Talk:Pan American World Airways
|Pan American World Airways is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.|
|This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 14, 2005.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day... section on December 4, 2004, December 4, 2007, and December 4, 2011.|
Unofficial "flag carrier" of the United States
The introduction to the article asserts that Pan Am was the "unofficial flag carrier of the United States," but this statement does not appear to be supported in the body of the article or by appropriate citation. Not intending any offense to a fine company or the people who worked for it, this sounds like mere boosterism, which should not have a place in a featured article. I don't want to remove that language, since this article has been through peer review, but will any editors step forward to substantiate that claim, or at least qualify it? (For example, if Pan Am marketing material spoke of the "unofficial flag carrier," then the phrase needs an "according to.")
Thanks, --Craigkbryant 02:48, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
- This description had been used in several sources that I used in writing this article, mostly because in the beginning the US government gave a lot of support to the airline (note that the article mentioned the US government's seeing the airline as the "chosen instrument" for foreign flights). Also, Pan Am had a very large presence in international flights (the article mentioned Pan Am was focused on dominating the international air travel market and its attempts to "enhance" its position as the nation's prominent international airline). If you still have any questions, feel free to ask. Pentawing 03:32, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
Appreciate the response. I'd still be happiest to see a cite specific to the words "unofficial flag carrier" in the article. Without it, this still sounds like sloganeering and boosterism. Would you be willing to add such a citation?
Best, --126.96.36.199 05:24, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
- Done. Pentawing 06:09, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
Further to the comments above, Pan Am was the de facto flag carrier for the US. As the US has never had a government-owned flag carrier, Pan Am was used to transport diplomats and US government personnel. This persisted until at least the 70s and deregulation; I'm not sure about their status afterwards. Having seen this article featured on the front page, I should really add some more info, especially on Pan Am's decline and fall, seeing as I spent a summer at the Smithsonian working on Pan Am's history... Jakob 22:19, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
Richard Robins (talk) 20:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)Richard_Robins. I was disappointed to read the first paragraph above the photo of Juan Trippe. My father was a Pan Am flight crew member from 1942 to the 1970s. Sadly, the opening paragraph places unnecessary emphasis on the events after the Company's demise at the expense of all its achievements, e.g. first to offer 'economy seating,' first to fly round-the-world, important global airline in the postwar years. The paragraphs below do a reasonable job, but the top paragraph could do a much better job. Regretably, there's no mention of promoting Boeing to build the B-367 at the end of WWII, and no mention of the Co. being the launch customer for many important aircraft, e.g. Douglas DC-6, DC-7C. Pan was the first Company to place an order for the Boeing 707 that made the "jet set" possible. Pan Am was an early contributor to the design of the Boeing 747 because Trippe wanted something very large. My main point here is to ask, Why does the first paragraph ignore Pan Am's major accomplishments?
The last fatal accident was Pan Am Flight 103 in 1988. The plane, a Boeing 747 named the Clipper Maid of the Seas, exploded in mid-flight over Lockerbie, Scotland, due to a bomb in its cargo hold.
Speaking as someone who lost classmates to that one, let me remind you that was not an accident but a direct terrorist attack, as the subsequent sentence makes clear. Perhaps, in airlinespeak, "incident" was intended?
It rather reminds me of the awkward wording at Syracuse University's memorial, saying that all victims died "in a plane crash over Lockerbie, Scotland, caused by a terrorist bomb." (The last clause was added after the memorial was built, at the insistence of some of the victims' parents who wanted it absolutely clear they died due to malice aforethought on another's part, but even still since when do planes crash over places?)
Also, seeing as this made the main page today, I'm really disappointed that someone couldn't find a better way to phrase this:
The airline was involved in the worst disaster in aviation history. A Pan Am 747, named the Clipper Victor, was involved in the Tenerife disaster on March 27, 1977.
