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

Aviation: 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 been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met This article is supported by the aircraft project. Military history: Aviation / North America / United States 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 This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Military aviation task force North American military history task force United States military history task force United States: Military history Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force. Kansas Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kansas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Kansas 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.KansasWikipedia:WikiProject KansasTemplate:WikiProject KansasKansas articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Smithsonian Institution Low‑importance This article is within the scope of Smithsonian Institution WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Smithsonian Institution and related articles 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.Smithsonian InstitutionWikipedia:GLAM/Smithsonian InstitutionTemplate:WikiProject Smithsonian InstitutionSmithsonian Institution-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from Beechcraft Model 40 was copied or moved into Beechcraft Bonanza with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Text and/or other creative content from Waikiki Beech was copied or moved into Beechcraft Bonanza with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

I propose to merge Parastu 14 into Beechcraft Bonanza. I think that the content in the Parastu 14 article can easily be explained in the context of Beechcraft Bonanza, particularly as it is an un-licensed copy of the Bonanza. Petebutt ( talk) 19:54, 11 November 2020 (UTC) reply

I agree. - Ahunt ( talk) 19:59, 11 November 2020 (UTC) reply

We actually need sources that say the Parastu is a copy of the Bonanza - the current references don't seen to state this - with the closest being that it is a "look alike" by globalsecurity. Nigel Ish ( talk) 20:36, 11 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Agreed with Nigel Ish; globalsecurity is ambiguous about the actual similarities of the aircraft, other English-language sources on Google are unreadable without a subscription, and I distrust online translations of technical content in foreign languages that I'm unfamiliar with. Can anyone out there access additional English-language sources and/or read Farsi well enough to verify what the Iranian sources say? Carguychris ( talk) 20:49, 11 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Original research using the very few images of Iranian Bonanzas the Parastu just looks like the original aircraft with some new paint and sometimes wingtips but I cant find any reliable sources to back that up. It is doubtful they are new aircraft. MilborneOne ( talk) 12:27, 12 November 2020 (UTC) reply

You could look at it from the other side and posit that there are no reliable sources that state it is not a copy and is an original aircraft!--06:49, 14 November 2020 (UTC) Petebutt ( talk)

If no reliable sources (not Iranian! Nothing they say can be trusted!) are forthcoming, then the merge should go ahead. No reason why a stand-alone article can't be resurrected if it does prove to be an original design!!-- Petebutt ( talk) 07:02, 14 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Unsourced common sense indicates they are not new aircraft like a lot of Iranian designs they have just improved the aircraft they already have. MilborneOne ( talk) 09:53, 14 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Part of the problem with the accessable Iranian sources is that, as far as I can tell using Google Translate, they don't say anything about any relationship with the Bonanza either, and they appear to be general news sources so we couldn't put great trust in them for technical facts (even if we ignore general issues with Iranian sources) - we have no decent sourcing that gives a direct relationship (either existing Bonanzas with a new coat of paint or some sort of copy or rebuild). It may be helpful is someone can get a sight of what the latest editions of sources like Jane's All the World's Aircraft say, because currently we have very little to base an article or a merge on. Nigel Ish ( talk) 10:46, 14 November 2020 (UTC) reply

As much as I know/search, there doesn't seem to be specific source(s) to show/prove this claim of " an un-licensed copy of the Beechcraft F33 Bonanza..." and I presume that we cannot merge the article without having reliable related sources" ... Anyhow; all diverse views are appreciated. Ali Ahwazi ( talk) 07:52, 15 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Closing', given that the proposal remains contested and the discussion is stale. Klbrain ( talk) 15:40, 16 May 2021 (UTC) reply

 Subsequent analysis of National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) accident records between 1962 and 2007 revealed an average of three V-tail structural failures per year, while the conventional-tailed Bonanza 33 and 36 suffered only eleven such failures during the same time period.

Does this actually mean anything? Were the Model 33 and Model 35 built in the same numbers? I assumed the V-tail was far more common than the conventional tail. The total numbers of aircraft effected doesn't matter, it is the number effected proportional to the units built. The numbers suggest that the V-tail does in fact have a higher proportional failure rate, but one shouldn't assume such things. Perhaps V tails were built in the thousands, and Model 33s in the dozens. It is like saying that "last year there were 10,000 engine failures by Toyota Corollas, but only 150 engine failures among Alfa Romeos, therefore the Toyota Corolla is less reliable than an Alfa". There are also many, many times as many Corollas in existence.

64.222.152.192 ( talk) 13:49, 16 April 2022 (UTC) reply

Articles about aircraft, boats, cars, and other vehicles should always include pricing information. What is the standard retail price, citing a recent year?

Also, what are the range of prices for used aircraft?

Operating costs would also be useful, but are not essential.

This article would also benefit from at least an estimate of how many of the 17,000 planes are still in service. Davidcay ( talk) 00:48, 13 December 2022 (UTC) reply

Wikipedia policy at WP:NOPRICES says: An article should not include product pricing or availability information (which can vary widely with time and location) unless there is an independent source and encyclopedic significance for the mention, which may be indicated by mainstream media sources or books (not just product reviews) provide commentary on these details instead of just passing mention. Wikipedia is not a price comparison service to compare prices and availability of competing products or a single product from different vendors.

As far as how many remain in service, there is no way to determine that. Some nations, like the US and UK have public aircraft registries, but most do not, making that determination impossible. - Ahunt ( talk) 01:51, 13 December 2022 (UTC) reply