Talk:Aloha Airlines Flight 243

message: Question: how can a 19-year old plane have 80,000 takeoff-landing cycles? There are about 7,000 days in 19 years, so this plane somehow averaged 10 cycles per day? Maybe it was 8,000 cycles, which would average one cycle per day, which seems reasonable..
Answer:  80,000 takeoff-landing cycles is correct.  Prior to Sept 11, 2001, Aloha and Hawaiian
Airlines typically flew on the order of ten inter-island flights per jet daily.  Daily service started at 5:00 am and concluded at 9:00 pm.  Flight times were approximately 20 to 60 minutes depending on the route, and turnaround time on the ground was on the order of 20-30 minutes.
Capt Roberto R. MOLA Feb 6th 2008 17:55UTC 
I agree completely to this concept and, additionally, would say the following:
1)The text I've added in the past about maintenance schedule for Aloha (A deep and thorough inspection of Aloha Airlines by NTSB revealed that the most extensive and longer "D Check" was performed in several early morning installments, instead of a full uninterrupted maintenance procedure. They also found that eddy-current testing inspections on the fuselage skin, as prescribed by Boeing, had not been performed.) is a transcription of NTSB findings. Citation needed? Well, everybody feel free to research that matter and know the truth. Period!
2)Insistence on the so called "Fluid Hammer" effect as the MAIN cause for the failure, neglects COMPLETELY all the official investigation fot the case.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.37.184.28 (talk) 17:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have carefully written that the Fluid Hammer theory is completely Austin's own thoughts. I have not written anything that brings forth FH as absolute truth regarding flight 243. --J-Star (talk) 19:34, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Since it is completely Austin's own thoughts, it most certainly does not belong on Wikipedia. No original research. --LonelyPixel08 (talk) 00:09, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

text: As in taken care to make sure his theory isn't presented as factual in the article. --J-Star (talk) 09:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: cycles

message: Was the page as of Dec 23 plagiarized from this news article http://starbulletin.com/2005/12/22/features/story05.html, or visa versa?
:This article was used as part of the source fore the story above. Trödel•talk 18:52, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source question 

message: The details section, while containing pertinent information and being well-written, generally lacks any sources. Given the specificity of the information contained in there, I am assuming that much of it was drawn from an NTSB report. Nevertheless, most of the claims in the section need to be cited for verifiability. Madcoverboy (talk) 01:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As the article itself was tagged in 2010 and nothing was done about this problem, I have moved the unsourced material here. Feel free to add it to the article with appropriate citations. Doniago (talk) 13:33, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Unreferenced details

message: * N73711
* AAH243
70.55.86.54 (talk) 00:29, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: redirects needed for this article

message: As part of the Matt Austin theory, the article references him as saying "As the cabin air escaped at over 700 mph..."
That sounds pretty high and unlikely. Doubly so since, in context, that's supposed to be the air inside the plane as it reaches the breaks in the aircraft skin.
Is there any further documentation for that? I couldn't find anything that looks at all reliable.
Thanks
wiki-ny-2007 (talk) 18:10, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  speed of the air flow leaving the plane? 

message: AAH 243 should redirect here as AAH243 does, as should Aloha 243. Also Queen Liliuokalani (airplane) , Queen Liliuokalani (airliner) , Queen Liliuokalani (jetliner), as this is the notable event in the life of aircraft with this name, as it is the notable event in the history of this flight number. 65.93.12.101 (talk) 13:00, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  redirects 

message: Did anyone bother to search for her remains? Was her body ever recovered?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.4.188 (talk) 14:35, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes her remains were searched for (they also searched for the missing part of the fuselage), and no they were never found. 2001:558:6040:82:7CD6:B941:F0A2:C349 (talk) 16:10, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The fate of C.B. Lansing? 

message: "The safe landing of the aircraft despite the substantial damage inflicted by the decompression established Aloha Airlines Flight 243 as a significant event in the history of aviation, with far-reaching effects on aviation safety policies and procedures."  In what way?
This is a very broad statement that is not qualified in any way throughout the article.  If it drove new structural integrity inspections or new safety features or even increased inspection intervals it should be noted somewhere.  By whom is it considered a significant event?  I feel this entire statement is opinion-based or baseless altogether and not being otherwise qualified in this article is non-value added and should be removed.
:There was some information on this that was itself removed for lacking sources; it can be found higher up on this page. Doniago (talk) 13:04, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What far-reaching effects? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Aloha Airlines Flight 243. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111201141420/http://www.ntsb.gov:80/investigations/summary/AAR8903.html to http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/summary/aar8903.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:25, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: See
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWxxtzBTxGU  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2806:102E:11:B5E3:8DC0:C7A5:3C90:940C (talk) 15:37, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not sure if this applies to this flight.     

message: Most other cases of decompression are just that, a break in the hull making the air inside the airplane quickly run out through the break. Here, however, the entire roof suddenly disappeared, leaving the passengers completely exposed to the outside environment and the oncoming wind at thousands mph. I can't understand how they survived even 2 minutes of that, let alone 13. Can anyone provide an explanation?82.155.231.85 (talk) 20:26, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The 737 cannot fly faster than mach 1 and if it did the aircraft would have PROBABLY been destroyed by the loads. This aircraft absolutely was not flying at anywhere near that speed. The article also mentions that an immediate emergency descent was performed which suggests that they wouldn't have been exposed to that environment for very long. 12.186.169.130 (talk) 16:05, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  How did they even survive? 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:09, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion