Talk:Boeing 767

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconVital articles: Level 5 / Technology FA‑class
WikiProject iconBoeing 767 has been listed as a level-5 vital article in Technology. If you can improve it, please do.Vital articlesWikipedia:WikiProject Vital articlesTemplate:Vital articlevital articles
 FAThis article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Featured articleBoeing 767 is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 2, 2013.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 17, 2011Peer reviewReviewed
February 7, 2011Good article nomineeListed
March 5, 2011Peer reviewReviewed
October 1, 2011WikiProject A-class reviewApproved
January 6, 2012Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article


New interesting photo landed at Commons[edit]

Boeing 767 - 8967212889

The present article is already pretty well illustrated, but the following air-to-air photo just landed at Commons that may be worth a look. Perhaps as a replacement for the LAN 767 in the Operators section? Ariadacapo (talk) 12:27, 5 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A nice image but the strong dark background is probably to much for the size it would appear in the article. MilborneOne (talk) 18:15, 5 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nice photo, if there was a higher-res version it could be cropped and would be a better fit. Thanks for sharing. SynergyStar (talk) 04:35, 7 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agreed! It’s a little too loaded visually to fit here. Thanks for the feedback. On a side note, curious aviation photography enthusiasts should check out the freshly-created Files from the Austrian Airlines Flickr stream category at Commons. Ariadacapo (talk) 10:10, 8 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
N767BA

How about File:Boeing 767 over Mount Rainier, circa 1980s.jpg, which shows the prototype 767, N767BA? - Jmabel | Talk 05:22, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's a historically relevant photo of the prototype 767. It faces left, and although not very high resolution and with the main subject a bit high, it is worth considering. I think it could replace the Farnborough Delta 767 photo in the Development>Background section with the altered caption "The 7X7 would make its global debut in 1982 as the 767-200." Regards, SynergyStar (talk) 17:32, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Another possible route is to swap out the TWA 767-200 photo in the Development>Service entry and operations category with the altered caption: "The 767-200 entered service on September 8, 1982." or something like that. Regards, SynergyStar (talk) 22:55, 22 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The latter swap option has been exercised. Thanks for the historical photo! Regards, SynergyStar (talk) 01:16, 22 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

767 program developments in 2014[edit]

Just a note on some new developments that might get incorporated into the article:

  • 767 cockpit upgrade: program announced here: [1]. Looks like 787 style 3-LCD display with HUD. Seems to coincide with KC-46A and FedEx 767-300F orders. However have not been able to find a reliable source as of yet showing that the cockpit is being deployed on new builds. One enthusiast site says that the first 3 FedEx deliveries in 2013- were prior gen cockpit.
  • 767-2C. The basis for the KC-46 A. Apparently this is a slight stretch of the 767-200ER (counts as a "fourth fuselage length" of the type?), and there may be commercial offerings. [2] [3]

Regards, SynergyStar (talk) 01:07, 24 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mention the cockpit upgrade. Otherwise there's not much notable just yet. I'm not sure if the 767-2C is actually longer. The KC-46 length increase over the 767-200 may be due to the refueling boom, at least partially. -Fnlayson (talk) 13:47, 24 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Order for three TGCP (talk) 22:27, 2 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Boeing 767. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:41, 25 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Boeing 767. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:48, 31 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

767 Tail Skin Wrinkles[edit]

I tried to alter the main page and it was purged in a few hours. In 2004 at the United Airlines ramp at IAD(Dulles Airport) tail skin wrinkles were observed. Myself and a captain discussed them. I might be a commercial pilot, I forget. I mentioned that every 767 on the flight line had wrinkles. Two were severe. The issued has not been resolved by Boeing correctly. No engineering analysis inclusive of the inferable frame distort has been conducted. If elevator failures are occurring it is likely due to captains using little if any rudder to fly. Aileron directional control requires aa downward nose down elevator movement. Turbulent air can cause a rather forceful control need. Why does the FAA allow skin distortion?96.255.207.79 (talk) 15:10, 12 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was removed as it needed a reliable reference/source and some idea that it is notable enough to mention. Personal knowledge is not treated as reliable on wikipedia, it needs to be published. MilborneOne (talk) 16:27, 12 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wrinkles on the underside of fuselage, and just ahead of the empennage, indicate a very heavy landing for any large airliner. More likely to happen with rear-mounted engines such as a 717, 727, or VC10, This is a discussion page, and users should be free to discuss these sorts of things. Perhaps the zealot controlling the article should go have a look for good refs himself. All too often zealots demand everyone else should supply refs, but they don't feel obliged to do it themselves. No mention is made in the article of cracks in part 1809B, the gusset supporting the inboard hinge of the inboard spoilers. Ansett discovered these cracks first. No mention is made of the public scandal and blame the Australian media labelled Ansett with for letting the crack happen. No mention is made that the 767 was the first of the fault tolerant designs. The 767 and 757 are sister ships and share much in the way of maintenance assets. The a/c is now at the end of its civilian life and the article needs to make it clear. It is now considered a 3rd world airliner.220.240.225.135 (talk) 11:40, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

