Talk:Lufthansa/Archive 1
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lufthansa/Archive 1 page. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This non-existent page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
older comments
Lufthansa may be the largest german airline, and it used to be state-owned; but today it's a private enterprise. Does this still make it a "national airline"? -- Nils
Sliding Man
What is this man opening the door on the runway thing!? This isn't a serious incident. I think it should be removed. If this kind of thing qualifies you could list hundreds of incidents for all major airlines. newkai 02:56, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Agreed, I think that information looks very strange in the article. I have removed the paragraph entirely - Adrian Pingstone 19:17, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Destinations
There needs to be some mention of destinations in this article and how the airline sticks out from the rest of the competition in this area.
Lufthansa and A300B4
The article says that Lufthansa uses A300B4 models, but I have seen them using only A300-600R models in past few years, so this information is inaccurate. Does anyone know how many B4 and -600 models do they actually use?
- According to the LH Fleet page http://konzern.lufthansa.com/de/html/ueber_uns/flotte/index.html Lufthansa uses only A300-600, not 300-B4. -- Nils Jeppe 8 July 2005 12:55 (UTC)
I´m sure that Lufthansa recently only operates A300-600 not B4! Dagadt
Formation of Lufthansa
As the company is celebrating its 50th birthday this year, I think it should be mentioned that 1955 is the year it was founded in. To my knowledge the pre-WWII company was a "different" company bearing the same name.
Miles & More
Miles & More should be merged into the Lufthansa article, and its other participants should have a note about it in their pages. The program isn't noteworthy enough to need its own article. Dbinder 23:44, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
- Disagree, the Miles&More program is used by several different airline companies. It should remain a separate article. BTW: Separate articles for the British Airways Executive Club and American Airways AAdvantage exist as well. Do your want to merge them too? MikeZ 16:58, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- I do think Executive Club should be merged. I have left AAdvantage alone for now. It's noteworthy since it was the first one. Dbinder 14:31, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
- Disagree, as per MikeZ, especially now that SWISS is also part of Miles&More. Schutz 20:44, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- Disagree, as per MikeZ and Schutz. CrnaGora (Talk | Contribs | E-mail) 16:31, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
- Disagree, as above Lars T. 14:11, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- Disagree, as above Bringo 08:18, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Flying Swan?
It says in the first paragraph that Lufthansa means "flying swan". It doesn't. As far as I know, there is a Sanskrit word - "Hamsa", which means swan. In German however, the only meaning I can conceive here is in connection with the Hanseatic League, as is written in the History-section. When I tried to edit this, it was changed back, so maybe someone else needs to make a change.
- I changed the "German translation" sentence. In my opinion the reference to the swan is not correct, the bird in the company logo and on the aircraft tails is a crane. MikeZ 07:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
- The German cognate to "hamsa", btw, is "Gans" (goose). 惑乱 分からん 17:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- I would also be interested to know about it. Which view is more authentic, Flying Swan or Air + 'another company name'? Anyone has any authentic information about this? Also, if me or you start an airlines company today, how will we name that? Air Yamaha, Air Google, Air Microsoft, or something like Flying Swan or White Goose. What makes more sense? Also, is there any confirmation anywhere if the author who designed their logo, indeed made a crane, and not a swan? Sobuj 18:41, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
The name comes as a derivation of the Hanseatic league, a trade group back in the 12-1400's. The intention of the airline was to become an airborne version, hence the name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgw89 (talk • contribs) 05:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Redlinks
Can someone clean these up because, though at first they may not appear excessive, im worried about the fleet sections, because somehow I think most pages about the fleet types exist. Thanks for your help DannyM 12:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Service to East Germany after WW2
It's unclear if the airline was banned from the whole country or just W Berlin after WW2, if anyone has any info please clarify. Propound 05:07, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Lufthansa was not specifically banned from flying to East Germany or Berlin. However, there was allied legislation banning german aircraft from a.) crossing the intra-german border, b.) flying into Berlin. Off course, this legislation applied to Lufthansa in the same way as it applied to a Piper Cub. So, before 1990, there was never a Lufthansa service to Berlin, however in the mid-eighties Lufthansa had a Frankfurt-Leipzig service on the occasion of the Leipzig Trade Fair. These flights did not cross the intra-german border, but flew into czech airspace then took a sharp left turn and headed to Leipzig. Service from Western Europe to Berlin was done by "allied" airlines like BA, Air France and PanAm with PanAm providing all services from West Germany to Berlin (650 weekly connections). The PanAm services were heavily subsidied by the West German government.
