Talk:Williams FJ44

Customary strikes again
In this article the kilonewton / pound-force conversions are mangled, or at least the content of the table massively contradicts the contents of the many body text regarding thrust values.

Would people please stop using anglosaxon units, it is so bronze age! How many hogsheads to the furlong does you new shiny fully carbon composite jet get? Use the damn freedom system of measurements (also known as SI for the non-francophiles)! 82.131.210.162 11:26, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It's an American engine, so American conventions are used here.  AK Radecki Speaketh  17:31, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Thrust
1900 lbf does not correspond to(2.58 kN), but 8.54kN. Completely agree with prevous note. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.80.98.8 (talk) 17:16, 11 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree the conversions should be corrected if they are incorrect. But English-WP allows US Customary measurements to be used in articles, and this is not the place to try to change that. - BillCJ (talk) 17:49, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Just recognized them same: Allmost all thrust indication text parts are not consistent with the later table and are also not consistent with the unit conversion lbs->Newton. I will change that now.83.78.63.26 (talk) 07:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC) I also changed the wrong Newton value of the FJ44-4 in the table. All other table values are correct.83.78.63.26 (talk) 07:35, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Another model Williams FJ44-4M-34
Williams FJ44-4M-34used in the new Aermacchi M-345HET jet trainer. http://newatlas.com/leonardo-m-345het-maiden-flight/47190/ Bizzybody (talk) 03:17, 5 January 2017 (UTC)