Talk:P-61 Black Widow

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	P-61 Black Widow 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.
Aviation WikiPortal

	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.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Related task forces... Military aviation task force United States military history task force World War II task force

P-61 Black Widow 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: 4 September 2006

I missed Step 5, didn't I?GarageBay9

Brandon T?Moriori 01:25, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

That would be my name. Set it as my auto-sig eons ago and forgot to change it--I've been doing my sigs by hand the whole time. o_O Just changed it in my preferences and decided to fix it here.GarageBay9

Contents 1 Merger of introduction with Night Fighter article 2 Whoops 3 heh 4 infobox 5 References 6 Unstable? 7 how was it? 8 Failed GA 9 End of Operational Service?

[edit] Merger of introduction with Night Fighter article

While I can fully understand why, to somebody who reads the article in it's current state, the text that covers the progress of nocturnal air combat might seem more appropriate there, I have found as a P-61 researcher that the aircraft's history is much easier both to understand and to explain when a parallel precis as well as important aspects and milestones of nocturnal air warfare are presented in key places. Several significant events and effects concerning the P-61 and its service were intimately tied to the state of evolution or the character of night fighting at the time. Omitting that crucial context and reference makes the conveyance of the P-61's history much more difficult to successfully undertake, and to understand.

Said sections may not be in the article yet, but the passages about night fighting will click into place once they are. Until then, they don't really detract, either--it's a solid link to the aircraft's early origins.GarageBay9 22:52, 11 February 2006 (UTC)\

• Section 'To fly and wage war in the dark' should definitely be merged into Night fighter, with a link to the latter article placed in this former's 'References' section.

[edit] Whoops

Sorry about that time lapse, folks. Other stuff came up and I had my hands full. I'll get the rest of the article and references up as soon as I can.

[edit] heh

I really hope you're planning to break up that giant paragraph at the bottom there. Also - have you considered shifting some of the content here to bulk up a separate article like night fighter? Some of the information about background, while intriguing, doesn't seem to quite 'fit'. Also, the section on the dangers of flying seem very far removed from the actual aircraft and better suited to yet another article on, say, Air combat in World War II or something like that.

Don't get me wrong - the stuff is good, it's just not what I'm used to seeing in a detailed aircraft article and so it feels a bit out of place. I'll check back when you're done, though, and maybe it'll fit more solidly then. -eric ✈ 09:16, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] infobox

In addition to being rather garishly colored, the infobox looks horrendous in (at least) Firefox - not sure about other browsers. Superfluous couple-pixel-wide table columns, strange blank spaces, etc. — ceejayoz ^★ 16:50, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] References

A lot of great information in this article but when you go so in-depth, references are doubly appreciated for that "polished" look. I can provide citations for some general military aviation books and a nice publication in Polish (which I can barely read but it has great photos). Great job on the article everyone! - Emt147 ^Burninate! 05:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

My original plan was to write much, much more, covering the Widow until the P-61C's and F-15's retirement, with a footnote covering surviving examples and restoration projects. Obviously, it's taken me longer than I expected. :) Either way, I do have all my references noted down for the portions I've posted, and sooner or later, I will get them up here. GarageBay9

[edit] Unstable?

What's this about WWII fighters being unstable? Most were fairly stable, the unstable ones almost never made it into production. Check any website on German X-planes, most were unstable and almost none ever went into production. If you mean engine torque, that wasn't an intentional part of the design, that was the laws of physics. LWF 22:43, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] how was it?

There's lots about the development not almost nothing about the plane in service. How did the performance match up with the expectations? Anybody? KarlM 06:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Done!!-Ken keisel 17:10, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Failed GA

I failed this article partially because of the lack of references, and also because of the lists that occur in the article. Some P. Erson 14:03, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] End of Operational Service?

The info box states that the P-61 was retired in 1952. I seem to remember that it was used in the early part of the Korean War. It would be nice to read about the later part of the Black Widows operational life.--TGC55 14:27, 12 September 2006 (UTC)