Talk:List of fictional aircraft

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

List of fictional military aircraft was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 12 June 2018 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into List of fictional aircraft. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Merger

No I like these pages seperate as Millitry aircraft and private/civillen aircraft are used for different things as such have different ablitys, roles, systems etc! -- Awar 16:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

No. I agree for the above reason. Putting the two articles together would result in a messy hatchet job. They represent two different subjects entirely. It would be best to leave the articles separate at least for the time being to let them mature by themselves. Nodekeeper 09:30, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I don't see a real distinction between Airwolf and the X-fighter from Xmen. They are all fictional aircraft. Adriaan Renting 22-09-2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.87.1.33 (talk) 20:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page needs some careful revision. Several of the "fictitious" aircraft listed here are not fictitious at all, for example: A-12 Avenger II - This is a cancelled fighter development program. Although never built there is nothing fictitious about it. F-108 Rapier - Also a cancelled fighter program, full-scale mock-up was built. This was an actual aircraft, if never in production. Nazi Fighter - Not a fictitious aircraft, a stand-in for another type perhaps, but both the Pilatus P-2 and the Messerschmitt BF 109 are quite real. Yak 12 - Actually a painted T-33 (as accurately described) but not an actual Yak 12, which is very different type of aircraft. Arguably fictitious.

I have since corrected all of these errors and one or two more. Jacquesdav (talk) 19:44, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

Can Wiki "List of..."'s contain pictures? How about a gallery at the bottom with random selections of aircraft? --70.128.112.146 (talk)

ADF-01 Falken?

It redirects to this page but there's no mention of it in the article. It used to have its own article, but then was merged and then deleted from this one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.156.203.66 (talk) 18:23, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Falken

Should we make another article on the ADF-01 FALKEN? Ace Combat wouldn't be as popular as it is today without this Star Wars expy. --190.44.72.119 (talk) 21:36, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quiet possibly yes TheBlitzer07 (talk) 07:49, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're replying to a comment from over ten years ago. The ADF-01 FALKEN is not notable enough to warrant its own article. Click here for the deletion log of that very article. A simple mention on this page and the relevant game pages is enough for Wikipedia; further information should be kept off of Wikipedia. We already have an Ace Combat wiki to go more in-depth with this information. ~SlyCooperFan1 18:41, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see no mention of Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang

As silly of an aircraft as it it, being fictional within a fictional story, It is still a fictional aircraft. Lee Anderson, AF Cadet & EE Student (talk) 17:16, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, if you have a reference you can certainly add it - Ahunt (talk) 17:24, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article on the film Chitty Chitty Bang Bang shows the flying car. There is a separate article, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (car), on the flying car itself, and then there's an airship too, Chitty Bang Bang (airship).

Varlaam (talk) 01:50, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Two missing films

As soon as I saw the title "fictional aircraft", two films popped into my head:

Q Planes – experimental prototypes
Japoteurs – giant bomber

Neither appears on the page. Varlaam (talk) 01:59, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention the U.S. Air Force's new Truncheon Bomber being built by Yoyodyne Industries, a dubious enterprise being run by Red Lectroids as a cover for their nefarious activities, in Buckaroo Bonzai

IMPDB

While Ipdb.org is a wiki there seems to be a fine line here for the mere fact that the site does offers screen shots (pictures) of the references in question. If the site was all text, that would be one thing, but with picture proof looking right at you, if kinda hard to deny. Now granted some of the screen shots are just aircraft only, but there are plenty of images with the actor and the aircraft in the same frame.--‎Jetijonez ^Fire! 05:18, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that identifying aircraft types from photographs is considered WP:OR. We really need text in a WP:RS to satisfy WP:V requirements. - Ahunt (talk) 10:42, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar

Don't you think the grammar in some places on this page is bad?

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of fictional aircraft. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203024116/http://www.actiontoys.com/product/CAPSCAR-8.html to http://www.actiontoys.com/product/CAPSCAR-8.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140313182602/http://www.freewebs.com/unionofpower/military.htm to http://www.freewebs.com/unionofpower/military.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.sfdb.org.uk/view/Carrier

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:31, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of fictional aircraft. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110121054514/http://forums.xplanefreeware.net/topic/2192-carreidas-160-original/ to http://forums.xplanefreeware.net/topic/2192-carreidas-160-original/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:47, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Does aircraft from Command & Conquer series belong in this list?

Does aircraft from Command & Conquer series belong in this list? EchoBlu (talk) 17:45, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Monogram 172 F-19 Stealth Fighter-white.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:08, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blue gold flying wing

In Clive Cussler's Blue Gold, a flying wing plays a significant role. I can't find the exact name of it now, but it is developed from the Northrop N-1M (written by Clussler as 'N1-M'). Kdammers (talk) 20:11, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

F-302.webp

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:23, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Conehead" seekers (Transformers)

Decepticons Dirge, Ramjet, and Thrust transformed into F-15s with fictional modifications (i.e. different wings and tailfins). Would they be alright to list here despite being partially based on a real aircraft? ChonkyTomcat (talk) 10:21, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]