Talk:Energy–maneuverability theory

"SEE model" not defined
The phrase "SEE model" is not defined, but it is referred to. It apparently refers to PW, but this symbol is never given a name. Dkraemer1 (talk) 18:57, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Please, no hand-waving
The formula Ps W = (T - D) V that "explains" this theory is simply the well-known relation  known to every high school physics student. The mathematics of the theory would certainly improve this article, but this formula doesn't help and has been removed. Please cite your source when you add the math, and don't add the math if you don't know what it means. Yappy2bhere (talk) 02:08, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Formula source
Formula was from "Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War" by Robert Coram. I would like to point out that while this formula is obvious today, it was not at the time, and was considered revolutionary. Please add it back and cite the biography. In the future, ask for references to be added before taking preemptive action.

Formatting Niggle
Why doesn't the title of the article use a *hyphen* between 'Energy' and 'maneuverability' rather than what I *think* is an m-dash? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:9:1D00:327:9981:80CA:88AA:90FD (talk) 17:25, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

That's a good question. I tried to move the page, but for some reason could not. Lexoka (talk) 20:15, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Diagram needed
Simple Smiley (talk) 16:36, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

BIG Question
Does anyone know if Boyd and Christie's 1964 two-volume report on the performance envelopes of U.S. and Soviet aircraft from the Korean and Vietnam Wars has ever been made public, especially the comparative performance slides described by Coram? Tfdavisatsnetnet (talk) 16:57, 28 October 2022 (UTC)