I'll fix these, but still ...Daniel Case 03:41, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
- I changed the wording concerning Pan Am 103 from "accident" to "incident" (noting that the word accident wasn't used beforehand, though it wasn't caught in the first place). As for the second passage, I can't think of a better way to say this. Any idea is appreciated. Pentawing 03:52, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
In true Wikipedia fashion, I went ahead and fixed it myself. Daniel Case 04:44, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks. Much appreciated. Pentawing 05:09, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
- For future editors, in United States airlinespeak "incident" has a specific meaning under statute: an occurrence to an aircraft that didn't result in loss of life or serious injury or substantial damage to an aircraft. ICAO has a similar definition. A baggage cart bumping into an aircraft and denting its tail is an incident, if the dent isn't too bad. Flight 103 was a disaster and a criminal act under the laws of the United Kingdom, the United States, and Germany, but was absolutely *not* an incident. --Charlene 23:32, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
The airline was involved in the worst disaster in aviation history. A Pan Am 747, named the Clipper Victor, was involved in the Tenerife disaster on March 27, 1977." This sounds redundant with the repeats os invovled and disaster. How about, simply:
"The airline was invovled in the worst accident in aviation history - the Tenerife Disaster of March 27, 1977."
to the moon!
The article says: During the Apollo program, Pan Am sold tickets for future flights to the moon. These later became valuable collector's items. But my recollection is that they merely took reservations and kept a waiting list, but never actually sold tickets. Can someone verify or modify? --Keeves 15:21, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
- Waiting list tickets were given out; www.retrofuture.com/moontrip.html says by 1971, over 93,000 tickets were allocated. check out the page about 3/4 of the way down (near the 3rd picture) for more information --Rjcflyer@aol.com 00:38, 8 January 2006 (UTC)--Rjcflyer@aol.com 9:35, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- The article has a picture of a waiting list certificate, and the text "... the air carrier established the First Moon Flights Club, which, in reality, was nothing more than a prioritized waiting list. ... the public was eager, too. By the time the airline closed out its list in 1971, Pan Am (whose name was emblazoned on the shuttle in Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey") had a list of over 93,000 people, including future president Ronald Reagan." The website was last updated in 2002 and was written by a man called Eric Lefcowitz, who seems to be a failed author and failed guitarist. It would be more accurate to say that "Pan Am opened a waiting list for future flights to the moon. Over 93,000 places were allocated, and waiting list certificates later became valuable collectors' items." To win my respect an editor would have to determine (a) whether Pan Am seriously expected to schedule moon flights, and whether the waiting list had any legal weight and (b) if so, at what point did the company abandon the project, and if applicants were ever notified of this and (c) was the list, or the data on the list, sold as part of the company's assets? -Ashley Pomeroy 03:27, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi to all, we need to write something about the World Port.
To whoever inserted this passage, can you note the sources this is based on? Also, the wording borders on positive commentary instead of straight facts (please reword to tone down the language).
- At its height during the early 1970's, Pan Am was known as the "World's Most Experienced Airline." It was highly regarded for its state-of-the-art aircraft and far-flung destinations. Pan Am's crews and cabin staff were respected for both their aviation experience and their multi-lingual ability. Pan Am flight attendants were poised and dedicated, and a high percentage of them were university graduates. American passengers in particular were proud to travel on this airline, which was known for its superb safety record. On board meal service was excellent, with filet mignon served in Economy Class on some flights. Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis preferred to fly First Class on Pan Am even though her Greek husband owned Olympic Airlines. But serious challenges lay ahead.
Hello, I am the author of the above paragraph. I have just inserted the book by Barnaby Conrad into the "References" in the main article for Pan Am. This is where I received information that the airline had used the trademark term "World's Most Experienced Airline" in its advertising, as well as the fact that the Pan Am flight attendants tended to be university graduates. I myself have flown on Pan Am to Asia, Europe, and the Caribbean and I own a souvenir menu that shows filet mignon being served in Economy Class on a flight from Tokyo to Los Angeles in 1970. It was a well known fact, frequently cited in many sources, that Jackie Kennedy Onassis preferred to fly on Pan Am rather than her husband's airline. It is true that the airline had a high reputation during its good years, before the economic problems and disasters of the 1980's injured its brand and led to its collapse. I am new to Wikipedia. Can you rewrite the above paragraph to your liking with this information in mind? Thanks, User:DennisJOBrien@yahoo.com.
