This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
1948 KLM Constellation air disaster article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1948 KLM Constellation air disaster received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
I've edited this a little bit for clarity and flow, trying to make the sequence of events a little more clear, mostly rearranging paragraphs, with very minor alterations to text.
A few questions I have:
These two sentences seem to contradict each other: As the flight had taken off late, they had not picked up the radio message broadcast by Prestwick airfield informing them of this [the 600-ft ceiling].
The routine weather reports broadcast from Prestwick had given a cloud cover of 700 feet. No new forecasts, which would have told Parmentier of the expected decreased cloud cover were broadcast.
How should this be reconciled -- did Prestwick send a (non-morse) update on the weather or not? I gather not, given board of enquiry findings. Should the first of these sentences be removed then?
Secondly, are these accurate?
Three miles to the north-east of the runway, rising to over 600 feet, were a set of wireless masts. Three miles inland ran a series of electricity pylons and high-tension cables...
Are these three miles in different directions? (Which way is inland from the airport?) At first I thought this was a duplicated sentence and started to remove one, but given that the "wireless masts" were 600ft and the others were 450 feet, they seemed distinct. Can this be clarified?
Thirdly, this seems unclear:
However three miles out Parmentier decided that the wind probably was too strong for landing on the main runway [32] and decided to overshoot and land on the alternate. He overflew Runway 26, the lights of which he could now see, climbed to a height of 450 feet and extended the landing gear ready for landing.
Should that be he overflew runway 32, not 26? Or did he overfly both runways and come around for a third pass? Or am I misunderstanding "overflew" -- is that supposed to mean he was lining up for landing on 26?
Thanks! -- Catherine 18:09, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Interesting article with a good level of detail. A couple of minor comments:
a) “Three miles (5 km) inland ran a series of electricity pylons and high-tension cables, the main national grid line for South Scotland, carrying 132,000 volts. However the error-riddled charts gave the height of the cables at only 45 feet (14 m)”. What was the actual height of the pylons/cables?
b) A few times the article informs about the pilot's thoughts and beliefs, even though the pilot died in the crash. E.g. “Parmentier expected to be in visual contact with the ground which would make such an attempt relatively easy”, “At this point they ran into what Parmentier believed was an isolated patch of cloud”., “Parmentier realised the 'isolated fog' he had run into was getting denser, but due to his belief that they would have visual contact with the ground the crew had not attempted to time their flight downwind of the runway”. If the thoughts are deduced from the pilots radio communication with the controllers, I believe it would be more accurate to quote what was said. -- Terp16 ( talk) 07:07, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Archived at Wikipedia:Peer_review/Archive_1#KLM_Constellation_air_disaster_1948, above link doesn't work for some reason. There's actually no discussion there. One flaw I see with the article is that it isn't true that everyone died within 24 hours. Шизомби (Sz) ( talk) 17:18, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 16:57, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Prestwick is NOT Glasgow and so this accident should not be listed as one occurring in that city. Only very recently has the airport acquired 'Glasgow' in its name, which of course does mean that Prestwick (and its adjoining town Ayr, for that matter) has become part of Glasgow 40 miles up the road. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.104.206.124 ( talk) 20:58, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:1948 KLM Constellation air disaster/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Poor condition. Huge wikification, cleanup, expansion and citation issues need adressed. Blood red sandman 16:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC) |
Substituted at 18:05, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
1948 KLM Constellation air disaster article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1948 KLM Constellation air disaster received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
I've edited this a little bit for clarity and flow, trying to make the sequence of events a little more clear, mostly rearranging paragraphs, with very minor alterations to text.
A few questions I have:
These two sentences seem to contradict each other: As the flight had taken off late, they had not picked up the radio message broadcast by Prestwick airfield informing them of this [the 600-ft ceiling].
The routine weather reports broadcast from Prestwick had given a cloud cover of 700 feet. No new forecasts, which would have told Parmentier of the expected decreased cloud cover were broadcast.
How should this be reconciled -- did Prestwick send a (non-morse) update on the weather or not? I gather not, given board of enquiry findings. Should the first of these sentences be removed then?
Secondly, are these accurate?
Three miles to the north-east of the runway, rising to over 600 feet, were a set of wireless masts. Three miles inland ran a series of electricity pylons and high-tension cables...
Are these three miles in different directions? (Which way is inland from the airport?) At first I thought this was a duplicated sentence and started to remove one, but given that the "wireless masts" were 600ft and the others were 450 feet, they seemed distinct. Can this be clarified?
Thirdly, this seems unclear:
However three miles out Parmentier decided that the wind probably was too strong for landing on the main runway [32] and decided to overshoot and land on the alternate. He overflew Runway 26, the lights of which he could now see, climbed to a height of 450 feet and extended the landing gear ready for landing.
Should that be he overflew runway 32, not 26? Or did he overfly both runways and come around for a third pass? Or am I misunderstanding "overflew" -- is that supposed to mean he was lining up for landing on 26?
Thanks! -- Catherine 18:09, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Interesting article with a good level of detail. A couple of minor comments:
a) “Three miles (5 km) inland ran a series of electricity pylons and high-tension cables, the main national grid line for South Scotland, carrying 132,000 volts. However the error-riddled charts gave the height of the cables at only 45 feet (14 m)”. What was the actual height of the pylons/cables?
b) A few times the article informs about the pilot's thoughts and beliefs, even though the pilot died in the crash. E.g. “Parmentier expected to be in visual contact with the ground which would make such an attempt relatively easy”, “At this point they ran into what Parmentier believed was an isolated patch of cloud”., “Parmentier realised the 'isolated fog' he had run into was getting denser, but due to his belief that they would have visual contact with the ground the crew had not attempted to time their flight downwind of the runway”. If the thoughts are deduced from the pilots radio communication with the controllers, I believe it would be more accurate to quote what was said. -- Terp16 ( talk) 07:07, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Archived at Wikipedia:Peer_review/Archive_1#KLM_Constellation_air_disaster_1948, above link doesn't work for some reason. There's actually no discussion there. One flaw I see with the article is that it isn't true that everyone died within 24 hours. Шизомби (Sz) ( talk) 17:18, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 16:57, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Prestwick is NOT Glasgow and so this accident should not be listed as one occurring in that city. Only very recently has the airport acquired 'Glasgow' in its name, which of course does mean that Prestwick (and its adjoining town Ayr, for that matter) has become part of Glasgow 40 miles up the road. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.104.206.124 ( talk) 20:58, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:1948 KLM Constellation air disaster/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Poor condition. Huge wikification, cleanup, expansion and citation issues need adressed. Blood red sandman 16:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC) |
Substituted at 18:05, 17 July 2016 (UTC)