This template 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 template is within the scope of WikiProject Rocketry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of rocketry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RocketryWikipedia:WikiProject RocketryTemplate:WikiProject RocketryRocketry
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight
Can anyone think of a better way to lay this out? -Joseph 20:40, 2004 Sep 8 (UTC)
As the template exists in early November 2014, it might be useful to separate the rocket/spacecraft-related terms of use from the aviation-related terms of use.
However, I don't have a strong opinion on that as of right now, so will just leave the comment here for others to consider. N2e (talk) 12:47, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2014-11-06T12:47:00.000Z","author":"N2e","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-N2e-2014-11-06T12:47:00.000Z-template_layout","replies":[]}}-->
Since RATO redirects to JATO, maybe the template should be changed, and RATO and JATO put in a single line as "JATO/RATO", like it's done for ZLL/ZLTO? conio.h • talk02:58, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2005-12-04T02:58:00.000Z","author":"AlexKarpman","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-AlexKarpman-2005-12-04T02:58:00.000Z-JATO\/RATO","replies":[],"displayName":"conio.h"}}-->
Should SRVL (Ship-borne Rolling Vertical Landing) be added? Described here:
[1]
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONDESKTOP__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-N2e-2010-12-30T15:11:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Is_there_a_link_for_standard_horizontal_takeoff_and_horizontal_landing?-2010-12-30T15:11:00.000Z","replies":["c-N2e-2010-12-30T15:11:00.000Z-Is_there_a_link_for_standard_horizontal_takeoff_and_horizontal_landing?"],"text":"Is there a link for standard horizontal takeoff and horizontal landing?","linkableTitle":"Is there a link for standard horizontal takeoff and horizontal landing?"}-->
Is there a link for standard horizontal takeoff and horizontal landing?
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONMOBILE__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-N2e-2010-12-30T15:11:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Is_there_a_link_for_standard_horizontal_takeoff_and_horizontal_landing?-2010-12-30T15:11:00.000Z","replies":["c-N2e-2010-12-30T15:11:00.000Z-Is_there_a_link_for_standard_horizontal_takeoff_and_horizontal_landing?"],"text":"Is there a link for standard horizontal takeoff and horizontal landing?","linkableTitle":"Is there a link for standard horizontal takeoff and horizontal landing?"}-->
I was surprised not to find a link for standard horizontal takeoff and horizontal landing in the template? Am I overlooking something? Or is the template really just types of non-standard take-off and landing? Cheers. N2e (talk) 15:11, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-30T15:11:00.000Z","author":"N2e","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-N2e-2010-12-30T15:11:00.000Z-Is_there_a_link_for_standard_horizontal_takeoff_and_horizontal_landing?","replies":["c-65.93.15.125-2011-03-01T04:53:00.000Z-N2e-2010-12-30T15:11:00.000Z"]}}-->
This is called CTOL... conventional take-off and landing. 65.93.15.125 (talk) 04:53, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-01T04:53:00.000Z","author":"65.93.15.125","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-65.93.15.125-2011-03-01T04:53:00.000Z-N2e-2010-12-30T15:11:00.000Z","replies":["c-N2e-2011-03-01T13:20:00.000Z-65.93.15.125-2011-03-01T04:53:00.000Z"]}}-->
Yeah, I see what you mean. I've never run into an instance in the aviation literature where the term HTOL is even used. And it is a redlink in Wikipedia today (as of 2011-03-01).
So maybe the HTOL redlink ought to be totally removed from the template Template:Types of take-off and landing. That would be my suggestion unless we can find a verifiable, source for the use of HTOL. N2e (talk) 13:20, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-01T13:20:00.000Z","author":"N2e","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-N2e-2011-03-01T13:20:00.000Z-65.93.15.125-2011-03-01T04:53:00.000Z","replies":["c-65.95.15.144-2011-03-04T21:15:00.000Z-N2e-2011-03-01T13:20:00.000Z"]}}-->
HTOL is "horizontal" which is not the same as "conventional". STOL is also horizontal, and it is not CTOL, as are CATOBAR, STOBAR, etc. 65.95.15.144 (talk) 21:15, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-04T21:15:00.000Z","author":"65.95.15.144","type":"comment","level":4,"id":"c-65.95.15.144-2011-03-04T21:15:00.000Z-N2e-2011-03-01T13:20:00.000Z","replies":["c-N2e-2011-03-11T20:54:00.000Z-65.95.15.144-2011-03-04T21:15:00.000Z"]}}-->
I have removed the HTOL link from the template. Rationale: no source found in the aviation literature where HTOL is used to describe this sort of take-off and landing. N2e (talk) 20:54, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-11T20:54:00.000Z","author":"N2e","type":"comment","level":5,"id":"c-N2e-2011-03-11T20:54:00.000Z-65.95.15.144-2011-03-04T21:15:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
Strategi Solo vs Squad di Free Fire: Cara Menang Mudah!
.jpg){kind=small}
