Talk:Beechcraft 1900
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
A request has been made for this article to be peer reviewed to receive a broader perspective on how it may be improved. Please make any edits you see fit to improve the quality of this article. |
 |
Beechcraft 1900 is part of WikiProject Aircraft, an attempt to better organize articles related to aircraft. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.See comments |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. |
|
|
|
 |
Beechcraft 1900 is a former good article candidate. There are suggestions below for which areas need improvement to satisfy the good article criteria. Once the objections are addressed, the article can be renominated as a good article. If you disagree with the objections, you can seek a review.
Date of review: October 8, 2006 |
Contents |
[edit] Speeds: IAS v. TAS
Question to Trevor: I have been writing much of this piece. The cruise speed is reported in TAS, whereas the Vmo is reported in IAS. Obviously an aircraft cannot cruise 12 knots faster than its maximum speed. Because different units are used, it can cruise at 260 TAS while the maximum speed is limited to 248 IAS. Since you want to drop the IAS and TAS labels, how do we resolve this?
[edit] Fire Detection System, Aircraft Performance
Regarding the trouble of the fire detection system on the B200, a SB has been improuved for a long time, witch is consists of sheets of metal installed on the exhaust flanges and avoid the sun lights to penetrate under the engine coolings and activate the fire detection optical device under a certain angle. I operate on the Be-1900D in Europe for a long time, and I never heard criticism is for a poor performance of this aeroplane. Sorry for my poor english skill.
[edit] POV Issue
"The Beechcraft 1900 has been criticized for poor performance, poor temperature control, high noise levels, and generally uncomfortable flights"
Does anyone have a source for that? I can't say I've ever heard such criticism before. Nick Moss 08:13, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- I initially removed this as POV, but it was added back. In the interest of avoiding an edit war, I decided to leave it, but requested a source and got nothing. My mom, however, seems to have primarily negative memories of her flights on regional turboprops, and being in the industry, I know that the planes she's mostly remembering are Beech 1900s. The noise is her biggest complaint, although I don't recall it being that loud the couple of times I've flown on them.
- Since there's been no source cited yet, I'm removing it from the article. If someone can cite a source here, we can add it back.--chris.lawson 12:52, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] GA failed
- 1. Well written? Fail (lead section too short)
- 2. Factually accurate? Fail (no reference section hence no reference also, no inline citations)
- 3. Broad in coverage? Pass
- 4. Neutral point of view? Pass
- 5. Article stability? Pass
- 6. Images? Pass
Additional comments :
- In section Development, certification, and production it starts discussing about the fact that the engine was developed from the KA200 but it doesn't go into details which makes me say maybe we should change the title of the section to reflect what is in it.
- Shouldn't Design and variants be a subsection of Development, certification, and production.
- Specifications (Beechcraft 1900D) section should probably be turned into a floating infobox.
This article needs to work on the failed criterion to better the quality and presentation of it. More comments could be made on the prose and all that but I will wait for a reply at GA or on my talk page to give more insight into what is to change on/add to the article. Lincher 01:51, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
