This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
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:
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 is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Dear friends, I had placed a short piece under Gannet AEW 3 'Harness restraint issues' a while back which was in fact my Green Endorsement following the ditching of a Fairey Gannet AEW 3. The story is verifiable and appears in a copy of the Naval Magazine Flight Deck. It was in Wkipedia for quite some time and in fact had benefitted from a few small improvements such as changing the abbreviation of Lt to the full Lieutenant, this sort of thing. So it had been read and 'approved' if that is the correct word. Then for some reason it has been removed and I have no idea why or by whom. It preceded the extract from Cockpit issue 65, fourth quarter 1973 which currently sits there. The story is, to my knowledge, unique in aviation history in that it was a night-time ditching from HMS Ark Royal in a military aircraft with no harness restraint and in what is known as the Bermuda Triangle. Would this not be of interest? I would appreciate your thoughts please. Thanks. Keith Jones — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.198.22.229 (talk) 14:35, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Fairey Gannet/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Needs citations, copyedit. - Emt147Burninate! 01:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
The article gives no information on anti-submarine version even though that was one of the main tasks of the type.Noseball (talk) 13:31, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Last edited at 13:31, 12 April 2012 (UTC).
Substituted at 14:55, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Fairey Gannet flying with one half of its Double Mamba engine shut down
Given that this a/c type was known for stopping one engine AND one propeller in flight to conserve fuel, the citation of taylor (1969) p361 appears to be a mistake by author Taylor, and probably should not be repeated here. Filterbob (talk) 17:30, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have carefully re-read the article and I cannot find the inaccuracy you refer to. Could you please quote here what you think is incorrect? - Nick Thornetalk23:28, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently, he means this statement:
The Double Mamba engine could be run with one Mamba stopped to conserve fuel and extend endurance for cruise flight. The contra-rotating propellers meant that when only half of the Double Mamba was running there were no thrust asymmetry problems. - BilCat (talk) 00:49, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but there is no inaccuracy there. It is not like a normal twin engined aircraft where if one engine was shut down for some reason there would be a massive assymetrical thrust issue (that is why the S-2 Tracker had such a large rudder with hydraulic assist for single engine scenarios). Because of the contra-rotating props on the Gannet the thrust axis for both engines was on the centerline and so shutting one down does not give any assymetry issues. I fail to see any problem with the article text. - Nick Thornetalk01:22, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
.svg)
