Talk:Piasecki X-49 SpeedHawk

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 been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the rotorcraft project.

German page

The German article appears to have some newer info on it. Can anyone translate this? Thanks. --BillCJ 04:29, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rotor & Wing

December issue has the X-49 on the cover and this article:

Colby, Steve. "R&D: Beneficial Bird", Rotor&Wing. December 2007. <http://www.aviationtoday.com/rw/issue/cover/17380.html>.

MLA citation reference included for convenience. Don't have the ISSN for Rotor & Wing. --Born2flie (talk) 21:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First flight?

R&W has the first flight as 29 June 2007.[1] HAI lists the same day,[2] and Piasecki's news release does also.[3] What a difference a day makes. --Born2flie (talk) 22:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strange. The HAI article is direct copy of Piasecki's news release. Should the date be updated with Piasecki's release? -Fnlayson (talk) 23:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and corrected that. Need to fix infobox date though.. -Fnlayson (talk) 23:43, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a helicopter

It is not a helicopter, it is a gyrodyne. I'll correct this. 213.78.183.91 (talk) 11:20, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~No, it's a compound helicopter. On a gyrodyne, the rotor only provides lift, no thrust.~~ Correction a gyrodyne is also called a compound helicopter. I was thinking of an autogyro before. -Fnlayson (talk) 18:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is a helicopter and a compound one at that. Even if one were to opt for the FAA definition of gyrodyne over the traditional one by Dr. Bennett, because the rotor is not in autorotation, nor does it have a zero mean axial airflow through the rotor (Bennett's definition), you wouldn't be able to call it a gyrodyne. --Born2flie (talk) 19:20, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Army or Navy?

~~The text says it's a U.S. Navy project, but the specs and infobox say Army. Which is it?~~ - The Bushranger (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, teach me to speed-read! - The Bushranger (talk) 23:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:06, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]