Talk:FADEC

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.	Aviation Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated projects or task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

[edit] Title as an acronym

I looked into this, and just wanted to document what I found for future editors. It appears that FADEC is a very common term, to the exclusion of the five-word version, in aviation documentation. Therefore, it appears to be ok to title the article "FADEC" because most people would simply refer to it as fadec (i.e. like radar). In keeping with this, I recently edited the lead in so that the first sentence is not an explanation of the acronym, but explains what is a FADEC. - Davandron | Talk 16:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Acronym "incorrect"?

Previously, the lead in said that the acronym was incorrectly interpreted for the E to mean electronics. Looking at usage, I see both versions (engine vs electronic) in use in many companies' literature. For something to be incorrect, there has to be only one correct answer and it seems that both are used. If we can cite it from the inventors, I can see saying that it originally was engine, but I don't think that an alternate usage is in-itself wrong. - Davandron | Talk 16:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)