Talk:Air New Zealand Flight 901
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Air New Zealand Flight 901 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment. | |||
|
||||
| This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
This article has been mentioned by a media organisation: | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
 Archives |
|||
|
[edit] Time
I'm not sure that the times given are in NZST, they could be in NZDT as the crash took place in November when NZ was using Daylight Time. Evil Monkey∴Hello 10:23, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
- The same thought just occurred to me! I think NZDT would be in effect in late November 1979. -- FP 10:33, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Legacy
Just a note for the sake of completeness. Air New Zealand's decision to replace DC-10s with Boeing 747s probably had more to do with the grounding of all DC-10s for five weeks in 1979. There's a very brief mention of this grounding at McDonnell_Douglas_DC-10#Safety_record; I'm surprised Wikipedia doesn't have more on it. Had Air New Zealand not been government owned, it might have collapsed at that point (this is purely speculation on my part).-gadfium 07:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Movie
Not any contribution but would like to know if anyone can help with the name of a dramatized movie made of the Mnt Erebus disastar. edras1@absamail.co.za
- There was a TV serial (miniseries) that was broadcast in NZ and AU called Erebus: The Aftermath, made in 1988. Perhaps this should be added to the article. --MCB 17:19, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 44 Unidentified victims
How can there be so many people who were unidentified? Wouldn't Air NZ have some kind of paper trail that would say who was on the plane?
- That sentence should probably be clarified. It's not that ANZ didn't know who was on the plane, but that the remains of 44 of the victims were not individually identifiable and thus could not be returned to their families for funerals. --MCB 18:01, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
- Now fixed. --MCB 19:30, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Changing of coordinates
Who changed them? It's not clear in the article, and I think it's important to note, especially since Mahon found it to be the reason the plane crashed. Iorek85 05:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Brian Hewitt of the Navigation Department on the 17th floor of Air New Zealand House 1 Queen St AUckland
But Mahon got this terribly wrong- not being a pilot
The coordinate error would not have mattered if the crew did not arm the Inertial Nav under VFR
The Inertial Nav is an IFR instrument - to be used safely above Minimm Safe Altitude (MSA) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.155.178.202 (talk) 11:04, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Victim Nationalities Discrepancy
This site [1] doesn't agree with the nationalities of victims listed here. It has the following listed:
US:18 (this article says 22) UK:8 (this article says 6) SWISS:3 (this article says 1) JAPAN:23 (this article says 24) FR:1 (this article says 1 - hey something matches) CA:3 (this article says 3 - and again!) NZ:203 (including 20 crew) (this article says 200)
(this article also says 1x Australian)
These add up to 259, so it doesn't even agree with itself (257 victims) - but where are the nationalities listed on this page sourced from? I couldn't find it in any of the refs. PseudoEdit (yak) (track) 21:52, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] About the information I removed
First, mentioning that the airline sold it's DC-10s later seemed irrelevant since nobody faulted the plane itself.
Second, in order to have as cozy a community as the "sizable portion" assertion claimed; everyone would need to know 10,000 people if we use the ultra-conservative figure of 2,000,000 for the population. Of course the higher the actual number, the more people each person would need to know. (I just divided 2,000,000 by 200) I've talked to many friendly New Zealanders but I seriously doubt people's Christmas card lists down there go into the thousands. Anynobody 08:48, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Front page news
This particular article made the front page of The Press today. Seems that an IP address traced to Air New Zealand made some edits to this article that were designed to make the article more favourable to Air NZ. The edit mentioned in the article was appears to be this one from 2003. I had to laugh at the sentence from the article that read "Computer experts contacted by The Press also tracked the altered entry back to Air New Zealand's computer server." -- as if using WHOIS is that hard. Evil Monkey - Hello 21:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- Turns out the edits were first discovered by the NZBC blog. They also pointed out another edit that made large additions to the article. Evil Monkey - Hello 01:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] An orchestrated litany of lies
A line in the article:
- The phrase "An Orchestrated Litany of Lies" has entered New Zealand popular culture.
has been tagged as citation needed. What would be a suitable citation for this?
It would be easy to add three references (or more) from a variety of New Zealand sources showing use of the phrase unconnected to the Erebus report. Is that enough, or do we need a source which actually says "This phrase is now part of New Zealand popular culture"? Here are some sample uses: [2] (the album of this name: ...a famous quote from NZs recent political past...), [3] (...To quote a well known phrase, there has been "An orchestrated litany of lies”...), [4] (...in a phrase that is likely to resound as did “an orchestrated litany of lies” in another investigation...). Some of these are not considered reliable sources, but we are not using them to establish facts but usage.-gadfium 19:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
- Since no one replied, I've added these three refs to the article.-gadfium 17:55, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Continuation of Antarctic flights
Did this incident spell the end of sightseeing flights to Antarctica run by Air New Zealand? Either way I think mention of the continuation (or otherwise) of the service should be made in the "Legacy" section Dick G (talk) 06:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, there were no more after this. I don't have a ref though.-gadfium 04:41, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Minor edit to correct nature of the Ross Ice Shelf
I have made a minor edit to correct the statement that the Ross Ice Shelf is sea-ice. It certainly isn't; ice shelves are formed where glaciers flow into the sea and are in Antarctica are continuous with the great ice sheets of the continent. --APRCooper (talk) 09:48, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Are all of the crew members from New Zealand?
Were all of the crew members from New Zealand? If so, what source states this? If not, what source and what nationalities are the non-NZ crew members? WhisperToMe 08:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
This: http://www.antarctic.homestead.com/901.html states that all of the crew were from Auckland - But does another source say this? WhisperToMe 08:50, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] When was the error to the flight plan made?
In "Circumstances surrounding the accident":
At that time flight plan coordinates were entered into the computer by hand, and during this process a single digit had been typed incorrectly. This resulted in the flight plan, originally intended to fly down the middle of the wide McMurdo Sound, actually being programmed to fly directly over Mount Erebus, some miles to the east.
In "Changes to the coordinates and departure":
Unknown to them, the coordinates had been modified earlier that morning to correct the error introduced years previously and undetected until now. These new coordinates changed the flight plan to fly 45 kilometres (28 miles) east of where the pilots intended the plane to fly. The coordinates instructed the plane to fly over Lewis Bay and directly over Mount Erebus, a 3,794 m (12,448 ft) high volcano, instead of over McMurdo Sound.
So what exactly happened? What I gathered from the article is that the original plan flew over McMurdo Sound, this was changed for some reason to fly over Mt. Erebus, and then the pilots unwittingly entered the new plan. But that contradicts the first quote, which makes it sound like the error was made during the entry process.
The other interpretation I'm getting is that the original plan wrongly flew to Erebus, it was changed westward to McMurdo, but the pilots entered wrongly to go back to Erebus again. But that makes no sense as to why changing the flight plan would've been a problem. Kelvinc (talk) 20:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
see section above on who changed the coordinates —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.155.178.202 (talk) 11:07, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:AirNewZealandFlight901.jpg
Image:AirNewZealandFlight901.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 04:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
