Talk:Tupolev Tu-2000

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Aviation 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 articles 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 met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met Associated task forces: /  Military aviation task force Aviation: Aircraft / Soviet /  This article is supported by the aircraft project. This article is supported by the Soviet aviation task force.

Article says top speed is Mach 24 in space... I think this article should define the speed of sound in a vacuum to ensure no-one misunderstands this information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.6.35.235 (talk) 23:02, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An image used in this article, File:Tu-2000.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot -- talk) 12:18, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply ]

The specifications section states that the powerplant was planned as 6 × liquid hydrogen with liquid oxygen oxidizer turbo jet/scramjet.

But a jet engine - using conventional terminology - uses atmospheric oxygen as oxidiser; if you're carrying your oxidiser, then you're a rocket engine (if you see what I mean).

Something's not right. I don't have the book used as the supposed source of this claim.

Anyone?

Michael F 1967 (talk) 20:28, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]