Talk:Boeing MQ-25 Stingray

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 / Maritime / Technology / North America / United States

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
	Maritime warfare task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Links

http://breakingdefense.com/2016/03/navy-refueling-drone-may-tie-into-f-35s-f-22s/

Phd8511 (talk) 04:47, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Embarrassing"?

Explain. There's nothing in any of those citations (2,3 & 4) that explains why potentially returning the S-3 Viking to service would be 'embarrassing'. Seems like an author's opinionated commentary more than any kind of factual data. (Bobbo9000) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.102.92 (talk) 05:11, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching that. It was added, along with other comments in that sentence, back in May by an IP from down your way. We'll need to check the rest of that edit to see if they added anything else that needs to be removed. - BilCat (talk) 10:21, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Generic Article Renamed?

Reading the content of this, it reads mostly like a rundown of the program up to the award to Boeing, rather than a description of the Boeing winner itself. As such, the title is misleading.

Also some reasoning needs to be provided as to why Tacit Blue, the early 80s manned stealth surveillance USAF technology demonstrator, is an "aircraft of comparable role, configuration, and era" to a 2020s production aerial refueling unmanned drone for the Navy. I guess I'm not seeing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.48.162 (talk) 18:31, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article is currently in "transition" following the award to Boeing, and currently identifies as an aircraft article. It will be updated over time as more specific information on the aircraft becomes available. - BilCat (talk) 03:23, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First flight

Happened recently: [1] images on that page are by Boeing. Are there any that are PD? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:07, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What does the MQ-25 weigh?

Does anyone know what the MQ-25 weighs empty? i.e. with no fuel

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Boeing MQ-25 Stingray.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:23, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Flight testing Chinese opinion

What does the last sentence in the flight testing paragraph add? It seems completely out of place there. 2001:1C00:D00:6BF0:0:0:0:1002 (talk) 21:12, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The text about the PLA is not really relevant for sure. This is brief mention in the PM article. I'll remove it. Thanks, -Fnlayson (talk) 01:52, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]