Talk:Laird Super Solution

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 not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by the aircraft project.
	This article is supported by the Air sports project.

Super Solution

Why was this moved from the more common usage, not to mention naming convention Laird Super Solution. Is there an over-riding reason for it, if not please move it back as it wil cancel out a lot of double re-directsPetebutt (talk) 17:17, 13 November 2011 (UTC) I can't see any reason why the company's name should be omitted in this case, when it is used for all other aircraft - renamed page back to what it should have been. NiD.29 (talk) 04:10, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Engines

I'm not convinced the engine was an R-985 as this engine was only just entering production as the aircraft was being built is there any concrete evidence for it as opposed to an R-1340.Petebutt (talk) 17:22, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have measured a scale drawing and the cowling comes out at over 52in diameter which would be far too large to closely cowl an R-985, but perfect for an R-1340!!!Petebutt (talk) 17:35, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]