Talk:2020 Calabasas helicopter crash/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Congressional reaction

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/01/31/socal-congressman-introduces-bill-requiring-terrain-warning-systems-on-choppers-in-response-to-kobe-bryant-crash/

https://abc7.com/congress-to-consider-helicopter-safety-act-after-kobe-crash/5894224/

https://www.10news.com/news/southern-california-congressman-introduces-helicopter-safety-bill-in-response-to-kobe-bryant-crash

According to these sources Congressman Brad Sherman, D-Los Angeles, has responded by calling for the FAA to reform Helicopter Safety in response to Kobe Bryant's death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:640:C600:3C20:3C52:FA83:A6C9:7456 (talk) 01:53, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Fingerprints

"Bryant's body was identified through fingerprints." Where did the coroner obtain previous Bryant fingerprints for comparison? WWGB (talk) 10:42, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

If there is any arrests in his past, the FBI has them. Otherwise a cop would go to his house and print a personal item, like a toothbrush. Also, it isn't uncommon for a person of means, such as Kobe, to maintain a file with things like that in it, for just these circumstances. John from Idegon (talk) 11:21, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Was not he arrested in the past? Was not that a "big deal" at the time? See Kobe Bryant sexual assault case. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:11, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

There are some circumstances other than an arrest when fingerprints are taken; e.g., as part of a background check. Also, as others have noted, Bryant was arrested at least once in the past. Timothy Horrigan (talk) 17:05, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Request split 1 February 2020

With ongoing discussion about renaming Death of Kobe Bryant to 2020 Calabasas helicopter crash, I suggested that reactions regarding his death (fans and celebrities) must split and merged to main Kobe Bryant article. On other hand, the latter article must be focused on incident itself and domestic and international reactions regarding the incidents, even political reactions about the incident without mention of Kobe Bryant. I think it is more relevant because many aviation incident doesn't even list one notable people who died. Even reactions of Kobe Bryant was included, this section should be more brief than more detailed. Have someone have opinion about this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.137.171.220 (talk) 12:26, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

• I am not sure if it is much useful to discuss this before the name-change discussion above is closed. We will have ample/enough sources, and content to decide what should be done regarding the articles in question by the time discussion is over. —usernamekiran (talk) 21:10, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

There was a splitting proposal a week ago, which was closed because a requested move was being discussed at the same time. The requested move discussion still hasn't been closed. Surachit (talk) 17:45, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Actually, it looks like there is some confusion. On January 26th, a merge request started at 9:14pm and lasted until 12:18am on the 28th. During that time, a move request lasted from 9:30pm to 10:41pm on the 26th, which was closed due to the merge request. Additionally, a split request started at 4:10am on the 27th to 4:51am on the 28th, which was closed due to the one of the merge requests (the link is broken). On the 28th at 12:38am, a second move request was started which is still open as of the 3rd at 8:47am. So, the first move, first split, and the second split all overlap the first merge request. Right now, the second move request has had overlap with the first split request and the second split request.

Regardless, the first split request mention started at 4:10am on the 27th. The second move request, which is open, started at 12:38am on the 28th. So, to my understanding, the splitting proposal was not closed because of the second move request. --Super Goku V (talk) 08:53, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

I have WP:BOLDly moved the Memorials section to the main Kobe Bryant article, under the #Memorials section, as this article has become more focused on the crash and accident itself. Natg 19 (talk) 08:47, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

@Amakuru:, can we discuss why you reverted this change? I'm not sure about a Split proposal, but it seems to me that these Memorials should not be included on this page, as this page at the moment focuses on the circumstances on the crash itself. Natg 19 (talk) 02:34, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

@Natg 19: thanks for the ping. There are several reasons why memorials belong here. The most obvious is that, even though the article was moved to the helicopter crash name, it is still the target of Death of Kobe Bryant and, as noted above in this discussion, no decision has made to split out that topic, meaning this is still the article about Kobe's death. It is also entirely appropriate that an article on a crash and accident would contain details on the memorials and celebrity-mentions in connection with that very crash. See a similar situation at 2018 Leicester helicopter crash. The section is probably overly long right now and could be reduced a bit, and could very well also include mentions about any memorials to other victims of the crash as well. In the Kobe Bryant article, on the other hand, which describes his whole life and career, including this amount of detail on memorials etc. is excessive and WP:UNDUE. A very condensed one or two paragraph summary similar to what's at Michael Jackson#Memorial service would be the appropriate section there. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 08:46, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Elevation & descent rate corrections required

Under Flight the last section reads: The helicopter entered a dive at 9:45:15 a.m. (17:45 UTC),[20] descending at a rate of 4,000 to 5,000 ft/min (20 to 25 m/s) with a speed of 160 knots (300 km/h) before it struck the hill at 9:45:39 a.m. at an elevation of approximately 1,400 feet (430 m)

It should read: The helicopter entered a dive at 9:45:15 a.m. (17:45 UTC),[20] descending at a rate in access of 2000 ft/min (20 to 25 m/s) with a speed of 160 knots (300 km/h) before it struck the hill at 9:45:39 a.m. at an elevation of approximately 1,085 feet (430 m).

