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 articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
" Freed from the design constraints imposed by the limitations of late-1940s jet engines, which led to the Comet disasters, developing a robust, safe, and high capacity jet aircraft was within Boeing's grasp."
Perhaps we could include some explanation of how late-40s jet engine tech imposed design limitations that led to DeHavilland using square-framed windows on the Comet, which were the direct cause of the aforementioned disasters. Because it is not at all clear to me what engines have to do with window design. The Comet had issues with engines, but they had nothing to do with the lost aircraft.
A better explanation would be nice but such info is mostly irrelevant to the Boeing 707. I just trimmed the erroneous engine-Comet diaster text. Thanks, -Fnlayson (talk) 19:09, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the differences are probably due to test airplanes being retained by Boeing and not delivered to customer(s), i.e. the built numbers do not match the delivered numbers. -Fnlayson (talk)
Not sure why it took over two years to do it, but the article's self-conflicting numbers have been corrected, per the reference. 1peterk (talk) 04:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I now see that some parties keep correcting the figures, then other parties revert them. It's 865 707s, excluding (not including) the 720s. 1peterk (talk) 04:50, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
