Talk:Airco DH.4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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.	Aviation Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated projects or task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Aircraft WikiProject

	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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (general topics): Military aviation task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): World War I task force

Graeme - we seem to be editing this one in tandem - "D.H." is generally (including most other contexts on wikipedia) the usual abreviation for "de Havilland" but that's not a detail I would fight over. The picture situation (the old article lacked a good clear photo of the standard type) is improved, I hope. DO we need to talk???

Soundofmusicals 14:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Should this be classified as a British Bomber aircraft1910-1919 rather than a British fighter aircraft 1910-1919? Nigel Ish 22:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Abso@#$%^&*inglutely. Winstonwolfe 02:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cockpit Layout

Regarding the design of the cockpit layout, clearly there were problems regarding communication between pilot and observer because of the distance between the two. I'm just wondering if the point in the article about the positioning of the fuel tank could be verified/cited. In Munson, Kenneth "Aircraft of World War I". Ian Allan 1967. ISBN 0-7110-0356-4, page 16, the chosen cockpit layout is attributed to the need to "...give the pilot the best possible view downward past the bottom wing for aiming the 460lb, of bombs...". Maybe the communication problem was caused by a mix of the two reasons for this particular configuration? I propose to weave something in about this into the article unless anyone has any comments/objections.Scoop100 08:45, 29 June 2007 (UTC)