Talk:Narrow-body aircraft

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 not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Scopeliner?[edit]

The term "Scopeliner" is suspect as it only appears in a limited number of articles and a Google search reveals its only use is in this and a few related articles which are then referenced by other pages on the web.

The term sounds pejorative and while certain small airliners may have been operated with seat restrictions by airline affiliates in order to stay withing "scope clauses" of operating agreements, a search of numerous trade publications and aviation glossaries reveals that the term "Scopeliner" is not in general use, either within the industry or outside of it. Hatcat (talk) 22:48, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I've removed the rants and removed the suspect distinction to bring it in line with Regional airliner, which defines them as any planes carrying 35-100 passengers. Jpatokal (talk) 07:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3-wide?[edit]

According to the article, it sounds like the Embraer ERJ145, Saab 340, deHavilland Dash8 and others, might well be included in the article. Why aren't they listed? I'm going to be bold and add them; if I haven't a clue what I'm talking about, someone please correct me. Jsharpminor (talk) 00:34, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Concorde??[edit]

Someone listed the Concorde as a narrow-body aircraft.

It may be, in fact, true that its fuselage might be small enough to make the grade... but is it really considered a narrow-body airliner? I thought it had drastically different flight characteristics from most other aircraft in service, which really made it unmaneuverable, and in a class of airliners all its own.

At the very least, I'd like to see one place where the Concorde was ever referred to as a "narrow-body airliner" before it gets included in this page. Jsharpminor (talk) 00:40, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Concorde had a a 4 abreast cabin which makes it a narrow-body. Plus, have you ever seen anything referring to the Dash 8 as a narrow-body, because I've only heard "turboprop airliner" and "regional airliner".--Chuckmorris812 (talk) 02:11, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Narrow-body aircraft. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160623164732/http://www.flythemrj.com/media/pdf/MRJ_Brochure_e_.pdf to http://www.flythemrj.com/media/pdf/MRJ_Brochure_e_.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 10:25, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How many airlines used Seven Abreast Seating?[edit]

A few sources say Channel Airways used seven-abreast seating in their Hawker Trident narrowbody planes.

This page https://travelupdate.com/seven-seats-across-trident/ shows a seating plan and B&W picture of 3-4 seating at the front of a Channel Airways plane. The page also shows a color photo of a different airline's 3-3 seating at the rear of a Trident, but doesn't say whether that other airline also featured 7-abreast seating anywhere on their planes.

Anyone know if other airlines tried 7-abreast 3-4 seating on a single aisle airliner, or was it unique to Channel Airways? — Preceding unsigned comment added by VeryWetPaint (talk • contribs) 04:40, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTFORUM Maybe ask at airliners.net.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 05:59, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'd make a move for this to be re-added to the page. I can't pinpoint where it was removed, but this page used to include a seven-abreast section with reference to this aircraft. 2.26.186.254 (talk) 20:05, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Three-abreast cabin - Turbolet L-410[edit]

Turbolet L-410 2003:D1:732:601B:E91C:18E7:F0A2:9BC3 (talk) 16:45, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]