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:
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
Flying wings are tailless aircraft, but not necessarily the other way round. It seems silly to have two lists for the same/similar type of aircraft.--Petebutt (talk) 09:03, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Object, for two reasons. We have terrible trouble with fanbois writing up tailless types as flying wings. At the very least a merge would require an additional column to distinguish the two, and even then few fanbois would ever stop to check. It would be a recipe for chaos. By keeping them separate we both maintain order and educate the visitor. Also, one or two Northrop types from ca. 1930 are traditionally classed as flying wings because they have no fuselage, even though they have twin booms and a tail plane so are definitively not tailless aircraft. These include the Northrop X-216H. So in practice the flying wing is not quite a subset of the tailless type. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 10:09, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Object, conflates two distinct types with different definitions, even if distinguishing between them is the cause of much argument. While this list is surprisingly short, that is no reason to lump it in with tailless aircraft for the sake of what? Page size? - NiD.29 (talk) 07:03, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
