Talk:Uruguayan Air Force Flight 571

thats so wrong

I'm not sure I follow you. If a detail on the page is wrong you can discuss it here, or since this is a Wiki, just edit the main page directly. Alternatively if you feel the events of this story are morally wrong, I can't help you. -- Solipsist 21:04, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Death of Liliana Methol

Survivors' official writer P.P.Read wrote that Liliana finally accepted the meat and was becoming good when an avalanche killed her. --Ypacaraí 12:59, 2005 Jun 14 (UTC)

Whoops, my bad. You're right, of course. I just got to that part in Read's book. Corrected the article to reflect it. Avalyn 05:57, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Article title

Previous discussion moved here from Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions/archive4

I have an article naming conundrum. I've just been looking for an article on the 1972 plane crash in the Andes following which the survivors turned to cannibalism in order to live. Wikipedia, has references to the event at 1972, in Cannibalism and for the film Alive: The Miracle of the Andes. There is also a good external reference at [1].

Now it seems to me, there should be an article for this event in and of itself - but what should it be titled? I can only think of Plane crash Chile (1972), which isn't brilliant. --Solipsist 08:27, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

For commercial airliner crashes, the standard seems to be "<Airline name> Flight <flight number>", for example Air New Zealand Flight 901 (see List of accidents and incidents on commercial airliners grouped by location). Since this was a Uruguayan air force plane, and I can't find a flight number, I might suggest Uruguayan Air Force Fairchild FH-227D if that's not too obscure! -- Arwel 10:43, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I have always found the standard odd, because it does not mention that it is about a crash. Also, the Uruguayan Air Force may have other planes of type Fairchild FH-227D.--Patrick 11:09, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Personally I think the article should be named by what the incident is most commonly known as. I do note that in the United States it is common to call air disaster after the flight number. But in other parts of the world it is not. Example while US people refer to Pan Am Flight 103 people in the UK refer to it as the Lockerbie disaster. Now getting back to original question. There doesn't seem to be a common name. Andies disaster has been used by some media, but there have also been other crashes in the Andies. -- Popsracer 11:23, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I suspect the Airline Flight 001 naming standard comes from general air incident investigations, the majority of which don't end in a crash. I'm not sure that Uruguayan Air Force Fairchild FH-227D works, because it sounds like it would be about a type of plane in the Uruguayan Air Force. So now I'm leaning towards Andes Flight Disaster (1972) or Uruguayan Air Force Flight (1972). An analogous problem occurs with the 1994 crash of a Chinook helicopter on the Mull of Kintyre, killing several top UK anti-terrorism experts. It seems to mostly be refered to as The Chinook Helicopter Crash/Disaster, even though I would have thought it was not the only Chinook to crash. -- Solipsist 12:23, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Might I suggest renaming the article in question with the standard plane crash nomenclature, i.e., Uruguayan Air Force Flight 571? Avalyn 06:52, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Lectures

Some of the survivors travel the world lecturing on business management and the lections thy got form their experience. --Error 4 July 2005 01:26 (UTC)

Air Force

Why did they fly military? I understand that in the Andes, the military takes some role of colonization of the wilderness. --Error 4 July 2005 01:26 (UTC)

The only commercial Uruguyan Airline is Pluna. The flight they got was probably a chartered flight (non-scheduled). Perhaps this might have been a factor as well? (I am just thinking out lout, tho) --Pinnecco 01:57, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

They flew a military charter because it was less exepensive than a commerical flight. -CB

Age

Something should be said about their ages. --Error 4 July 2005 01:26 (UTC)

nitpicky

Alpinist is a pretty eurocentric term for a mountain climber.

In this case they called themselves Andinists.

Nitpicky, I disagree. Alpes (Alps) is not considered a word exclusive to Europe in South America. I lived in Uruguay for 6 years and Alpinistas is used (is also common in Brazil). --Pinnecco 02:02, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

And in Brazil, actually "alpinista" only means "rock climber". --Ypacaraí 03:02, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm confused by numbers of those who survived...

45 on plane. 27 survived initial crash. 9 died later.

That would make 18 survivors rescued but 16 is quoted?

12 died in or immediately following the crash

5 died during the first night and into the next morning

1 succumbed to injuries eight days following the crash

8 died in an avalanche thirteen days after the crash

3 succumbed to injuries/infection after the avalanche and before rescue

16 survived the whole ordeal--Wurmis 16:51, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

"Due to a curious navigation error, the pilot notified air controllers in Santiago that he was over Curicó"

In P.P.Read's book it seems to say that Dante Hector Lagurara was the one in contact with Santiago air traffic control and the one flying the plane at the time of the crash. Lagurara is mentioned as the copilot, and Julio Ferradas is named as the pilot. When the book is describing the pilot and copilot a few pages earlier it says that "[Lagurara] was now flying the Fairchild under the eyes of Ferradas to gain experience". I'm not sure whether to edit the article to read "copilot", since technically if Lagurara was the one flying the plane at the time of the crash then he could be described as pilot. Indeed at the end of the book it talks about the investigations into the crash that blamed it on the "human error of the pilot".--JackMcJiggins 05:39, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Location?

Would anyone have the actual long/lat coordinates of the crash site?