OK, updated paragraph has been added with citations provided. User:DennisJOBrien@yahoo.com
Following the precedent from Frontier Airlines and Arizona Airways This section should be split off into two separate airlines -- they're different companies, not really connected except by name. —Cliffb 05:49, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- I agree --Gnosbush 13:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- I also agree. There is no similarity between these incarnations and the original airline except the name, the logo, and one aircraft type (the most common type in the world when Pan Am went bankrupt). The current airline is mainly a charter service, the original was a schduled service carrier. These are different airlines and should be listed separately.Elwood64151 16:50, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
- I also agree. The two other airlines basically purchaced the name and logo and have no relation other than that to the orignal airline. I think the old Pan Am Shuttle was more of an airline than these two. Spring3100 07:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- I also agree. They're different companies with the same name. Incidentally, many people when they find they are flying Pan Am even now immediately think they are flying with the old, established airline, and not a charter airline that bought the name. --Charlene 23:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Then just go ahead and do it. But it's really more of a scheduled commuter airline than a charter service. BTW, I live in Mercer County, NJ and flew on a "Clipper" to Hanscom a year ago. The Jetstreams are white with the Pan AM Globe and each have "Clipper XYZ" names. As far as I can see the livery is identical to the 707 I flew on to Amsterdam in 1964. The tugs, gate and terminal area are similarly marked. I haven't seen anything larger than a Jetstream in Pan AM livery in years. GCW50 15:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Finally done... Cleaning up that old list.. —Cliffb 04:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
It's a shame, bue at least the name hasn't died, and its ghost still flies. On the other hand TWA is really kaput.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Simonlebon (talk • contribs) 06:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC).
Pan Am Building
I've added the following to that section just to highlight the impact of the disaster - "Two hundred seventy people from 21 countries died, including 11 people on the ground. With 189 of the victims being American citizens, the bombing was the worst terrorist attack against the United States until September 11, 2001 and remains the worst terrorist and aviation-related disaster on British soil." Kaenei 23:58, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- I have added fact tags to this, as the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing killed more people and it was directed towards US forces (as well as French), and killed 299. But is it regarded as a war time attack or 'terrorist' attack? --Russavia 02:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Unless you can point to a source that made this assertion, I suggest that such a passage be left out in the meantime. PentawingTalk 01:13, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Clipper Flying Boats
Re the prewar Clipper period, no mention of the Martin (?) flying boats between the Sikorskys and the Boeings! 188.8.131.52 09:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Pan Am in film
The airline appeared in other movies, notably in several James Bond films. The company's Boeing 707s were featured in Dr. No, From Russia with Love, and the well-known parody Casino Royale, while a Pan Am 747 and the Worldport appeared in Live and Let Die.
Other mentions include:
- The 1969 film Bullitt features a chase scene at San Francisco International Airport, where Steve McQueen's character runs after the villain on the tarmac while dodging several Pan Am 707s.
- Also in 1969, Argentine actress Isabel Sarli checks in and boards a Pan Am 707 flight from Panama City, Panamá, to Buenos Aires, Argentina, in Armando Bo's Desnuda en la arena.
- The airline's logo was also seen in the film Blade Runner. Subsequently, Pan Am became one of the victims of the supposed Blade Runner curse on large corporations whose logos were featured in scenes from the film.
- Pan Am also figured prominently in Scarface (set in the city of Miami, one of Pan Am's major hubs), where the airline's logo and slogan were adopted by criminal overlord Tony Montana.
- In the I Love Lucy episode "Home from Europe," Lucy, Ricky, Fred and Ethel fly from Europe back to New York on a Pan Am flight.
