Talk:Dornier 228/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled section

I think Finland should remove from military operators since the Dornier is used by Finnish Border guard which is under Ministery of the Interior, not by the army.

Martti Kujansuu

added title to this section, no date so signing for future archiving. Redalert2fan (talk) 23:15, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Merger proposal

The Dornier 228 NG is basically the same aircraft, just with new propellors and cockpit avionics, and being built by different companies, so there is no real need for a separate article yet. There is virtually no information in the Dornier 228 NG article that isn't already in the original article. (Also it may be worth checking that there isn't any copyvio of [1] going on.Nigel Ish (talk) 09:22, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Agreed; the NG article appears to be the good-faith contribution of a new editor. Johnnywes05, we don't create generally separate articles on aircraft subtypes; we only do this as a last resort if there's so much to say about a particular variant that the original "parent" article gets swamped. That's not the case with the 228NG. Any objection to us folding this back into the main Do 228 article? --Rlandmann (talk) 09:54, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Support moving anything of use into Dornier 228. MilborneOne (talk) 10:17, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

I support merging it back into the main article - variant only. - Ahunt (talk) 14:42, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

I thought we were discussing this, if not I'm going to keep adding to the Dornier 228 NG. Let me know. Johnnywes05 (talk) 19:23 March 15 2010 (EST)

I understand. I have the POH and specs for it as we speak. Supposedly there will be a readily available one in 2 months. The Dornier 228 NG will have different props and stronger engines, which will change its characteristic. If you can help that would be great. I can email you the POH of the Dornier 228 NG.

Johnnywes05 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:16, 14 March 2010 (UTC).

My problem is the spec and performance will be different on the Dornier 228 NG. Kind of like a razor back King Air 200, which is a King Air 200 on juice, compared to a regular King Air 200. Except totally different companies and different engine manufacturers. Time will tell. Johnnywes05 (talk) 13:54 March 14 2010 (UTC)

Merge it; there have been plenty of cases where a new manufacturer has taken over production of an existing type and changes engines/avionics etc.; Jetstream 31, Twotter and soon the N-24 Nomad by all accounts, just to name a few. They don't need new articles. If the specs are very different, change the specs to the new production variant when they are reliably-sourced numbers.

User talk:YSSYguy/Archive 1 YSSYguy (talk)

Thanks. I agree with the merge Johnnywes05 (talk) 11:26 March 16 2010 (EST)

OK -- done! --Rlandmann (talk) 20:42, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Performance

Dornier 228 NG

NEVER EXCEED SPEED = 223 KIAS

MAX SPEED (15,000 FT.) = 223 KIAS

STALL SPEED (W/OUT FLAPS) = 79 KIAS

STALL SPEED (W/ FLAPS) = 74 KIAS

MAX. PAYLOAD = 5,716 LBS (2,593 Kg)

MAX. RAMP WEIGHT = 14,176 LBS (6,430 Kg)

MAX. TAKEOFF WEIGHT = 14,110 LBS (6,400 Kg)

Johnnywes05 (talk) 17:10 March 14 2010 (EST)

1st customer of NG

I read in Aviation World september 2010 that Lufttransport is the first customer of the NG, operating it on Svalbard (Spitsbergen) but wiki claim Japanese is the first? RGDS Alexmcfire

Dead Link

I just found Source [[8]] to be a dead link, but don't have the time to research a new source at the moment.

Cheers

--Feierfrosch (talk) 19:19, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Rename as Dornier 228

I propose that this article should be correctly named "Dornier 228". In a quick trawl, I have mostly seen the basic type designation as "Dornier 228" (without the archaic "Do" prefix) in significant sources, eg FAA, UK CAA, Flight International, etc.PeterWD (talk) 09:37, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

The term "Dornier Do 228" is definitely wrong:

* The EASA TCDS has it as "Dornier 228"

* The same applies to Dornier's own book: Dornier GmbH: Dornier. Die Chronik des ältesten deutschen Flugzeugwerks. Friedrichshafen 1983, page 42.

* ... and to: John W.R. Taylor: Jane’s All The World’s Aircraft, 1980–81. Jane’s Publishing, London 1980, ISBN 0 7106-0705-9, pp. 92-94.

* see also the above mentioned sources.

The move to the correct type designation cannot be avoided any longer.

Btw: The "Do" prefix was dropped with the introduction of the Dornier 128, see Dornier's book. --Uli Elch (talk) 10:46, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

main pic change

The current main pic point away from the text. Here are some left-pointing propositions :--Marc Lacoste (talk) 19:20, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

• 
  Current
• 
  frontside from below, gear up
• 
  frontside level, gear down
• 
  side bit front, gear down
• 
  side, gear up