- -- C. Deelmann 15:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Focus cities / secondary hubs
Berlin Tegel is definitly not a "focus city" in Lufthansa's route network. The only international routes are BRU and CDG. There are more international routes from Cologne!
I´d say Stuttgart Airport is a secondery hub of Lufthansa! Of course it´s a smaller focus city than Dusseldorf Airport, but it´s a bit larger than Hamburg Airport because of more frequencies! Dagadt
- This is not true. Hamburg has recently gained in importance for Lufthansa. It was the first airport to get the betterfly-fare concept with many new European destinations added at the same time. Nowadays, Hamburg even has unique destinations served by Lufthansa from no other airport, e.g. Bergen, Rønne, Bastia as well as Saarmelleek and Valencia which are only served from Düsseldorf also. Stuttgart, otoh, is not even close to a secondary hub nor is it a focus city, as it is mostly served by smaller aircraft with much less frequencies than Hamburg. FMB 17:18, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
BBJ
Can anyone give a reference to the BBJ that is in LH's fleet? I have looked for one and can only find the service operated by Privatair on behalf of LH. Which is duly noted in the Privatair entry. skyskraper 14:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- Well, the PrivatAir jet is not so much a plane in their inventory but a service they offer ... --- C. Deelmann 15:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Fleets in History Section
In the history section, it seems to list many, many instances of different planes being purchased. Do all of these purchases need to be listed? I understand certain purchases may be historic, but if so, maybe it should be explained why it is important? (e.g. Allowed flights across Atlantic, etc.) Other examples seem to be listed just for the sake of listing.Gittinsj 01:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)gittinsj
Zürich Airport
I've deleted Zürich Airport as a Lufthansa hub, for only SWISS uses it as a hub and although it is owned by Lufthansa it is run independently. Moreover, the section about Zürich becoming Lufthansa's third hub is mere speculation, as there have been made no official remarks about Lufthansa dropping the SWISS brand in favor of its own, nor LH offering flights out of ZRH to non-German destinations and therefore being qualified to be called a hub. FMB 17:31, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'm going to venture a guess as to why ZRH was listed in the first place: on LH's website, they have on their information page listed as "Our hubs in Frankfurt, Munich, and Zürich ([1])". I'm guessing thats why somebody listed it in the first place. I was not the one who listed it, but I'm guessing this could be the reason why it was listed. Any thoughts? Neo16287 (talk) 13:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- ZRH is a secondary hub. Basketballoneten 18:49, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Proposed routes
Hi! I´m fond of Airlines and you can say I´m an expert. So I want to propose Lufthansa a few routes. Unfortunately I don´t know to create a good table! So please help me! The routes are on my Userpage Dagadt. If you have create a table please insert it in the article (new section of course)! Dagadt
- I don't think this is appropriate for an article that is supposed to give information on the airline as it is, not on how Wikipedia users would like it to be.DerGolgo 17:13, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ditto FMB 18:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- I've removed the section, this isn't a fan forum.DerGolgo 00:13, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ok...how I see you aren´t interested in Airlines. Your opinion is ok, but lots of people don´t think so! If you don´t trust me, ask other Users! Dagadt
- Well this has no place in an encyclopedic article about LH. I see you have this on your user page and it is perfectly fine to have it there. However, this not being an appropiate section of the article aside, I would not agree with your proposals, let alone others. This fact would not make it viable to be included into the article, either. FMB 10:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ok...how I see you aren´t interested in Airlines. Your opinion is ok, but lots of people don´t think so! If you don´t trust me, ask other Users! Dagadt
- I've removed the section, this isn't a fan forum.DerGolgo 00:13, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ditto FMB 18:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Accidents
The 727 cargo plane lost in 1979 was not part of the LH fleet and - as far as I know - not operated or maintained by LH personnel. I am not sure if it should be listed here.--Kermecke 06:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
"The" Flag Carrier?
