124.176.118.18

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:12, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

de Havilland Mosquito and its Op History

Please stop arbitrarily removing citations from articles. It is not acceptable and warrants an immediate revert. I have also taken out the last citation you have provided inferring that all the manuals have the same speed statistics: They don't. I have them, and I am looking at them as I type this, and they are very different. The source is totally wrong. Regards. Dapi89 (talk) 10:05, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

You are not listening. The links you have provided are wrong. I have all the notes. They do not give the same statistics in every Pilots note book. Think about the logic of it. Please be carfeul, your are in danger of breaching the 3RR.Dapi89 (talk) 12:01, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

I have asked an administrator to step in owing to your edit warring and refusal to take this to the talk page. Dapi89 (talk) 12:38, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

I have already sent a note to the administrators. STOP vandalising the page [1] and go to the discussion page. Dapi89 (talk) 13:09, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Edit warring at de Havilland Mosquito

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war at De Havilland Mosquito. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

The complete report of this case is at WP:AN3#User:124.176.118.18 reported by User:Dapi89 (Result: 24h). EdJohnston (talk) 13:22, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

124.176.118.18 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Accuracy of Information

Decline reason:

Accuracy of Information as per third party reliable sources is far more important. Nothing is worth edit-warring over - that's what WP:BRD is all about (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

The fundamental issue is that the NF.38 is being presented as having a "top speed" of 370 knots at sea level. This is incorrect. That speed was a peacetime "maximum permissible speed" flying limit imposed by the Air Ministry. That is why it is listed under Limitations. "Thou shalt not perform aerobatics above 19,100 lbs., neither shalt thou use large anlges of yaw, nor shalt thou exceed 370 knots below 10,000 feet. Spinning is right out."

The same peacetime limits appear in the reprint of the NF.38 notes from Crecy, the 1950 FB.VI manual to which I posted a link, and the reprint of the PR.34 / B.35 notes, also from Crecy.

Wartime limits were higher, as the authorities were willing to run a greater risk of structural failure under wartime conditions. Examples both of wartime limits and of orders directing the maximum permissable speeds to be lowered are online at the Australian National Archives, The wartime limit for the FB.40 (Australian equivalent of the FB.VI) for example was 390 knots in clean condition below 10,000 feet. No Mosquito ever went that fast without a dive, however. I can upload examples of both types of document if you prefer.

In the meantime, I'd like the links I provided to NF.36, PR.34 and B.35 speeds to be restored, as they were properly referenced and demonstrated actual "top speeds" for late-marque Mosquitos. Similarly, the link I provided for FB.VI speeds was correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.176.118.18 (talk • contribs)

Please use the article talk page

I see you've returned from your block to continue adding aircraft speeds at de Havilland Mosquito. Please be aware that if you get into another dispute, the fact that you're not discussing anything on the article's talk page will be counted against you. You are expected to seek consensus for your changes. EdJohnston (talk) 21:36, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Grand. Tell you what, I'll look forward to speeds for the FB.VI. What shall we say, 390 knots at sea level? That will be nice. PUre fantasy, but nice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.73.10.103 (talk) 23:52, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

August 2010

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on De Havilland Mosquito. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Binksternet (talk) 22:14, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.

---