Talk:De Havilland DH.88 Comet

Propellers
The article states that the Comet was first fitted with Hamilton V-P propellers. This is contradicted by Harald Penrose, who says that the design team went to New York for discussions with Hamilton but concluded that their props were not suitable, firstly because they were designed for much more powerful engines but also because their hydraulic actuation would be problematic. I find this account more plausible than that in the article; apart from anything else I would have expected DH to have tested the installation in another aircraft rather than waiting for the Comet to be completed.TheLongTone (talk) 16:00, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Penrose is not always reliable, I have caught him out before. I have on my shelf the Putnam book on the de Havilland aircraft, Martin Sharp's history of the company, Geoffrey DH's own autobiography, and Oglivy's book on the Comets. They tell in a good deal more detail about the visit to the States, how despite the concerns you note they ordered a cut-down set for the Comets but then, as a fallback, went to France and ordered a set of Ratiers. Ogilvie has photos of the prototype in its earliest form, visibly confirming that it was initially fitted with the Hamiltons. They did indeed interfere with the cooling airflow as had been feared (this could not have been tested on another plane), so the fallback plan was implemented. The crankshafts had been made with an integral Hamilton fitting, so an adapter had to be made for the Ratiers. If you have concerns over any given factoid, by all means tag it and I'll dig out a suitable reference. (Henshaw's account of reworking an engine for the King's Cup leaves a puzzle over the path of the hydraulic oilway, but that is another question altogether. I doubt that Shuttleworth would let me take it apart to find out.) &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 17:22, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree about Penrose. I don't have eithe Sharp or Ogilvie & it is a while since I read Geoffrey dH's autobiog.TheLongTone (talk) 15:01, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

de Havilland DH.88 Comet.
Hello, I'm not sure if this is the correct way to communicate, however. I have several times tried to add factual content to G-ACSR. Each time it has been removed. Please tell me why and how to include this genuine information as my father was the person that repaired the aircraft when in Baghdad? I even included a letter from de Havilland addressed to my mother as my father was a serving member of the RAF and as such could officially accept monies for the work even though his c/o allowed it. Had he not repaired the aircraft it would not been able to proceed as it did. I have an account with Wikipedia which is Tiggy1962. By having an account I assume I can add content to Wikipedia pages. If I am wrong please educate me in a way that I can understand. . (talk) 10:06, 29 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Your edit regarding G-ACSR (see the diff) was reverted by because it was unsourced – see the diff.
 * Everything published on Wikipedia that is likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable published source so that it can be independently verified. Please see WP:VERIFIABILITY. I think it is unlikely that the information regarding your father’s involvement in Baghdad is supported by a reliable published source. Therefore it is unlikely that your information can be published in Wikipedia. Dolphin ( t ) 12:14, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Everything published on Wikipedia that is likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable published source so that it can be independently verified. Please see WP:VERIFIABILITY. I think it is unlikely that the information regarding your father’s involvement in Baghdad is supported by a reliable published source. Therefore it is unlikely that your information can be published in Wikipedia. Dolphin ( t ) 12:14, 29 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia. Yes, this is the right place to discuss your edits. The problem Wikipedia faces is that thousands of people every day try to push false information on it. So we have very strict rules about being able to verify facts by citing reliable sources which other editors can follow up. There are also legal issues like copyright, where images especially have to be released under a permissive license before we are safe using them. For example if you were to upload that letter to the wikimedia Commons] under a Creative Commons license, we would be able to consider using it here. But we would still need sourcing for its backstory and relevance, so we still might not be able to. I even wrote a book on the Comets with much new research; it gained ringing endorsements from the Comet Racer Restoration Project and Aeroplane but another editor here decided that since I had self-published, that was not good enough for them. So this article must remain in a lousy state, and you and I should sink a beer together some day. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 20:11, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Steelpillow Thanks for the reply 'Steelpillow'.
 * Maybe I'll give the letter to the museum. Then down a beer or two. 2A02:C7C:6CDD:5500:C5E:3628:DC45:9632 (talk) 20:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Hum - I see you already uploaded an image to the Commons; Letter from de Havilland to Holmes.jpg. The original certainly needs to be kept safe. Happy to help find a good home, if you like. You can find the steelpillow web site and contact details easily enough in Google, or Wikipedia has a private email system if you can figure how to set it up. I'd love to hear anything more you can add to the tale, anyway. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 16:40, 30 May 2024 (UTC)