Talk:Gimli Glider
<templatestyles src="Module:Message box/tmbox.css"/><templatestyles src="Talk header/styles.css" />
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gimli Glider Template:Pagetype. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Template:Find general sources |
| Archives: Template:Comma separated entries<templatestyles src="Template:Tooltip/styles.css" />Auto-archiving periodScript error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".: Template:Human readable duration File:Information icon4.svg |
| Template:Search box |
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".Script error: No such module "Check for deprecated parameters".
Script error: No such module "Article history". Script error: No such module "Banner shell".
Gimli Glider Pilot
https://skiesmag.com/news/gimli-glider-exhibit-commemorates-40th-anniversary-miracle-landing/
2607:FEA8:4C0:2420:E09C:86D7:5655:3E49 (talk) 08:01, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
C-GAUN or C-GAUH ?
File:Air Canada Boeing 767-233; C-GAUN@SFO;17.02.1985 (5702291035).jpg
.jpg){kind=link}
This photo aircraft is C-GAUH, not C-GAUN. Because C-GAUN has tail number is 604, while this aircraft has tail number is 603. This is a photo of C-GAUN on Flickr : C-GAUN “604” Air Canada 767-200ER (The Gimli Glider) wearing the original 767 livery at YYZ in April 1989 By the other hand, this photo was reuploaded to Flickr, and we can see the registration is C-GAUH.
What do you think ?
@Ivebeenhacked@Aviationwikiflight@Maungapohatu@Deeday-UK@RecycledPixeIs Tô Ngọc Khang (talk) 09:34, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
- Taking a look at the original image, it's clear that the image shows a B767 registered as C-GAUH and not C-GAUN. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 09:39, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yeah, you're right. So switching the current image with another image, let say this one, will be the best course of action. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 14:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
- This photo should be delete, because not his own shot. Air Astana 1388 (talk) 15:32, 19 March 2025 (UTC)
- Yeah, you're right. So switching the current image with another image, let say this one, will be the best course of action. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 14:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
error in attribution of cause
As a retired pilot (U206 freighters over Canada's boreal forest up to James Bay), there is a significant error on the Gimli Glider page. Captain Pearson was warned by the pilot he was relieving that the fuel gauges were inoperative. The article states that Pearson entered the cockpit and found the indicators inoperative "as he expected", then flew the plane anyway.
Wikipedia, the PIC of an aircraft in Canada is 100% responsible for flight operations of that aircraft. MOT regulations, not to mention pilot common sense, require the PIC to personally verify fuel levels (among other things of course). If the gauges don't work, he has to do it by directly supervising dip-sticking of the tanks. Pearson didn't, and that is why the MOT charged him with breach of regulations, putting an aircraft in danger.
Amidst the mass of secondary details on that page, I doubt that any normal person would conclude that Capt.Pearson, rather than a heap of gobbledegook, caused the accident. At least, I didn't. That needs to be corrected.
I hope that someone can arrange for it to be done who won't be indignantly reverted as I usually was before I quit Wikipedia 20 years ago. U206 bush pilot (talk) 18:07, 15 May 2025 (UTC)