With so many specifics, you should found easily some literature on the subject. You just have to mention it. --Marc Lacoste (talk) 07:55, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Boeing 767. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:28, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool. Both links bring you to "page does not exist" --KDTW Flyer (talk) 17:18, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Boeing 767. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:18, 5 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Boeing 767. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:02, 22 July 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Boeing 767. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:09, 23 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Boeing 767. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:43, 20 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mobile App[edit]

On the Boeing 767 page of Wikipedia on mobile it oddly saids Supersonic Transport instead of jet airliner but on any browser it saids jet airliner. Is this just something that happens or is there a way to fix this. The Minecraft60 (talk) 00:51, 31 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's lingering vandalism from a long-term abuser. It should change to the correct version if you clear the cache. Acroterion (talk) 00:53, 31 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok that makes sense now. Thanks for the explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Minecraft60 (talk • contribs) 00:57, 31 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I was about to change this to "subsonic" or "jet" from supersonic, but let me try the cache clear. Thanks @Acroterion Pilotxaq (talk) 16:33, 6 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

thrust?[edit]

Why is thrust listed in "kgf" which is not a proper unit? It should be "kN" which appears to be used elsewhere.

baden k. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.143.29.8 (talk) 03:12, 24 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

protection???[edit]

WTF is the protection for? I cannot see this article being controversial.

baden k. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.143.29.8 (talk) 03:15, 24 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The summary says it was protected for vandalism nothing to do with controversy. MilborneOne (talk) 13:31, 24 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The "As of" template in the accidents & incidents section - not capitalized[edit]

Pardon my ignorance but why is the "as" right at the start not capitalized? I tried a few different options with the syntax but the best I could get was the "as" capitalized but without the month. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Youngjim (talk • contribs) 15:51, 24 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See the instructions at Template:As of in the Parameters section, e.g. lc=y. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:03, 24 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Apparently a bug in the template, in that |lc= without a value was giving lower case. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:35, 24 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, something like that. I tried lc=no without luck also. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:37, 24 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Data template readability[edit]

I've been looking at the data in the template chart for this and the 757 trying to decipher it, and I have to admit I am stumped. What is the meaning off this "3-Class" "2-Class" business? If it is talking about planes set up in single, double or triple class sections, the numbers don't seem to add up. Maybe "3-class" actually means all third class? I don't know. And I also can't figure out why it appears to be showing less capacity than the 757. I'll have to look at that again. But moset of all, what is this "Y" "J" "F" business? There is no key at all, and even though I know something about planes I am totally baffled. "Youth", "Juniors" and "Females"? What happened to "First", "Business" and "Economy"? Is the average reader supposed to know what these letter mean and I'm just dumb? "18F/196Y"? Idumea47b (talk) 05:14, 6 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Y, J and F classes are economy, business and first, respectively. The booking class is explained when you leave your mouse over the letter. The code is used in airline reservations and is standard for airline seating classes. The average aviation reader is often informed. "3-Class" "2-Class" are seating arrangements. The numbers mostly add up (15+40+119=174, 18+42+150=210, 16+36+189=241 not 243 : there are 38J seats in Boeing's layout, thanks for checking, 18+196=214, 24+237=261, 24+272=296). To compare between the 757 and 767, you should compare 2-class seating not 3-class. The 757-300 does have a slightly higher 243 (12F+231Y) capacity than the 767-200 [214 (18J, 196Y)].--Marc Lacoste (talk) 05:48, 6 January 2020 (UTC) please proofread before saving and keep questions short, thanksReply[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Boeing_767&oldid=1183620576"