According to the LA times "The chopper hit the hillside at an elevation of 1,085 feet, about 20 to 30 feet below an outcropping of the hill." Even the cite that is listed has the elevation correct. Also the decent rate is incorrect, according to ABC news and the FAA ""The descent rate for the helicopter was over 2,000 feet a minute," and the second reference states the aircraft was flying at 1400 feet.[19} 2600:8802:2200:2320:74C6:A312:FD34:C474 (talk) 00:12, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

References

Several things that should be fixed (but I'm way too busy to do them myself today)

The article states that the helicopter company's rules did not allow IFR flight. That appears to be a true but incomplete explanation. If you look at other news coverage, the company did not have a IFR certificate like most helicopter operators in SoCal. There are other more recent articles that explain SoCal weather is usually sunny, so the expense and hassle of getting a IFR certificate isn't worth it just to be able to fly on the few dozen days per year when it's too overcast to fly around SoCal under VFR.

The New York Times just published an article minutes ago that provides several details not previously known, such as information about the flights landing at Burbank and Van Nuys which the helicopter was forced to wait for by ATC. I think some other news sources had previously mentioned that the helicopter had first flown from Long Beach Airport to John Wayne Airport, but the NYT article makes that timeline much clearer.

Bike Magazine published an interview a few days ago with one member of the second group of mountain bikers to arrive at the crash scene. The interview clarifies exactly where the crash occurred: on the New Millennium Loop Trail, a mountain biking trail for which the closest access is the Calabasas Bark Park, a local dog park. --Coolcaesar (talk) 17:22, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Okay, it looks like someone else mostly took care of the first issue. And I just took care of the third. Don't have the time to deal with the second one right now, though. --Coolcaesar (talk) 06:23, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Year in title

Have there been any other helicopter crashes in Calabasas? Jim Michael (talk) 21:17, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Not any notable ones that I know of, but including the year is pretty standard for non-commercial aviation incidents. See the articles listed at Template:Aviation accidents and incidents in 2019 or Category:Accidents and incidents involving helicopters, for example. Also, WP:NCEVENTS states that the majority of articles about events should include "when" and "where" in the title, even if it isn't necessary for disambiguation. Surachit (talk) 23:23, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

This crash is notable enough that it fits the exception listed on that page: the event is easily described without the year. Jim Michael (talk) 00:41, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

To me, the inclusion of the year suggests that there have been multiple (notable) helicopter crashes in Calabasas, thus requiring disambiguation, or that more helicopter crashes in Calabasas are expected to happen in the coming years. The former is apparently not true (making the title misleading), while the latter is a bit distasteful. Surtsicna (talk) 00:53, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Those are also reasons for not including the year. If/when you mention the Calabasas helicopter crash to anyone, you don't call it the 2020 Calabasas helicopter crash. Jim Michael (talk) 01:04, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

WP:NOYEAR says that "The date is not needed when the article pertains to events that are unlikely to recur." But you really can't say it’s unlikely there will ever be another notable aviation accident or incident in Calabasas, can you? This isn’t Tenerife or September 11, it’s not something so unique and severe it’s unlikely to ever happen again. The Los Angeles area is home to many famous people, and crowded airspace, and Calabasas could be the site of the next major accident there, or the next, or the next...

The article title is consistent with Wikipedia naming conventions. No one should be confused by it. Shelbystripes (talk) 01:30, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Also, a move request was recently completed and there was massive support for moving the article to its current title. It’s far too early to be seriously debating the title again. Shelbystripes (talk) 01:33, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Another helicopter crash in Calabasas is unlikely - helicopter crashes aren't common & it appears to have only ever happened once there.

Whether or not to include the year in this article's title hasn't really been discussed before. Jim Michael (talk) 01:42, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

In the above move request discussion, consensus was reached on the current article title. On a quick count it looks like 13 or 14 editors voted for the current article title (including year). You would need to launch a new formal move request vote and obtain a strong enough consensus to override that recently obtained consensus, before moving the article again. Just FYI. Shelbystripes (talk) 16:12, 23 February 2020 (UTC)