Talk:Short Singapore

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 been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Military history: Aviation / British / European

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force

Untitled[edit]

Article much improved by recent edits :-). Winstonwolfe 03:06, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Length[edit]

The specifications quotes the length of the aircraft as 64 ft - while the reference and some written sources 9William Green, warplanes of the Second World War, Volume 5 Flying Boats) agree with this, others (i.e the Encyclopedia of World Aircraft) disagree - any idea what is the right one? Nigel Ish 17:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Perhaps there is some confusion because of the three different boats, AJ Jackson's British Civil Aircraft since 1919 has the Singapore I at 65ft 6in, the Orbis Illustrated Encyclopedia of Aircraft has 76ft 0in for the Singapore III. MilborneOne 20:12, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting - the usual suspects of measuring length tail down or hull excluding vertical cannot explain it. I wonder whether the addition of the tail gun position could possibly be an explanation? Winstonwolfe 03:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going for the shorter one - its seems to be quoted by more recent sources (and more of them - and seems to scale right on drawings Nigel Ish 22:18, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Short Singapore. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.jaapteeuwen.com/ww2aircraft/html%20pages/SHORT%20S19%20SINGAPORE%20III.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:33, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]