Talk:American Airlines Flight 191/Archive 1

message: Is it worth mentioning this incident was described in Airframe? Nil Einne 19:13, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Airframe 

message: I did a major update with photos I culled from an FAA website and put on Commons.  Unfortunately these are the best I could do, could find very few images at all, the FAA website that uses this crash analysis for online learning is quite detailed with many photos, just not very high resolution.  --Wgfinley 05:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photos 

message: The below posting was taken from . I have also read that another plane was landing at the same time. It seems that the live footage option for passengers may well have been watched by the passengers. -- max rspct leave a message  18:17, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: CCTV option on the plane

message: According to my dictionary, an accident is: 1. mishap causing injury or death ; 2. event happening by chance. -- Collins English Mini Dictionary 1998. It lists mishap as a minor accident. Can we really call it an accident? By chance? Especially in the light of the NTSB report. The crash was caused 'structural failure' brought on by AA's deliberate ignorance of the maintainence/saftey advice from McDonnell Douglas, corner-cutting AND design flaws by McDD --  max rspct leave a message  18:42, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Crash or accident

message: The lead paragraph as it was changed was just plain incorrect based on the way the NTSB and FAA account for airplane crash fatalities.   The figures include not only those killed on board but those on the ground.  Therefore, the death toll from each of the WTC planes exceeds those killed in this crash given the many ground fatalities (neither of the other two 9/11 crashes exceeded Flight 191's fatalities).  While part of a coordinated attack each one of these crashes was a single aircraft crash.  I think it also gives the reader perspective -- this was the deadliest crash in US history for over 20 years and was only exceeded by planes being intentionally flown into buildings causing massive fatalities.  When you consider the cause of this accident -- cost cutting by an airline as opposed to pilot error, etc, makes it all that more significant.  --Wgfinley 07:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fatalaties of 191 vs 9/11. 

message: The lead as I have changed it back to again, as it stood for well over a year, is the only accurate and clear summation of the fatality count from this disaster.  The following changes are not:
===Combined 9/11 Fatalities Exceed AA191===
While true it's not very precise, both AA11 and UA175, individually caused more fatalities.  Were there some fatalities co-mingled in here?  Almost certainly amongst emergency workers who were working the crash site but the fact is whichever plane or tower you pick, both of these crashes exceed the fatalities in AA191.  Mucking up the lead with parentheticals doesn't clarify anything, it mucks it up, there are links to the articles fo AA11, UA175 and 9/11 if people want to learn why those were deadlier air disasters.
===Single Largest Loss of Life for Any "Single" Airliner===
Again, totally inaccurate.  AA11 crashed into Tower 1, BUT FOR AA11 crashing into Tower 1 none of those people die.  Their deaths are directly linked to the air disaster and so those fatalities, as per every NTSB report are duly noted and counted in the total.  Same thing with UA175, UA175 crashed into Tower 2 and directly caused the deaths of those people.  Other than the fact this was a coordinated attack neither of the crashes had anything to do with each other, i.e. AA11 crashing into Tower 1 didn't make Tower 2 collapse.
The lead as written is clear, concise, accurate, gives people a place to look for more info.  To me, the only thing that could possibly be more specific is that AA191 resulted in the deaths of more passengers than any other US soil air disaster but, again, that bogs things down with wording that is not needed.  It was the deadliest, these two crashes surpassed it, simple and concise.  --Wgfinley 14:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Killing The Lead and Inaccurate 

message: Again, totally inaccurate.  AA11 crashed into Tower 1, BUT FOR AA11 crashing into Tower 1 none of those people die.  Their deaths are directly linked to the air disaster and so those fatalities, as per every NTSB report are duly noted and counted in the total.  Same thing with UA175, UA175 crashed into Tower 2 and directly caused the deaths of those people.  Other than the fact this was a coordinated attack neither of the crashes had anything to do with each other, i.e. AA11 crashing into Tower 1 didn't make Tower 2 collapse.
The lead as written is clear, concise, accurate, gives people a place to look for more info.  To me, the only thing that could possibly be more specific is that AA191 resulted in the deaths of more passengers than any other US soil air disaster but, again, that bogs things down with wording that is not needed.  It was the deadliest, these two crashes surpassed it, simple and concise.  --Wgfinley 14:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Single Largest Loss of Life for Any "Single" Airliner

message: According to aviation hobbyists, the plane that recently crashed in KY was known at Comair to be Flight 191, while for ticketing purporses, Delta stamps it as Flight 5191.  In any case, I think it should remain as part of the list of other accidents that have been tagged as a Flight 191. --Prn51 00:21, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: AA Flight 191 relation with the Comair/Delta Connection crash

message: An anonymous contributor added this note to the article, referring to the first section: 
Note: The above summary was written with too much emphasis on technical aviation jargon, and is not written in a style appropriate for an encyclopedia. The actual cause of the crash is not clearly articulated nor accurately reported, here or elsewhere in this entry, including the probable cause of the accident as determined by accident investigators. Additionally, a later DC-10 crash, which occurred July 19, 1989 in Sioux City, Iowa, is not mentioned notwithstanding the author(s) contention that the aircraft's safety had been markedly improved. The author(s) are hereby notifed that editing will take place within the next 30 days in order for the entry to be able to provide cogent and useful information for the non-aviation industry reader (Notice written October 24, 2006).
I have moved the comment to this talk page. -- FP (talk)(edits) 10:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment from anon