Talk:Edgar Percival

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

I'm not too sure most Aussies would agree that E.W.P was 'British'...! Since he was born in Australia and was educated there AND worked there...it would be fairer to call him an Australian. There's little doubt what 'The Hat' would have said.....!

Duly noted, and was "the Hat" a familiar nickname? FYI, I assume you are a newcomer, a minor point in adding comments here, it is customary to provide the following: user id and date and time of submission using the Coordinated Universal Time or UTC code. See my signature line and just copy it as yours with the appropriate changes. Another way to sign your name and add the time is to put 4 tildes (~) at the end of your post, and it adds your name and time automatically. Bzuk 15:24, 14 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Paras 3 & 4 under Percival Aircraft Company don't really fit there and make it rather incoherent. PontiusPilot 01:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, I think the newest revision is closer to the sequence of dates and events. Nice to see you back and contributing substantively to fill in the "gaps" on some weird and wonderful aircraft types. Bzuk 02:39, 15 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Additional information that PontiusPilot has provided is filling in details in the article and with some minor editing, is contributing to making this a more comprehensive and authoritative article. Keep it up, this is now a prime example of how collaborative editing can take place. Bzuk 12:26, 15 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]
As I pointed out somewhere else regarding classifying someone as 'Australian', Percival would have been a British subject and so would have been considered 'British' whether 'most Aussies' like it or not.
IIRC, separate Australian Citizenship didn't exist until as late as the 1960s, whilst for Canadians it was sometime in the 1920s. Prior to these dates, citizens of both countries would have been classed as 'British' as well as 'Australian'/'Canadian' - a result of the sometimes confusing legacy of Empire —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.40.226.55 (talk) 17:02, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake - it was 1949 for Australia. Before then all 'Australians' would have been British Subjects. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.40.249.59 (talk) 12:35, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The last aircraft designed and produced by the Percival Aircraft Company[edit]

Percival Petrel or Percival Proctor? Bzuk 13:21, 15 May 2007 (UTC). '......that represented the final new design produced by the company prior to Edgar Percival selling his interests in the company.' New Design. The Q6 was a wholly new design. The Proctor I was was a Vega Gull II with R/T fitted and only very minor changes, so was really a variant at best. The final Proctors were, however, a re-design, being larger and heavier. 88.109.104.159 10:41, 16 May 2007 (UTC) I meant to add, the point that the above statement stated '...prior to Edgar Percival selling his interests in the company.' It didn't say it was the last design produced by the company, - which continued after EWP had left. 88.109.104.159 10:45, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Gardner. The link is to a botanist...! There was also another contemporary Charles Gardner who was an aviation Journalist, - and it wasn't him either. The pre-war racing pilot went on to found helicopter-based aviation firm after the war. The racing-pilot C.G. was a highly intelligent pilot and racer with an awfully bad stammmmmmer. Alex' Henshaw stated that '... Gardner was the only pilot who ever worried me when racing.' Charles Gardner won the Kings cup on 13th September 1937, a race in which two pilots lost their lives as I recall. Info' on C.G. has been hard to find.


Using Silvester as a reference; This is a good source for Percival info' in general, as John Silvester started with Percivals before the war as a youngster. However, it contains a surprising number of errors too... Some are just copy-edit-typos etc, but others are more by the way of facts wrongly remembered. Names, dates, places. These aren't obvious if one hasn't read suitable cross-referencing material on the events, characters and aircraft, so a little care is required in using it. PontiusPilot 12:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]