How is Lufthansa "the" German flag carrier? It is privately-owned, the German state has sold all or almost all of its shares. Sure, it carries the German flag on its planes, but so do Air Berlin and dba. There's nothing exclusive about that. Adhominem 09:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- Look up Flag Carrier. It sums it up pretty much FMB 19:18, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm stupid... i thought lufthansa was an african name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.251.228.88 (talk) 12:34, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Accident vs Incident
There's two lists in the article with accidents/incidents, with many of the items being listed in both of them. As the Incidents lists is more complete I am renaming it to "Accidents and incidents". The Accidents list will be deleted and any information not in the Incidents list will be copied. Ma.rkus.nl (talk) 20:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Destinations
In the current Lufthansa magazine you can see on the route map that the airline serves Rio de Janeiro from Hamburg and Piestany (SLovakia) from Berlin. I never heard about that and you can´t buy these flights on lufthansa.com. Does anyone knows more ybout that? Dagadt (talk) 17:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Claim in article, that Lufthansa was always Hitler's favorite airline? So, what?
As seen in the documentary, Triumph of the Will, Lufthansa was always the favorite air carrier of Adolf Hitler and, later, was the official airline of the Nazi party (NSDAP).
I do have two concerns with this sentence. First, no sources are given. Second, what other airlines should Hitler and his Nazi henchmen use? British Airways? Even if sources can be found to back up those claims ("always favorite"), that still doesn't tell a thing about the airline and should therefore be deleted from the article. Any second thoughts from someone? Cheers, MikeZ (talk) 10:13, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- Just for information: This claim was only recently added by an anonymous user, IP 216.170.232.106, from Madison, Wisconsin, USA, on November 29, 2007. MikeZ (talk) 10:20, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- I say in the interest of fair play we give him 5 days to source it, and then if it isn't sourced, we pull it. It is true, who else would they fly? But is there really a need for that? Neo16287 (talk) 11:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- I dont think if it was sourced it should be included as it is not really notable enough for inclusion, bit like saying his favourite country is Germany! MilborneOne (talk) 15:08, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
5 days are over, I just pulled that sentence. Cheers, MikeZ (talk) 20:08, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Pictures On Right Side
Is it just me, or are there too many pictures on the right side of the page. I don't think there should be that many pictures clustered together one after another. Not only does it make the fleet table smaller, it makes the article longer and some pictures, I believe, can be removed or moved. Does anyone have any other thoughts?--Golich17 (talk) 20:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
economics related
look: [2] --92.113.10.111 (talk) 18:54, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Cabin Info
Does anybody object to my expanding on the section regarding cabin service as similar to other airline articles? Neo16287 (talk) 18:48, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Go ahead. Planenut (talk) 00:55, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
B747-400 retirement or refurbishment?
According to this English article it is planned to retire the B747-400 in 2010 to 2012. According to the German article some newer B747-400 will receive PTV screens (and probably new first class interior?) and remain in service until most of the ordered A380 and B747-8 are delivered. (I guess that's longer than 2012, or would they really refurbish a plane only for 3 or 4 years more service?) --84.115.129.76 (talk) 23:07, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- NA-Class company articles
- NA-importance company articles
- WikiProject Companies articles
- NA-Class Germany articles
- NA-importance Germany articles
- Unreferenced Germany articles
- WikiProject Germany articles
- NA-Class aviation articles
- NA-Class airline articles
- WikiProject Airlines articles
- WikiProject Aviation articles