Jump to content

Talk:Sud Aviation Caravelle/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Table Formatting

I changed the table formatting to something a lot simpler. What was happening on my browser (Safari 1.0 on Mac OS X 10.2) was that the text was running on top of the image, and not word wrapping, so the page was both extremely wide, and the text unreadable due to being on top of the image. This might be a browser bug, or something wrong with the table formatting, but I simply included the image in a more conventional way to deal with it. GRAHAMUK 13:06, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Incidents

There is at least another incident in which a Caravelle was involved. It is referenced in this spanish wikipedia page:

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vuelo_118_de_Aviaco —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.96.47.54 (talk) 13:55, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Lifetime?

A recent ad campaign by the Lifetime cable channel features an airplane that appears to be a Caravelle. This plane has triangular passenger windows, a feature I do not recall from when I flew aboard a Caravelle in the '60s. Josh-Levin@ieee.org (talk) 08:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

References & sources, please?

Hi, the article really looks great. Unfortunately, it lacks references, sources or inline citations for nearly all the information in it! I cannot believe that such a (apparently) complete article could have been written without any "verifiable" source as a basis. Can any of the key contributors to this wikiarticle please provide adequate references and citations?
Thanks & kind regards, DPdH (talk) 02:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Even if more references are always desirable, the ref. "Reactores Comerciales (1999a) (en: Comercial Jetliners) ISBN 84-95088-87-8" is present in almost each paragraph and section of the article. --MauritiusXXVII (Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!) 08:49, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Agree that one reference is better than none, however for an article of this importance and length I believe more citations and sources are needed. Maybr the tag I've used was not the most adequate, will look for a btter one. Regards, DPdH (talk) 09:05, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

"During 1957, the second prototype accumulated roughly 25,000 flight hours across various flights conducted throughout North America and South America.[3]" Whatever the source, the year 1957 had a total of only 8,760 hours (365 x 24). "2,500" might be the correct number, but it is just my guess that a decimal error has occurred. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.15.79.137 (talk) 11:16, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Argentinian Caravelles

Hi All, I was unable to find out if there were "Caravelle"s in Argentinian Civil Aviation service (Aerolineas did use "Comet IV"), as well as sources for the claim that the Air Force used the "Caravelle". Can anyone please help? Thanks & regards, DPdH (talk) 09:34, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

UPDATE: I've found some online evidence which shows that both Aerolineas Argentinas and the Fuerza Aérea Argentina (Argentine Air Force) were users of the Caravelle. I list the links below:

Not as much sources as I'd like, still looking for sthg better. Kind regards, DPdH (talk) 10:21, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Here are 2 pictures of a FAA Caravelle T-93 and T-91. And here's an Aerolineas Argentinas Caravelle LV-III. Cheers. --MauritiusXXVII (Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!) 17:51, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Aerolineas Argentinas bough three series 6Ns (LV-HGX Alderbaran #19, LV-HGY Sirius #127 and LV-HGZRigel #149) which entered service in 1962 and used on the regional network. After one (Sirius) was destroyed in an accident a fourth was bought (LV-III Antares #180)and delivered in 1964. In 1970 they were replaced by 737s on the regional network and relegated to the domestic network. As the 737s were delivered the Caravelles were withdrawn and sold to the Argentine Air Force. The Argentine Air Force operated the three from 1973 to 1975. MilborneOne (talk) 18:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Number Built?

Just watching an hour long special on the Military Channel in the united states, they said that overall 289 were built, the article lists 282 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.66.166.95 (talk) 14:57, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

282 appears to be correct the manufacturers serial numbers (or construction numbers) run from 1 to 280 plus two prototypes equals 282. MilborneOne (talk) 15:12, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

"major improvement in aviation history"

"This variant introduced a major improvement in aviation history, being the first airliner in the world provided with thrust reversers and spoilers."

It wasn't the first to have reverse... probably wasn't the first to have spoilers? Could it conceivably have been the first to have both? Tim Zukas (talk) 20:40, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Incidents and Accidents

I took the information in the "Incidents and Accidents" section and put it in a spreadsheet. Perhaps someone may find it useful. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhNrocOKYP7fdHQ1bXM0bFhUaWlVU2pHRTM2cEZQTXc&usp=sharing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.43.12.61 (talk) 19:11, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Refs to TAA and Ansett in Aus.

The Australian airline TAA did submit a proposal to the Fed. Govt. to acquire Caravelles. It was just some political trickery, and it's unlikely that it was a genuine proposal. The Feds wanted both airlines to purchase Tridents, as they had plenty of GB Pounds in reserve, but not US dollars, and certainly not Francs. No one wanted Tridents as the delivery time was in the late 60s. The Caravelle was available earlier than this, but at only 80pax it was a lot less profitable than other jets. Ansett's desire for Boeings had always been publicly stated by Reg Ansett. The DC6 (100pax) was the mainliner for Australia and gave good profitable service. The L188s (98pax) were a quick replacement for the DC6s, and after LEAP gave even more profitable service for pax and freight. The Caravelle was a very reliable machine and operated by major carriers into the late 70s. At only 80pax and a jet purchase price meant it was not a good business decision. I suspect the Caravelle was designed to use two underpowered RR engines, rather than using four, or US engines.220.240.251.52 (talk) 01:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

"two underpowered RR engines" - actually the Rolls-Royce Avon was one of the most powerful turbojets in the world in its class at the time the Caravelle was designed, and what is more was probably the only civil certificated turbojet engine that was of sufficient power, reliability and fuel economy, available to Sud Aviation or for that matter, anyone else.
Most other people's engines at that time had the rather distressing habit of disintegrating and exploding randomly such that no sane civilian authority was going to certify any of them for carrying members of the public.
At the time the Caravelle was designed - around 1952 - no nation other than Britain had managed to build any gas turbine engines that were reliable enough to pass civil type certification. The only engines suitable for civil use available anywhere were the de Havilland Ghost, Rolls-Royce Derwent, Rolls-Royce Dart (turborpop), and Rolls-Royce Avon.
BTW, the Avon, which first ran in 1946, is so 'underpowered' that it is still in production as a 22,000 hp power generator today - 2015. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.31.130.99 (talk) 12:47, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Cockpit

About three and a half minutes into this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y08ZGnx0uQA the subject of using the cockpit design from the Comet is discussed. It states that although it was used for the prototypes, after the Comet disasters it was redesigned. I think the text should be changed, either to explain this, or just to say that only the shape and layout was based on the Comet. Chris.Bristol (talk) 23:09, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

The Caravelle used the entire external nose profile of the Comet I, as during the Comet design stages de Havilland's had flight-tested the Comet I's intended nose shape using a modified Airspeed Horsa fitted with the new nose section.

main photo change

  • current, on ground
    current, on ground
  • proposed, inflight flying left
    proposed, inflight flying left
  • alternative, better light but perhaps too much frontal
    alternative, better light but perhaps too much frontal

more--Marc Lacoste (talk) 09:58, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Dont have a problem with you changing to an airborne shot. MilborneOne (talk) 18:09, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sud Aviation Caravelle. 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) 07:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sud_Aviation_Caravelle/Archive_1&oldid=981175027"