Talk:SOCATA TBM

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the SOCATA TBM article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Aviation: Aircraft

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 met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Aviation / European / French

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	European military history task force
	French military history task force

Redirect

I've set the TBM-850 page to redirect to this one as the TBM-700 and TBM-850 are basically the same aircraft, one just having a similar but more powerful engine, so it makes more sense to have them on the same page. The page could use a photo. BabyNuke 15:54, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 14:32, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speeds

TBM850 VNE: 266 IAS

TBM850 Cruise: 320 kts @ 75%

...the speeds as listed in the article are incorrect. Skiendog (talk) 18:47, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TBM900

TBM900 announced this morning. I saw that some information is slowing rolling into the article, thanks to "TheDude." I'll try and add some information, too. Skiendog (talk) 20:54, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Originally, TheDude had a price listed at 3.52m USD. The only information I have seen has the price listed at $3.711m USD. Skiendog (talk) 21:06, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Accidents

No mentions of accidents in this article ?

Here a recent one :

On August 6th 2014 a TBM-700 crashes on Seine-et-Marne (France). Five occupants, two deaths.^[1]^[2]^[3]

--AXRL (talk) 17:30, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Who took down the chart of production numbers?!

...I will find you. Not cool. If you're going to make a change like that, discuss it in the talk page of the article. Skiendog (talk) 00:45, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Already replied on my talk page, it was over two years ago the chart was removed. MilborneOne (talk) 16:34, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And you never discussed removing it. If you believed sources were needed on the data, say so. If you wanted to make it smaller, say so. Instead, you just deleted it without saying a thing. Skiendog (talk) 03:12, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I went back in the page records and found the chart. I agree with removing it as it was non-standard and used up a lot of space to give very little information. It was also not referenced and therefore not clear where the data came from. - Ahunt (talk) 16:50, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, so it needs sources and to discuss the format/size? Good to know. Skiendog (talk) 03:12, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Skendog you may want to review WP:OWN. Sario528 (talk) 18:19, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

...Really? Okay- would it make you happy if I say, 'THE' chart? Whatever pleases you; just let me know. The point is that it's polite to discuss things with people before going into an article and just deleting things. Skiendog (talk) 03:26, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It was explained in the edit summary : "dont really need a complicated bar chart". This was 18 months ago. Nobody discussed the change at the time, you included, so it stayed like that. While statements need references, the article presentation come through bold editing and consensus in case of conflict. I'm not sure you could reinstate your chart now, especially with an offended attitude, but you can ask. Propose a change. --Marc Lacoste (talk) 08:01, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No it is not required or even usual to start a talk page discussion before removing something from an article, unless it is going to be controversial. The fact that no one even challenged that edit for a year and a half shows it wasn't controversial. At this point if you want to put it back in I think you would have to make a good case for it. - Ahunt (talk) 14:02, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also remember that the information is still in the article only the format as a chart was removed. MilborneOne (talk) 15:06, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quite true, I just checked that and the numbers are all still there, just more compactly stated. - Ahunt (talk) 15:23, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on SOCATA TBM. 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:

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) 11:45, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with the specifications (useful load)

The Specifications lists the "Useful load" as 636kg/1403lbs. According to the linked PDF spec sheet, that figure is for the maximum payload, not the useful load. Useful load should be equal to max gross weight minus empty weight; from there you would subtract the fuel weight to get the max payload. Max fuel is listed as 291gal which weights 1950lbs, more than the 1403 useful load. This implies the plane could never fly with max fuel onboard, clearly wrong. Bdeshaies (talk) 17:19, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Revised to give the payload as 436 kgNigel Ish (talk) 17:31, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Daher-Socata TBM 900 Air to Air.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:36, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Daher-Socata TBM 900 Air to Air.jpg scheduled for POTD

Hello! This is to let editors know that the featured picture File:Daher-Socata TBM 900 Air to Air.jpg, which is used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for March 31, 2021. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2021-03-31. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:31, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The SOCATA TBM (now Daher TBM) is a family of high-performance single-engine turboprop business and utility light aircraft manufactured by Daher. This SOCATA TBM 900 was photographed in flight during the 2015 EAA AirVenture Oshkosh airshow in the U.S. state of Wisconsin. The aircraft features a Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-64 engine, and a five-blade carbon-fiber propeller, which increases performance and decreases cabin noise. In a passenger configuration, the pressurized cabin is typically fitted with highly finished interiors, featuring luxury materials such as leather and wood veneers.

Photograph credit: Michael Mainiero

Recently featured:

@Cwmhiraeth: Thanks for the heads-up. The summary is perhaps a little heavy on not so important details ("five-blade carbon fiber propeller, which increases performance and decreases cabin noise" or "highly finished interiors, featuring luxury materials such as leather and wood veneers" - Ryanair also have leather seats!) while lacking much more important details: number of seats, speed, hp, range, retractable gear; or history: Mooney implication, first flight, introduction, national origin, number built...

I agree, that blurb reads like the company marketing dept wrote it! WP:PEACOCK. - Ahunt (talk) 15:11, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Strake

The article links to the nautical version of strake, shouldn't it link to the aerodynamic version instead? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strake_(aeronautics) It's a bit weird linking from an article about aviation to one about viking longships...

86.132.124.67 (talk) 16:40, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Quite right, it should point to Strake (aeronautics). Thanks for pointing that out

Fixed - Ahunt (talk) 17:11, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Daher pronunciation

French lesson please. How should I pronounce Daher? Thanks.Pieter1963 (talk) 19:13, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=168262

[2] ttp://www.lavenir.net/article/detail.aspx?articleid=dmf20140806_00510709

[3] ttp://www.metronews.fr/paris/seine-et-marne-deux-morts-dans-le-crash-d-un-avion-de-tourisme/mnhf!BVti48s551nrk/

[1]

[2]

[3]