Jump to content

Talk:1998 Cavalese cable car crash

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sentence seems to be just tacked on

[edit]

Can't cut this right now because the database is locked, but this sentence seems to be just tacked on at the end. Recommend removal or working into the article in a different way.

There had been a similar incident in August 1961 when six people died after a low-flying French military plane cut the cables of a cable car between the Helbronner peak and the Aiguille du Midi, in the French Mont Blanc range.--69.140.0.212 (talk) 16:56, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Anti-American sentiment"

[edit]

I think the article focuses too much on the "anti-American" sentiment in Italy. It should be enough to mention it in one sentence, although I don't agree with the term used. Not all criticism on the US comes from anti-American sentiment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.10.46.8 (talk) 13:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Had the same incident happened in, say, Lake Tahoe, there would have been protests that would unlikely be called "Anti-american." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.87.19.222 (talk) 20:44, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Anti-American or not, there were 20 peoples dead. And the murderers? Free. 194.105.53.118 (talk) 07:24, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's libel right there. Murder is defined as 'unlawful killing of another with malice aforethought ', you stupid wop. Attack pilots have to be trained to be aggressive because if they always fly exactly according to book, they will die on the first day of battle. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 12:24, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All the Prowler crew needed to do to have avoided this accident was to obtain and study beforehand a recent topographical map of the area over-which they would be flying, any features such as high buildings or in this case, a cable car, would have been clearly marked. Common sense would dictate that low flying might bring the aircraft into areas containing hazards not only to the aircrew and aircraft itself, but also to people on the ground. For some reason they appear to have neglected to do this. The accident area was not a war zone, and neither was access to suitable large scale detailed maps difficult, they could have bought one at any local petrol or gas station. All the crew had to do was plan the route properly, taking into account any ground hazards on the way. That the crew wasn't even aware that a cable car existed at the accident site says something for their flight preparation, or rather, the lack of it. The mountain was well-known as a tourist resort - which is why the cable car was there in the first place. How could the crew not be aware of all this. At the very least, the flight crew displayed a lack of professionalism and very poor airmanship, and appeared to have been almost oblivious to their surroundings.
No doubt the offending Prowler crew are now regretting their actions, and one can at least admit in their defence that we all make mistakes. But it was a very stupid thing to do.
The crew are probably now well aware of this, and will almost certainly never forget it. One suspects that if they could turn the clock back, they would have done things differently.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing - but foresight is better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.57.101 (talk) 14:58, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Opinions like the above one by "Wikiskeptic" above (Murder is defined as 'unlawful killing of another with malice aforethought ' you stupid wop. Attack pilots have to be trained to be aggressive because if they always fly exactly according to book, they will die on the first day of battle...) reflect popular beliefs based on "Top-Gun" style Holywood movies, and a complete ignorance of aviation in general, military or commercial. Even novice Private Pilots know that flying at high speed and extremely low altitude precludes any on-time reaction from a human pilot to avoid obtacles in the flight path. The response time needed to avoid the cable necessitates that the pilot flying the aircraft can see the obstacle and inmmediately react in a proper way, without exceeding the crew (or the airplane) G-loading limits; but flying as fast as they were flying makes it practically impossible to have enought time and distance to climb/turn in time to avoid hitting the cable. That is the reason for avoiding flying too low and too fast at the same time. This is clearly a case of "reckless flying", that is punished at every civilized country around the world, be it a military or a civilian aircraft, period. Now, if the pilot argued that his radio altimeter was failing, that argument was either a fabrication, or much worse, that he lacked complete judgement. It has not been the first time that a military court acts partially in order to save the crew and (hopefully), the country prestige, when in reality, it is an example of involuntary manslaughter, and no flimsy "they have to fly violating regulations 'cause they have to be "aggresive..." is valid. Just another good example of the kind of behaviour too often displayed by a few overly "aggressive flying" military pilots, is the famous B-52 flight that ended tragically when another "hot-shot" pilot crashed the large bomber into the ground and killed himself and all the crew (1994 Fairchild Air Force Base B-52 crash). Finally, calling the previous commenter "...you, Stupid wop", only reveals who is the true stupid, uninformed, ignorant person in this discussion. Amclaussen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.100.180.20 (talk) 01:04, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Newsflash, 99.999% of us would rather be some loe ethnic minority rather than a murderer. The latter is a crime among the nations; the former merely bad taste. Charges of 'murder' harm WP and in some sense are among the worst offenses an editor can commit. I may have committed the crime, but I never served the time!!!! -WikiSkeptic (talk) 06:46, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have expertise in the plane involved having served as a engineer for thirty years. Calling the pilots "murderers" and "unprofessional" is factually wrong and will not bring the dead back to life. The maps WERE current and did not show the cable; and, just because the radar altimeter passed a test, it could have failed later. Also, the radar altimeter is a 1950s technology; airliners must carry at least two. Even so, accidents happen. Turkish Airlines lost a 737 at Schiphol as one radar altimeter failed and the other one did not switch in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.149.135.25 (talk) 19:02, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
They were not murderers, but they were extremely unprofessional and committed negligent manslaughter, comparable to driving drunk: they had been seen hot-dogging around there for many weeks, they loved flying below the cables lines to show their acrobatic abilities, they had been seen many times doing that. There are documented witnesses. They confessed many years later and there is a linked newspaper article that quotes them saying they were supposed to go back to the "Land of the Free" that very week and so they were "having fun" one last time and "taking videos of the beautiful scenery". They were unlucky. They had done it many times with no damage to anything or anybody, but this time they flew a little too high and clipped the cable car. They barely made it back to base. They had not even realized that people had been killed until later, they stated. They admitted to burning the tape in order for the truth not to come out. They said that apart from the truth the video also showed them laughing and having fun. Are these professional pilots? They are not murderers, they did not intend to kill. What they did was negligent manslaughter and they should have paid for it but they did not because they were flown back to the US very quickly and tried there. Family and friends of innocent European vacationers who died in the disaster attending the trial in the US said the "trail was a farce", a "poor excuse for justice", a "scam of a legal system". Clinton gave a lot of lip service, as usual, to the Europeans, but nonetheless helped cover up this scandal. Good day to you, sir, --Mondschein English (talk) 18:59, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. This was a big scandal in Italy and the neighboring countries especially because all involved people got away almost without consequences. The pilots were guilty of flying too low, too fast and without proper preperation. A cable car does not pop up in a day. Who did the maps? And you can tell the difference between 150 m and 600m above the ground without instruments, that's a joke. It was at least manslaughter. You can assume how those soldiers behaved in other countries with whom they really were at war with. 213.162.68.210 (talk) 15:53, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The maps showing the cables were in the cockpit, the pilots destroyed proofs and got away with it. It was murder. No one hated them because they were Americans but because they escaped justice and how. Any other country would have condemned them... Salvalasilvia (talk) 15:25, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think murder is the correct term for this as that would mean they had planned to kill someone(s) beforehand, but it is as close as you can get and yes, had it been any other country this would have been a much bigger thing...or imagine if italian pilots had done this in the USA somewhere, holy smoley... 155.4.210.231 (talk) 23:23, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The legal definition of murder is completely irrelevant here. What normal people perceive as murder has nothing to do with this detached legal definition of the term.
And that is why it is absolutely right for Italians and other Europeans to qualify this act as murder.
Apart from that, the American judicial system is a joke from a European point of view anyway. 2003:DA:970E:A621:A5E2:8841:CDBD:7B12 (talk) 14:27, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Same cable-car, which was involved in 1976?

