Talk:1983 Negev mid-air collision/Archives/2011/December

Several issues...

1) The plane landed. Therefore, this is mischaracterized as a crash. 2)The article name is not descriptive. It's only because of an inline link from another article that I even knew it was here. 3) Why is a photo of an A-4 and not an F-15 in the article? The actual F-15 from the incident would be even better.

I'm not the guy to fix this. Even as a long-time user of Wikipedia I know little more than how to correct vandalism. Regardless, this article needs some serious work and I hope somebody will put the time in because this is a fascinating incident. 75.75.161.181 (talk) 20:36, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Hmm.

1) The 1958 Tybee Island B-47 crash wasn't technically a crash either; this may be a widespread problem. 2) The best alternate name I can think of is 1983 Negev mid-air collision. 3) I can't find any photos of Israeli Air Force F-15s - only USAF F-15s. If I find one I'll put it on the page (unless you're all right with having this page illustrated with a picture of a USAF F-15). --Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty | Averted crashes} 22:09, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty | Averted crashes} 18:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

1983 Israeli Air Force F-15 crash → 1983 Negev mid-air collision – Relisted. There is a consensus to move the article, but no consensus on which particular name it should be moved to. Jenks24 (talk) 15:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC) New name is more informative and more descriptive. 22:14, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

• Comment it could easily be called the 1983 Israeli Air Force A-4 crash. Calling it F-15 is mildy POV, though the F-15 did something famous. Perhaps 1983 Israeli F-15 loss of wing in flight incident would be better. 65.95.13.213 (talk) 03:21, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
• Support rename to "1983 Negev mid-air collision". New name better describes the incident, less misleading. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 14:48, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
• I dunno, it sounds like (if anything) it's the landing that's notable more than the collision itself. Certainly shouldn't be "crash", but I would keep the reference to the F-15 in the title; perhaps just add "landing" to the present title?--Kotniski (talk) 11:15, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• Agree with Kotniski, the incident is most notable for the landing of a crippled aircraft. How about 1983 F-15 Wingless landing? Poliocretes (talk) 12:26, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• Strong support for a move, and support the original proposal 1983 Negev mid-air collision. The current title 1983 Israeli Air Force F-15 crash is just plain wrong, the F-15 did not crash and there's no evidence that this is a common name for the incident. 1983 F-15 Wingless landing seems similarly unsupportable, the landing was not wingless. I can't improve on the current proposal; It describes the content of the article accurately, and coming up with a title that better focusses on the landing seems problematic. If anything, I might somehow retain the F-15 in the title, as the aerodynamics of this particular aircraft are an essential part of the story, and IMO it's helpful and not POV to reflect this in the title. But the main thing is, dump the current inaccuracy! Andrewa (talk) 15:55, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
  • I have now had a go at improving on the current proposal, see #Alternative proposals below. Andrewa (talk) 01:00, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
  • The F-15 did crash though, it crashed into the A-4 in mid-air. 65.94.44.141 (talk) 05:32, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
    • Hmmm, when I say "crash" in the context of aviation I mean an uncontrolled encounter with the ground. If an aircraft crashes into the terminal after having landed safely, that's not a crash. Or is it? Andrewa (talk) 12:15, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
• Support Agreed I cant see ny reason why F-15 should be mentioned in the title.

Because the most notable thing about the incident was the F-15's landing. We just need to know the technical term for this type of landing - if not "wingless" then what? "crash landing"? "emergency landing"? "landing after collision"? --Kotniski (talk) 16:37, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I suspect the incident is unique in many respects, although I do know of one incident where a single engine GA aircraft landed successfully with only one wing (landed on runway, walk away for pilot, no passengers, damage to the aircraft obviously!), after a main spar failure some distance from the airfield, which is even more remarkable IMO. Anyway, it may not have a technical name. Andrewa (talk) 00:18, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Alternative proposals

Just to formalise, my preferred new title so far is 1983 Negev F-15 mid-air collision and landing. Its main problem is it's too long, but I can't see what to drop. Andrewa (talk) 00:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I'd go along with that. (I'd support the original proposal too, as a definite improvement over the present title, but I think this alternative proposal is even better, as it mentions the landing, which appears to be the main point.--Kotniski (talk) 10:56, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

• The original proposal of 1983 Negev mid-air collision is the best and most concise. It involved more than just a F-15 (how else can it be a collision!?!?) and it is totally unnecessary to have more details in the title. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 20:57, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Disagree on a number of grounds. The article is about the F-15; The other aircraft is involved of course but it's not part of the topic of the article. Andrewa (talk) 20:18, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

As there seems no prospect of consensus on a new name, but there is consensus to move, IMO it should by default go to the original proposal 1983 Negev mid-air collision. Andrewa (talk) 20:18, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Another near crash

The GA incident I mentioned was described in a book Accidents Happen, I forget the author's name but they had been involved in aircraft safety. The book was a plea that most accidents (aviation and other) are avoidable, and gave many fascinating examples (aviation and other) where accidents were either avoided although they seemed inevitable, or took place but were clearly avoidable. But with a title like that it's very hard to find it on the Internet!

The synopsis of the incident was: Main spar fails, wing begins to collapse, pilot (alone in aircraft) instinctively starts roll to support collapsing wing, wing surprisingly stays on but will obviously fall off if roll is completed, pilot flies upside down to airfield and completes roll immediately before touchdown at which point wing falls off as predicted. Incredibly competent flying.

Can anyone find a reference to this book or incident? Not sure whether it makes notability on its own, but it might. Andrewa (talk) 19:46, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

PS the aircraft in question was obviously equipped for aerobatics, as most GA aircraft would be unable to fly inverted for an extended period. Andrewa (talk) 01:57, 3 June 2011 (UTC)