Talk:Lockheed L-301

Designation Claim
The claim here that this vehicle was never officially designated the X-24C is contradicted by the many NASA documents specifically referring to it as the X-24C. Furthermore, wikipedia is improperly redirecting queries for X-24C to the page for the X-24A rather than to this page. This should be fixed.75.67.80.68 (talk) 15:23, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The article says there were several aircraft tenatively designated X-24C. X-24C should redirect here, however unless there's a citation that this aircraft was definitively designated as such it should stay at its current naming. - The Bushranger (talk) 16:08, 30 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I've redirected X-24C to the section in the X-24B article that explains this situation. Will that suffice? - BilCat (talk) 16:12, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Spacecraft?
I can't find any reference in the article or elsewhere that states this vehicle was actually a spaceplane, i.e intended to actually travel into space (for the purposes of Wikipedia the oft used international designation of above 100km) for part of its journey. Is this claim true or is this article miscategorised? ChiZeroOne (talk) 02:39, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lockheed L-301. 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/20050215191331/http://www.arnold.af.mil/aedc/systems/74-1551.htm to http://www.arnold.af.mil/aedc/systems/74-1551.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/xplanes2000/L301.html

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) 04:15, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lockheed L-301. 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/20090725111504/http://www.darpa.mil/tto/solicit/BAA08-53/VULCAN_Industry_Day_Presentations.pdf to http://www.darpa.mil/tto/solicit/BAA08-53/VULCAN_Industry_Day_Presentations.pdf

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) 05:35, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

It's the science fiction article
Much of this is just unsourced fanboi speculation. If it isn't sourced to an RS, then out it goes. Greglocock (talk) 06:30, 2 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I was not aware that NASA were "fanboys". MilborneOne (talk) 11:27, 2 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Well, duh, I went and found some decent refs instead of the fanboi sites that were used originally, and got rid of the speculation. However, mea culpa, I have used a lot of X24C material rather than L301. I am currently thinking about how to expand the rigor of that approach (L301 was one of the last X24C proposals). Greglocock (talk) 18:55, 2 December 2018 (UTC)