Talk:Air Canada Flight 624: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 01:06, 1 April 2015

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Air Canada Flight 624 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Aviation: Accidents

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the Aviation accident project.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Canada: Ontario / Nova Scotia / Toronto Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Nova Scotia.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Toronto (assessed as Low-importance).

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in the following regions may be able to help:
Halifax	Nova Scotia	Canada

The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

It is requested that a diagram or diagrams be included in this article to improve its quality. Specific illustrations, plots or diagrams can be requested at the Graphic Lab. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
For more information, refer to discussion on this page and/or the listing at Wikipedia:Requested images.

Map needed

It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality.

redirects

TJP should link here

C-FTJP , ~~CF-TJP , CFTJP , FTJP~~
AC624 , ACA624 , AC 624 , ACA 624 , AC-624 , ACA-624
AC0624 , ACA0624 , AC 0624 , ACA 0624 , AC-0624 , ACA-0624
AIR CANADA 624 , AIRCANADA 624 , Air Canada 624

should redirect here -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 06:39, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@65.94.43.89: I think that list is a bit excessive. Even if you don't get the search term right for a re-direct, the right page is very likely to be listed in the search results. 624 is already 'taken'. 220 of ^Borg 07:41, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"624" is a typo, I've corrected it -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 08:11, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a redirect from the correct registration. Mjroots (talk) 15:24, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CFIT

Does this event not fit the classic definition of CFIT? 68.144.194.164 (talk) 16:09, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Landing short of the runway is not really CFIT in my opinion. YSSYguy (talk) 18:56, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that it is not CFIT. Mjroots (talk) 19:14, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Changed my opinion as well - We dont know (at this point) if it flew into the ground on its own (mechanical failure, eg) however if it WAS flown by the pilots (or A/P) then it does actually quality as a CFIT

" CFIT...describes an accident in which an airworthy aircraft, under pilot control, is unintentionally flown into the ground, a mountain, water, or an obstacle.[2] The pilots are generally unaware of the danger until it is too late." ---->>CFIT (talk) 22:26, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Under your conditions, a bounce landing is CFIT, since it is unintentional to fly twice into the ground. Or a hard landing with landing gear collapse, since the collapse renders additional contact with ground. -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 05:35, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The conditions for CFIT imply that the landing was-off runway. Ground does not mean runway. Please refer to the WIKI link posted for more details. I cite another WIKI example that was similar in nature where the aircraft struck the ground before landing, and was ruled as CFIT - but AFTER the investigation concluded no mechanical errors ocurred. UPS Airlines Flight 1354 68.144.194.164 (talk) 17:08, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 22:06, 31 March 2015 edit 68.144.194.164 (talk) →CFIT ← Previous edit		Revision as of 01:06, 1 April 2015 edit undo 68.144.194.164 (talk) →CFIT Next edit →
Line 32:		Line 32:
	::Under your conditions, a bounce landing is CFIT, since it is unintentional to fly twice into the ground. Or a hard landing with landing gear collapse, since the collapse renders additional contact with ground. -- [[Special:Contributions/65.94.43.89\|65.94.43.89]] ([[User talk:65.94.43.89\|talk]]) 05:35, 31 March 2015 (UTC)		::Under your conditions, a bounce landing is CFIT, since it is unintentional to fly twice into the ground. Or a hard landing with landing gear collapse, since the collapse renders additional contact with ground. -- [[Special:Contributions/65.94.43.89\|65.94.43.89]] ([[User talk:65.94.43.89\|talk]]) 05:35, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

	:::The conditions for CFIT imply that the landing was-off runway. Please refer to the WIKI link posted for more details. I cite another WIKI example that was similar in nature where the aircraft struck the ground before landing, and was ruled as CFIT - but AFTER the investigation concluded no mechanical errors ocurred. [[UPS Airlines Flight 1354]][[Special:Contributions/68.144.194.164\|68.144.194.164]] ([[User talk:68.144.194.164\|talk]]) 17:08, 31 March 2015 (UTC)		:::The conditions for CFIT imply that the landing was-off runway. Ground does not mean runway. Please refer to the WIKI link posted for more details. I cite another WIKI example that was similar in nature where the aircraft struck the ground before landing, and was ruled as CFIT - but AFTER the investigation concluded no mechanical errors ocurred. [[UPS Airlines Flight 1354]][[Special:Contributions/68.144.194.164\|68.144.194.164]] ([[User talk:68.144.194.164\|talk]]) 17:08, 31 March 2015 (UTC)