Kometa-Standard
type of aircraft
The Kometa-Standard was a Standard Class glider, designed and built in Bulgaria in the early 1960s. Thirty were flown by local gliding clubs.
Design and development
The Kometa-Standard was the second glider designed by Pavlov and Panchovsky, a fully aerobatic Standard Class aircraft of almost entirely wooden construction, though with fabric covered control surfaces. The wings, straight tapered in plan and set at mid-wing position, were single spar structures with leading edge plywood covered D-boxes. They had 4° of dihedral. There were salmon type fairings, tapering, slender, streamlined bodies, at the tips. The Kometa-Standard had mass-balanced, slotted ailerons and spoilers at 60% chord which opened above and below the wing.
The fuselage of the Kometa-Standard was a plywood covered monocoque with the cockpit extending close to the metal nose cone. The canopy of the prototype was of long bubble form, proud of the rear fuselage line, but this was lowered and reshaped on the production Kometa-Standard II, merging into the rear fuselage from which it was hinged. The cockpit was changed again in the Kometa-Standard III which had a sliding canopy over a reclining seat, making this variant 30 km/h (19 mph) faster than the Kometa-Standard II. Overall, the fuselage tapered uniformly from the cockpit to the tail.
“Kometa-Standard” enters the record as type of aircraft. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Kometa-Standard, type and aircraft can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Kometa-Standard” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Kometa-Standard, type and aircraft provides the most credible route into that argument.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Nov 9, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q6428307. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Kometa-Standard”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Kometa-Standard primary sources, Kometa-Standard archive and Kometa-Standard research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Kometa-Standard”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Kometa-Standard” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.