Talk:Scottish Aviation Bulldog

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AVIATION 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.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
WikiProject Scotland
Scottish Aviation Bulldog is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.


This article is within the scope of the Transport in Scotland WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of transportation in Scotland. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start This page has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Service ceiling

Under "Performance" a service ceiling of only 10 000 feet is given. Where does that statement come from? I still have my Pilot Manual (SFI SK 61) from when I flew it in the Swedish Air Force, and there is nothing in there showing that this airplane have much lower performance and service ceiling than even a Cessna 172! The fact that other rules about oxygen requirement may restrict operation to some is not the same as a service ceiling by performance! No service ceiling is given in my manual, and we never had any reason to really test the limit, but I will remove 10 000 feet and leave it blank untill someone find a more realistic number!--Towpilot 07:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I corrected the info to 17000 ft (5182 m). --MoRsE 07:28, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Sounds much more realistic, but exactly 17 000 ft is obviously a little bit generic, therefore the numbers in meter should be rounded as well to 5 000! Also, since all other metric info is given as alternative, these numbers should be swaped. Or the other way around. BTW, where did you find it?--Towpilot 07:55, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
From this web page. It seems at least trustworthy. --MoRsE 09:27, 19 July 2007 (UTC)