User:Ingoolemo/Threads/06/07/30a

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] BAe 146

Note: this comment is part of a synchronised thread. You can reply by clicking the [edit] link next to the comment's heading, or following this link. To ensure that you can see any further responses I make, add this page to your watchlist. Once you have replied, feel free to remove this boilerplate.

Hi you moved the above page, citing WP:Air naming conventions. However the move you made is actually in contradiction of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (aircraft) and is incredibly clumbsy; British Aerospace BAe 146 is repitition. What you are calling it is the BAe BAe 146! Mark83 18:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I had thought of that, but similar patterns can be seen throughout aviation history, as in the case of the Lockheed L-1011 or the North American NA-62; likewise, pre-7x7 Boeings are often referred to (erroneously) by such names as Boeing B-314. The most pertinent example is almost certainly the Hawker-Siddeley HS121 Trident, which is part of the same designation sequence as the BAe 146.

The real problem here is that it's not entirely clear how BAe named their aircraft. Were they doing like Boeing, calling their aircraft by [[{manufacturer} {model number}]], and simply using an abbreviated form? Were they doing like Lockheed, North American, and Hawker-Siddeley, using the abbreviation as a kind of stopgap so their planes wouldn't be just a number? Seeing that the DH.112 and HS.121 follow the latter system, I find it much more likely that the latter system is the case. However, no firm answer can be found until more research is done. Ingoolemo ^talk 19:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

May I be so bold as to suggest that given that it is not clear, it was very rash to change it with (as far as I am aware) no discussion. Clear or not the MOS states that the name should be the most common usage, which is BAe 146. Regards. Mark83 19:59, 30 July 2006 (UTC)