Talk:Boulton Paul Balliol

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Military history: Aviation / Maritime / British / European / Cold War Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

 A couple of queries for someone with good BP sources.

- - Was the Sea B undercarriage strengthened for decks landings? It was a common mod for other aircraft, and one web site does say this but it would be nice to have an authoritative source.

No, Boulton Paul had streessed the original undercarriage to high descent rates and loads.--Petebutt (talk) 04:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- - Numbers: everyone agrees on three prototypes and 30 Sea Bs, so the question is how many T.Mk2s, including the RCA group. We say 196, though the way it's worded could exclude the RCA order. The Cosford website says 199. AJ Jackson, in his Blackburn book says 183; maybe he missed the 12 RCA machines. If so, the disagreement is not large, but annoying. The only clear statement of 12 RCA comes from the Cosford site, so it would be good to have independent backup on them.TSRL (talk) 22:09, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Balliol T.1 prototypes: 3
Balliol T.2. prototypes: 4
Balliol T.2 pre-production: 17
Balliol T.2. RAF: 133
Balliol T.2 RAF: 30
Balliol T.2 Ceylon: 12 (7 from cancelled RAF contracts + five built to replace RAF supplied aircraft)
Sea Balliol T.21: 30
Total: 229

--Petebutt (talk) 04:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Sea Balliol was certainly stressed for deck landing - there is a photo of one landing on in Thetford's British Naval Aircraft since 1912what level of strengthening was required over the straight Balliol is uncertain.Nigel Ish (talk) 23:05, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Boulton Paul Balliol. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:48, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]