Talk:Stanley Hooker

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Aviation: Biography

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.

This article is supported by the aerospace biography project.

Biography

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Stanley Hooker video

There's an interesting video featuring Stanley Hooker talking about his engine work on YouTube here: [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.147.13 (talk) 10:38, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Atwood on Meredith

Even supposing that Atwood did say what he is reported in the Article to have said about the effect of the Meredith Effect on the performance of the Mustang, and that a citation can be supplied, it would seem appropriate for the statement to be added here: John Leland Atwood and here: P-51 Mustang and not in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.153.197 (talk) 06:24, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your comment and have removed the following from the paragraph about the Merlin

"This variant of the Merlin was also to become the powerplant of the North American P-51 Mustang, and its efficiency enabled the Mustang to fly all the way to Berlin, attack the defending German fighters, and return home; this engine and the laminar flow wing were considered the secrets of the Mustang's success. Lee Atwood of North American Aviation however, made it clear^[1] that the Meredith Effect had more influence on the performance of the Mustang than its laminar flow wing. The Meredith Effect used the heat of the engine to produce thrust through its sophisticated radiator system."

However, I accept that this might be a bit over zealous but leave it to others to decide if details about the Mustang need to be reincorporated.

KreyszigB (talk) 10:40, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Concur. It's not Hooker, or about Hooker, but is about both the other two, which is where it belongs. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 23:30, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RE: the historicracer.com link below. The Mustang was designed in 1940 when the only Spitfire Atwood would have heard of was the Spitfire Mk Ia. The Spitfire XIX was Griffon-powered and the Prototype XIX didn't fly until at least 1943-44. The Mk XIV and later Griffon-engined Spitfires like the XIX would all do about 450 mph in S Ratio.

And if the Mk XIX would only do the quoted "405 mph" they wouldn't have bothered building any. A Merlin-powered Mk IX would do 408 mph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.31.130.71 (talk) 20:17, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ http://www.historicracer.com/aviation/p51-mustang-meredith-effect-lee-atwood/

Chronology for academic studies

The chronology for Hooker's academic career is ambiguously worded and seems to provide at least one, possibly two, incorrect dates. I've got a date of 1932 for his move to Brasenose and one of 1936 for his doctorate. I can't attest to the accuracy of these dates but they seem to conform to overall times scale better than those provided in the article here.

Even if the dates are correct here, the ambiguity needs to be resolved, there's no mention of his Bachelor of Science degree and we're left infer the date for his move to Brasenose from his Busk award, that is incorrect. I suggest the following format: [scholarship/award and date: establishment: enrolment date: graduation/doctorate award date]87.112.60.171 (talk) 01:11, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Oxford dictionary of national biography states the following: "From village schools and Borden grammar school a royal scholarship took him in 1926 to Imperial College, London, to read mathematics. He won the Busk studentship in aeronautics (1928) and the Armourers and Brasiers research fellowship (1930), and gained his DPhil at Brasenose College, Oxford, in 1935." His autobiography (Not much of an engineer) states. "In 1935 my period at Oxford was coming to an end. I had obtained a DPhil....." (page 21). "in September 1928 I was awarded the Busk studentship" (page 4). "I went up to Imperial in 1926" (page 3) KreyszigB (talk) 17:55, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Passed away in Bristol, England

I believe Sir Stanley Hooker died in Bristol, England and not Bristol, USA. He retired and lived in Bristol, England. 82.14.146.60 (talk) 22:52, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://www.historicracer.com/aviation/p51-mustang-meredith-effect-lee-atwood/

[1]