Talk:List of aircraft operated by Scandinavian Airlines

Gallery
We shouldnt really have a large gallery that is the purpose of commons although we could add the images into the table, any thoughts. MilborneOne (talk) 14:53, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, this is one of the few uses where the MOS allows galleries. After aircraft were moved to subcategories for the individual aircraft, the Commons has become nearly impossible to use as a general image depository for airlines. But I agree, sticking the images into the table is probably the best solution. Arsenikk (talk)  10:57, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks a lot better thanks for the effort. MilborneOne (talk) 11:32, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll be adding comments similar to at List of Braathens aircraft, but I need to get the sources organized first. Arsenikk (talk)  12:30, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Updated interior - not sure where to put it, if notable. Could show more images. TGCP (talk) 13:18, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Missing aircraft?
I don't see in the table the 13 A320-200 that SAS operate as of now (November 2014). I won't alter the table myself because I specialise in adding pictures - Arpingstone (talk) 10:19, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of aircraft operated by Scandinavian Airlines. 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://www.webcitation.org/6Ag8J0mMw?url=http://www.flybmi.com/bmi/en-gb/about-us/about-bmi/the-fleet.aspx to http://www.flybmi.com/bmi/en-gb/about-us/about-bmi/the-fleet.aspx

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) 00:27, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on List of aircraft operated by Scandinavian Airlines. 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://www.webcitation.org/6AfYMHPHW?url=http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=20386 to http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=20386
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6BCCPtLon?url=http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=50868 to http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=35549
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6AfYhu5oR?url=http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=35549 to http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=35549
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6AfYmeOI3?url=http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=49423 to http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=49423
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6Aej77FXB?url=http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=23510 to http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=23510
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6AgA25zmS?url=http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=25946 to http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=25946
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6Ag4X94Ed?url=http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=34762 to http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=20386
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6AelAGgSC?url=http://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/SAS-active-crj.htm to http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=34762

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) 18:15, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Current fleet and what to do
Hello there, my fellow Wikipedians.

In the year-end report published by SAS Group (scroll down to "Documents" and download the first pdf for reference), it states that SAS currently have 22 wet leased CRJ-900s. However, in the leading section, it states they have 28. There's also a ref with a dead link in there (I've tried the Wayback Machine, but couldn't anything even close to recent that worked). Currently, the time is 11:32 PM where I am, so I'm not going to start reading the entire report and finding all the errors in the article, but I'm sure there are a few when it comes to the newest – there isn't even any reference to these numbers, other than that dead one. I hate false information, so could someone please help? Thanks in advance, Biscuit-in-Chief (talk) 22:32, 14 December 2018 (UTC).