Talk:Percival Prentice

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.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Military history: Aviation / British / European C‑class

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. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 06:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stressing[edit]

The Prentice was designed to be a fully aerobatic trainer and for this reason was stressed to something like +13 Gs. This made it somewhat heavier than normal and hence the complaints about underpowering. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.40.250.40 (talk) 20:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weaknesses[edit]

In the description there is a reference to the aircraft having had "poor spin recovery". I am aware of a Percival Crashing while practicing spinning in 1952. What reference exists to support the comment on "Poor Spin Recovery". Was anything done to improve the airframes already in service and if so when? 212.84.113.1 (talk) 23:20, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that the addition of horizontal anti-spinning strakes forward of the tailplane cured this. They can also be seen on some Tiger Moths, see below.

- the strakes in this picture are painted the same colour as the tailplane and fin/rudder (i.e., silver). Their purpose is to create extra drag at the tail end, so helping an aircraft in a flat spin to drop its nose. They were often seen on UK training aircraft, the DHC Chipmunk also having them in the RAF versions.

... actually now I come to think about it, IIRC the upturned wing tips were added later after spinning trials due to the tendency to flat spin of the prototype Prentice. BTW, flat spins tend to occur if the CofG is too far aft, and the Prentice suffered from this when incorrectly loaded whilst also carrying a third passenger.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.57.101 (talk) 21:05, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Number built[edit]

Something doesn't add up. The article states that "Over 370 were delivered to the RAF between 1947 and 1949". O.K., so we should add to that number the 100 Prentices built for the Fuerza Aerea Argentina and the 42 license-built by Hindustan, which brings the total number well over 500. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.163.113.52 (talk) 09:39, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]