- In the 1988 film High Spirits, a family of American tourists travels to Peter Plunkett's (Peter O'Toole) Irish castle on a Pan Am 747. The film was one of the last in which an audience would see a 747 in Pan Am's new colors.
- The airline was also featured in an opening scene of the Robin Williams's film Hook, in which the family is aboard a Pan Am 747-100 to London. Ironically, the movie opened just a week after the airline ceased operations.
- In The Phantom (1996) a Pan Am Clipper, probably a Sikorsky S-42, tried to make a "non scale" trip between New York and the fictional country of Bengala in Africa, before an attack of air pirates stopped it. Also in the New York Port are ads: "Pan Am Clipper Cargo" and "Via Pan American", both of them with the old Pan Am logo.
- The airline's logo was also featured in the opening sequence of The Family Man, where Nicolas Cage checks in at the Worldport for a Pan Am 747 flight from New York to London. Some years later his character finds the old Pan Am boarding passes.
- The battle between Juan Trippe and TWA owner Howard Hughes over Pan Am's transatlantic monopoly was featured prominently in The Aviator.
- In the television series The Simpson's in the episode Rome-old and Juli-eh grandpa metioned that if things didn't work out with him and Selma "Pan Am would have a job waiting for him".
Joke or truth?
PA had a hub in Guatemala? I knew they flew there, but a hub? See infobox. Archtrain 16:02, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Removal of Pan Am Flight 103 debris picture
Im showing the picture of "Clipper Maid of the Seas" is scheduled to be deleted. While trajic, this picture is highly associated with this incident. Removal of the picture has no merit and drasticlly takes away from the soul of this article. That picture has to be one of th most enduring images of the late 80's early 90's. It's historical value to this article is highly relevant. Kcuello (talk) 05:53, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- I agree the image should be retained if possible. However, it does need to be sourced on Wikimedia Commons.Phase4 (talk) 11:12, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:MartinM-130 GGBridge.jpg
Image:MartinM-130 GGBridge.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
Image copyright problem with Image:PA103cockpit4.png
The image Image:PA103cockpit4.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
- That this article is linked to from the image description page.
Exposed to be falling apart
"The airline was exposed to be falling apart". What is that supposed to mean? That someone revealed the unknown fact that the airline was falling apart? If so, who? --Lambiam 08:53, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm unsure why this article is featured, seeing as it's lacking inline citations in many areas. Please let me know if I'm mistaken about this criteria, or if it's simply referenced someplace else. --Resplendent (talk) 05:30, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- It was promoted to FA back in September 2005; requirements are much tougher now. See also WP:FAR for when an article may not meet current FA criteria. talk 17:40, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Can I propose re-writing the introduction? It currently has three paragraphs, two of which are about stuff after Pan Am World went out of business.
Can I suggest moving those paragraph to a section on “successor companies” or something, and writing a couple of paras with a digest of PA’s progress between for the 60 years prior to that. opinions? Swanny18 (talk) 12:47, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with Swanny18. I also note that we've had a fight before about the use of that word "flagship". I was going to revert 9014user's use of "major" until Cenpacrr changed the whole tone of the beginning. I think the opening paragraph should emphasize PanAm's role as the world's leading international airline in the history of flight. Who can forget the opening scenes in the movie Casablanca when you realize that those desperate refugees' dream was to catch the Clipper from Lisbon. GroveGuy (talk) 00:35, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Pan Am Building photo?
First airmail flight from NZ
Is this worth mentioning somewhere? First airmail flight to San Francisco Includes reference to the crash on 11 January 1938 that killed Capt Musick and his crew. Jamie Mackay (talk) 00:38, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Guided Missile Range Division
The Guided Missile Range Division (GMRD) was part of Pam Am for many years. Headquarted at Patrick Air Force Base, Cocoa Beach, Florida, this Division served the Air Force by operating the Eastern Test Range, from Cape Canaveral around the world including tracking stations (many former fixed base stations of the airliners), tracking ships, and operational groups at the Cape. Documentation of this Division is scarce and hard to find, but some of your references do speak of it, and your brief words do not do justice to the thousands of employees of Pan Am in this Division. Block1945 (talk) 19:34, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello folks, I've just read the article and noticed that it uses the words "astral navigation" in a couple of places. I think that by "astral navigation" the author might have meant that they were trained to navigate by the stars; however, I don't believe that there's such a word in the English language. I've replaced "astral" with "celestial navigation to make the meaning more clear for the readers. Clear skies to you 184.108.40.206 (talk) 02:28, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Manila out of order?
