Talk:Coiled tubing

I suggest we remove the list of "Major coiled tubing services companies", which leans more towards advertizing. Neither the Wireline page nor the Snubbing page has such a list. InsanePervert (talk) 16:12, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Why? Wikipedia provides the latest information but the companies show pictures/animations of the equipment and in some instances give case studies on capabilities. Unless the link is there, we have to search again. I find it very useful. Perhaps wireline and snubbing need a similar link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.16.174 (talk) 13:42, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

About CTU
I think we need a separate item for this. Also, the air compressor on the unit is sometimes used to 'blow air into well'? I don't think so. The compressor comes along with the generator, which cools down the unit. The categorizes of CTU applications don't seem good to me, either... DairyKnight (talk) 22:33, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

We should mention the freely downloadable Norsok standards that give guidance D-SR-005 Coiled tubing equipment Rev 1 Jan 1996 D-SR-008 Wireline equipment Rev 1 Oct 1996 D-010 Well integrity in drilling and well operations Rev 3 Aug 2004 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.16.174 (talk) 21:46, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Coiled tubing. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140729175205/http://www.coiledtubingdrilling.com/ctd/coiled-tubing/technology/ to http://www.coiledtubingdrilling.com/ctd/coiled-tubing/technology/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:53, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Introduction is too complicated and long
The introduction here reads like a paragraph in the middle of an article. It should start with a simple summary, not this long compare and contrast with other methods.

--Epididymus (talk) 00:16, 24 May 2018 (UTC)