Talk:Split S

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

Military history: Aviation / Technology Start‑class

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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

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 met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force

References

The three refs are not very helpful, it seems to me. The first mentions the manoeuvre without description, the second describes it briefly at the last seems not to mention it all. There must be citable sources fo aerobatics somewhere. I'll have a look but others may have them to hand.TSRL (talk) 16:56, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Video Caption

The video does not show a Split S. A split S starts and ends in level flight, whereas Cpt. Stricklin rolls his aircraft while in a steep climb before pulling into a reversing loop. This maneuver is called a Reverse Half Cuban Eight. There are plenty of references on this, including Wikipedia's and the page at The Ejection Site specifically referring to Stricklin's maneuver, ejection and crash. I'm new and nervous about screwing something up on the page, so I'm pointing out the factual error and hoping an experienced editor fixes it. I'll watch the page for a bit and, if no one posts a problem with this, will try to make the correction myself (move the video and caption to the correct page). Kabeyun (talk) 03:12, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Use of "g" for g-force

Is it me or is there an inconsistent use of the term g-force, i.e. G-force or "Gs"? This is all too prevalent in books and magazines, TV etc. Use of "G" is Universal Gravitational Constant not acceleration which is denoted "g". Maybe someone better at it can make any necessary edits. Roy Szweda (talk) 11:08, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]