"For almost 40 years, Pan Am westbound round-the-world route was Flight 001 originating in San Francisco with stops including Honolulu, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Bangkok, Manila, Kolkata, Delhi, Beirut, Istanbul, Frankfurt, London, and finally New York. "
It is difficult for me to believe that Pan Am would fly westward to Bangkok, then reverse eastward to Manilla. Can anyone verify that this is the correct flight order? Cwelgo (talk) 21:52, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Following up, I can't find a consistent list of stops for Flight 001, Let alone the order. Here, here, here, and here all agree on San Francisco, Honolulu, Hong Kong, Bangkok, Delhi, Beirut, Istanbul, Frankfurlt, London, and New York, but some add Tokyo, Manilla, and/or Calcutta. None strike me as authoritative. Does anybody know? Cwelgo (talk) 21:54, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
- If you pick a year I'll give you a list of stops for a year close to it. You're right, they didn't go east to Manila. Tim Zukas (talk) 16:56, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- By the way: I'm guessing it was usually flights 1/2, not 001/002. Certainly the public timetables didn't show the zeros.
Reuse of name - Flight training
I think some mention should be made of the PanAm International Flight Training Academy. It was founded as part of the original PanAm airline and even claims, on its web site (http://www.panamacademy.com/index.cfm) that it is the "only surviving division of Pan American Airlines". It still uses the colours and logos. Mesdale (talk) 11:27, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- Pawlowski, A. "Iconic Pan Am may fly again in TV drama." CNN. February 28, 2011. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:01, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Have removed "unofficial" ahead of sentence "... flag carrier of the United States" because I think some readers do not know that any airline designated as a certain country's flag carrier in bilateral aviation agreements is a flag carrier of the country where its headquarters are located and whose citizens/corporations have effective control over it, regardless of whether it is government-owned or not. Say, for example, easyJet were to start a regular scheduled service from Gatwick or Luton to a non-EU/EEA country in Europe, such as Russia or Ukraine it would become a designated UK flag carrier under the respective bilateral agreement between the UK and Russia/Ukraine. Similarly, when UK-US air services were still governed by Bermuda II, British Caledonian, Laker and Virgin Atlantic were all designated UK flag carriers at various times although none of these airlines was ever owned by the UK government (unlike British Airways). This is the correct meaning of the term "flag carrier" in an aviation context; the way it is often used in the press to refer to a particular country's government-owned airline is not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 13:51, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, you;ve changed cited information without (apparently) checking the wording inthe source first, or providing a new source. Your definition also disagrees with the definitions found at Flag carrier, which has several definitions for the term, not all of them cited. I am thus reverting your changes. - BilCat (talk) 18:33, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
- Please don't change "U.S." to "US" - this is American usage, which is allowed on WP on US-related topics. Also, see WP:OVERLINKING for WP's guidelines on overuse of wikilinks. - BilCat (talk) 19:28, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Pan Am logo
There is no reference in the article to who designed the iconic Pan Am world logo. Does anyone know the designer and do you feel it should be included within the article? Regards to all, David J Johnson (talk) 19:51, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
- That would definitely be some useful information to include in the article. It's one of the most recognizable logos of all time. –BMRR (talk) 17:20, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Looking at some of these sites Barnes is indeed mentioned, but then a different associate - Charles Forborg on one; Joseph Montgomery on another. Can anyone confirm the actual designer(s), so that the correct person can be included in the article? Many thanks, David J Johnson (talk) 15:08, 21 November 2011 (UTC)