Miscellaneous desk
< March 8	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	Current desk >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

March 9

Plane crash caused by improper training

Hello! I'm trying to remember a particular plane crash, where it was found that the airline the pilots were working for over-emphasized preserving altitude during a stall, faulting pilots heavily in simulator tests for losing more than a particular arbitrary number. Predictably, the pilots involved did not properly recover from a stall, as they did not want to push the nose down long enough to build up airspeed.

No matter what I type into Google I keep getting Pinnacle Airlines Flight 3701, which isn't at all the crash I'm trying to remember. 96.255.2.209 (talk) 00:42, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds a bit like Air France Flight 447, but I'm not sure that's what you're thinking of either. --Amble (talk) 01:53, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:15, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or possibly Lion Air Flight 610. --Viennese Waltz 12:31, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's none of these three, though all definitely have similar aspects. I recall it taking place long enough ago that the final NTSB report has been published and the airline in question reformed the training practice - so definitely nothing in the past couple years, and I don't think it was on the MAX. I'm positive that the Wikipedia article explicitly mentions the improper training emphasis, as that's where I originally read about it. It may not have been a stall, but rather wake turbulence or a microburst - but I'm positive about the gist (recoverable incident, pilots would have been fine if they had sacrificed more altitude). Thanks for all your help so far, and I hope we can figure it out, it's driving me bonkers. 96.255.2.209 (talk) 14:33, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is Category:Airliner_accidents_and_incidents_caused_by_pilot_error. Maybe you can find it there. RudolfRed (talk) 15:15, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

American Airlines Flight 587 has similar elements about simulator training teaching pilots the wrong way to recover control. In this case it was using the rudder to respond to wake turbulence, not recovering from a stall. —Amble (talk) 15:17, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

An accident in which misleading simulator training was a contributing factor was the crashing of China Airlines Flight 140. While (IMO) the airline carries responsibility for the mismatch between the simulator (which would not have stalled under the circumstances) and the plane's flight characteristics, inappropriately maintaining altitude was not an issue. --Lambiam 18:08, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another accident that misleading simulator training was a contributing factor to was the Copa Airlines Flight 201 crash. One of the two attitude indicators (artificial horizons) was intermittently giving false readings due to incorrect data from the gyro. Normally each indicator had its own gyro, but the captain could switch them to both work from the good one. However, according Mayday, the switch positions were different on the simulator he was trained on, and he inadvertently set them to both work from the bad gyro. --142.112.149.107 (talk) 08:08, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

calendar dates

for example, we now say 3000 B.C.,200 B.C. etc... to reference that time. what did the people living then call that time? thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:CE8:132:AD0D:E591:A37A:2E56:DFE8 (talk) 14:42, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It would depend on where you were. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:11, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In general, if the civilisation did refer to specific years, it would be in the format "in the <nth> year of <Emperor's> rule…" LongHairedFop (talk) 15:15, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) As Bugs notes, the Gregorian calendar was really the first truly worldwide calendar. Prior to the 20th century, most places in the world would have had a local calendar they used for their own business. If you want to restrict yourself to the Roman Empire, who invented the Julian calendar, the precursor to the Gregorian calendar, they counted days and months the same as today, but the year was based on Ab urbe condita, the year of the founding of Rome, 200 B.C. would have been 553 AUC. Many places, however, generally dated the year from the reigns of the local monarch, so you would say things like "In the twenty-third year of Joash son of Ahaziah king of Judah, Jehoahaz son of Jehu became king of Israel in Samaria, and he reigned seventeen years. China did something similar, generally naming each era after the start of an Emperor's reign, see Chinese era name. Wikipedia has a partial list and description of these systems in use at various times at the article Regnal year. --Jayron 32 15:29, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to Anno Domini, the AD/BC system was first used to any extent in the 8th century and had become almost universal in Europe by the 14th century, replacing the previous system of the year of the pope's reign.

Note that the year of a monarch's reign was still sometimes used on monuments as a means of expressing the date; Royal Exchange, London has the inscription Anno XIII. Elizabethæ R. Conditvm; Anno VIII. Victoria R. Restavratvm. or "founded in the thirteenth year of Queen Elizabeth (i.e. 1571), and restored in the eighth of Queen Victoria (i.e. 1844)") but it would be a very clever historian who could work it out from memory. Alansplodge (talk) 16:04, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

British Acts of Parliament were cited based on the regnal year until the Acts of Parliament Numbering and Citation Act 1962. DuncanHill (talk) 12:33, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re: the year was based on Ab urbe condita, the year of the founding of Rome Actually, as noted in that article, the AUC system only started to be widely used in the Renaissance. It was known but not widely used in classical Roman times. In that era, years were usually identified by the names of the two consuls who held office in the year. CodeTalker (talk) 19:33, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In Ancient Egyptian chronology, the date was stated according to regnal year of a particular pharoah, but we don't have a complete list of all of the pharoahs, and in some cases we don't know how many years they reigned, or whether they reigned at the same time as someone else. Alansplodge (talk) 18:24, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In Christendom, before Anno Domini became the standard Christian dating system, Anno Mundi was often used (particularly in the East), based on the supposed date of creation of the world. Iapetus (talk) 15:31, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Did Christians use the same zero as Jews? —Tamfang (talk) 02:59, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neither used a literal "Year zero" because the concept of Zero was only spottily accepted – the Ancient Egyptions and the Babylonians used it in certain circumstances but the Ancient Greeks generally did not: both Jews and Christians in this context would have counted from a notional Year 1 (though this actual term was apparently not used), before which there could be no earlier years because that was when God created the "world" (in modern terms the universe) ab initio.

As the article linked by Tamfang details, Jews and various others used different 'Year ones'. However, this was not a doctrinal matter, rather one of different scholars using different versions, translations, and interpretations of biblical texts, yielding a different overall total of years from 'the Creation' to known firmly-dated events. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.221.80.5 (talk) 05:23, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since it doesn't appear to have been mentioned already, I'd add that a continuous year reckoning that was actually in use around 200 BC was Anno Graecorum, a.k.a. the Seleucid Era, which counts from the founding of the Seleucid Empire in 311 BC. This system continued to be used by some until the 6th century AD, and sporadically even after this throughout the Middle Ages. In the second century BC coins in the Hellenic world frequently carried a year number according to this system, see for example the year ΓΞΡ (which is 164 AG or 149–148 BC) on this coin from Alexander Balas: File:Coin_of_Alexander_I_Balas,_Antioch_mint_(2).jpg. When it comes to 3000 BC, we have no idea. This is around the very beginning of written sources and very little texts are available (or decipherable) from that time period. - Lindert (talk) 22:20, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]