Talk:Floatplane
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Please fix svwp
editThe Swedish version of this article sv:Pontonflygplan has no links to the other languages as this English article. Can someone please go to svwp and fix links to the other language-versions. I want to do it, but can't because I'm just now blocked due to a conflict. Best regards BjörnBergman 16:34, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
- It's fixed! :) 81.229.81.120 (talk) 14:31, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Floatplane. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071124055039/http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/aero/aircraft/aradoar.htm to http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/aero/aircraft/aradoar.htm
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) 11:27, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Single float advantage
editMany years ago an aviation publication (Air Classics?) stated that the US Navy considered a single float superior because it eliminated the problem of an asymmetric imbalance of the aircraft should one watertight compartment be flooded. I cannot now find the RS to cite, but this fact needs to be recorded on Wikipedia so that it doesn't die with me. Tfdavisatsnetnet (talk) 18:08, 10 August 2022 (UTC)