| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gotha Go 244 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Obvious Error in Performance Data edit
Some of the performance data are obviously wrong. Especially egregious is the rate of climb (5000 meters per minute). Even with the most powerful engines listed in the article (the BMW of 960 hp), assuming 2 engines with 95% installed efficiency and 75% propeller efficiency and no drag from the rest of the airframe, the rate of climb is only 840 meters (2762 feet) per minute.Raymondwinn (talk) 20:56, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Picture?? edit
I went out and did a general search and there are lots and lots of pictures out there for the Go 244.
It is an interesting looking aircraft, and hard to imagine in your head.
Someone who understands the copyright issues and knows how to properly upload a picture to WIKI would do visitors a great service by putting a couple of pictures into this article.
James 203.150.155.17 (talk) 11:43, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- A quick search on Google with my tablet doesn't turn up any obvious copyright images available. (Granted, my tablet's search ability is limited, so I'll try later from a PC.) Because it's so similar to the Go 242, I doubt any copyright images can be used under fair use, but we could add a Go 242 instead, but not to the infobox in the lead. BilCat (talk) 23:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)