[edit]

Was it the same cable car, at which a severe catastrophe in 1976 happened? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.46.224.242 (talk) 10:57, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was the same cable car system [1]. According to Cermis the cable car system, which had two legs, has since been removed and replaced by a different style of cable car. Format (talk) 07:15, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cavalese cable car disaster (1998). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:15, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cavalese cable car disaster (1998). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:29, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"1998 crimes in Italy"

[edit]

This article was recently added to a category "1998 crimes in Italy" which contains only this article. As the deaths were never ruled criminal, that seems inappropriate. Thoughts? Vox Sciurorum (talk) 11:59, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

They were ruled criminal in Italy, but the US Government took the jurisdiction away from Italian magistrates. If the US government decides to cover up multiple murderers, that doesn't mean they aren't. --Roccoooo (talk) 14:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

These deaths have been ruled as criminal in Italy, they avoided justice in the USA. They still committed a crime Salvalasilvia (talk) 15:27, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The US does not own the World's Judicial System (although many Americans think they do own the World). It was a crime, multiple counts of Negligent Homicide. --Mondschein (talk) 23:01, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could we please protect this page?

[edit]

This Page seems to get vandalized and whitewashed quite often. I propose to protect it. --Mondschein (talk) 23:01, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Court documents

[edit]

These might fit in the article.


as a reference with an archive url [1]

as a reference with an archive url [2]

References

  1. ^ UNITED STATES v. Richard J. ASHBY, Captain (O-3), U.S. Marine Corps Reserve, 200000250 (United States Navy-Marine Court of Criminal Appeals 27 June 2007), archived from the original on 16 September 2012.
  2. ^ UNITED STATES v. Joseph P. SCHWEITZER, Captain (O-3), U.S. Marine Corps, 200000755 (United States Navy-Marine Court of Criminal Appeals 10 May 2007), archived from the original on 16 September 2012.


Lent (talk) 21:07, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:1998_Cavalese_cable_car_crash&oldid=1241490608"