Talk:1999 Martha's Vineyard plane crash

Start

I just started this page. I can provide citations (references) for everything, but need a day or two to get them together. Polihale (talk) 03:01, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved without prejudice to the comma issue, which was not properly discussed. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 03:29, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

---

John F. Kennedy, Jr. Piper Saratoga crash → John F. Kennedy, Jr. plane crash — This was moved from John F. Kennedy, Jr. airplane crash to John F. Kennedy, Jr. plane crash to John F. Kennedy, Jr. Piper Saratoga crash a few months ago without discussion - I don't see how it's necessary to name the type of aircraft in the title, and it makes it incomprehensible to people who haven't heard of a Piper Saratoga (which I imagine is most people). 109.154.65.127 (talk) 20:14, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

• Support. Existing title is far too precise. Andrewa (talk) 20:41, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. Existing title is far too precise. --Born2cycle (talk) 21:23, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
• Support. The only reason I could possibly see the current title being proper would be if he was involved in multiple plane crashes with different types of planes in the same year. I also agree that using Piper Saratoga is confusing. I personally though that was the name of another person.--76.66.180.54 (talk) 23:56, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

• Comment. Either way, shouldn't there be a comma after "Jr."? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deb (talk • contribs)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Who are the other Pilots?

This section is confusing.-Other pilots flying similar routes on the night of the accident reported no visual horizon while flying over the water because of haze. At least one pilot interviewed by the NTSB in the subsequent crash investigation canceled Kennedy's flight to Martha's Vineyard that night: "Based only on the current weather conditions at CDW, the fact that I could not get my friends to come with me, and the fact that I would not have to spend money on a hotel room in Martha's Vineyard, I made the decision to fly my airplane to Martha's Vineyard on Saturday".[1] The conditions near the crash site were "Clear skies at or below 12,000 feet; visibility 10 miles.

It is confusing because WHO is the person in this sentence?-At least one pilot interviewed by the NTSB. Who is the Pilot,what is his/her name?

Then there is this-At least one pilot interviewed by the NTSB in the subsequent crash investigation canceled Kennedy's flight to Martha's Vineyard that night. So this unnamed Pilot canceled John F Kennedy Jr's flight? How can a Pilot cancel another Pilot's flight? I have never heard of a Pilot in a different aircraft being able to cancel another Pilot's flight.

Also the quote- "Based only on the current weather conditions at CDW, the fact that I could not get my friends to come with me, and the fact that I would not have to spend money on a hotel room in Martha's Vineyard, I made the decision to fly my airplane to Martha's Vineyard on Saturday" Who said this? The unnamed Pilot, John F Kennedy Jr,or did the unnamed pilot hear John F Kennedy Jr say this? If there are sources for this,wouldn't there be a name in the source? So instead of the article stating At Least one Pilot, It would have the Pilots name listed instead?--BeckiGreen (talk) 20:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

The NTSB source doesn't have the name of the pilot interviewed. Reading the NTSB source, it's quite clear that the unnamed pilot rescheduled his own flight, not anyone else's. The bit referenced here in at the bottom of p.12 and top of p.13 (and yes, I know this comment is from 2012, but it was just recently referenced in an edit summary, so here I am). NekoKatsun (nyaa) 14:24, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Transfer 'Talk' items from JFK Jr. page?

The 'Talk' page for John F. Kennedy Jr. contains many substantial items which would more naturally belong here. 86.180.157.118 (talk) 21:13, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

confused by remark about lack of flight plan

I find "Under the conditions of his flight, Kennedy was not required to file a flight plan, and although he did not, no one knew his exact route or expected time of his arrival."

I hesitate to change this myself (because of the celebrity that JFK Jr. was, although I do not see protection being applied to this wikipedia article), but I am confused by the remark. It would be BECAUSE he filed no flight plan that nobody knew the exact route or expected arrival time, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 17:21, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Agree - it's poorly worded. Suggest:

"Under the conditions of his flight, Kennedy was not required to file a flight plan. Because no flight plan was filed, no one knew his exact route or expected time of his arrival." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.9.151.254 (talk) 02:33, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

foot injury -- when did the limp develop?

I find "Kennedy had a noticeable limp by the time of the crash." It seems his condition was getting worse, not better, judging by this remark. Perhaps he STILL had a noticeable limp at the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 17:25, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

and for the public good

Yes, I see that (in other words) use of US Navy raised some eyebrows. At the time, I heard it was on orders from President Clinton, so one or more TV commentators then made the most of this use of government resources by pointing out the public good that would be accomplished. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 16:58, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Immediately called "accident"

I wonder if really nobody else in the world but me reacted when CNN and other media immediately began to call this an "accident", long before anything at all was known about the reasons for the crash? I found that (news reporting) very strange and disturbing, and with the permanent dead silence about it, I still do. SergeWoodzing (talk) 03:11, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Sometimes when there is dead silence about a theory, it's because it's not plausible. Plane crashes happen to inexperienced pilots far more frequently than assassinations happen to the sons of ex-presidents. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.46.140 (talk) 14:12, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

You comment does not in any way address what I brought up here. Theory? What theory? I brought up an indisputable fact about the news reporting, but mentioned no theory of any kind. SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:41, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

The news reported that it was an accident why would they say anything different? Not sure what the silence bit is about, the ntsb report concluded it was an accident and everybody moved on. MilborneOne (talk) 16:01, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Why comment at all (on something else) if you guys aren't even going to read what I brought up? Quote myself above (plus enlightening bold): "I wonder if really nobody else in the world but me reacted when CNN and other media immediately began to call this an "accident", long before anything at all was known about the reasons for the crash?"

As if Marilyn Monroe's death had been called "suicide" before anyone even had her body looked at. As if the Lindberg baby was deemed "murdered" before anybody even began looking for him.

What was scary was (and still is) that the loss of Kennedy and his plane universally and without exeption was called an "accident" way way way too soon.

Comment on that timing problem with this case, if you please at all, but please don't cloud the issue with other stuff! SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:13, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry I dont understand why you would be confused, news media reports aircraft crashes in accident why would you think that it was anything else? MilborneOne (talk) 12:09, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Since you keep replying to what I never wrote, how's your English? The Lockerbie bombing disaster (and others) was called an "accident"?. No, not all plane crashes are accidents. This one was called an "accident" way way way too soon, even if it actually was one, given the political implications. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:21, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

PS Did you know that Kennedy's father and uncle were both murdered and that he recently had made announcements implying (albeit vaguely) that he was thinking of trying to pick up where they left off? So "accident" was hardly obvious at first. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:25, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

So CNN and all other media 'immediately called it an 'accident. Why they did that is a question only they can answer. I do think your comparison to the reports of 'suicide' and 'murder' are not equivalent. 'Accident' is a term that could be used generically. For example, 'There is an accident involving two cars on I40...' might be used to inform the public, before there are any facts proving it is actually an 'accidental cause,' and not a murder or suicide. As for all media immediately using the term 'accident,' who broke the story that the AP picked up? Should they have called it something else? Why did they use that term? There isn't a day that goes by that I don't ring my hands at the media for their incorrect use of terminology and the impact that has on society's understanding of truth. Was their immediate use of that word intentionally misleading? The world may never know. It would be interesting to see if they usually report plane crashes with this term. Musicmadn3ss (talk) 16:20, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Why was there a military burial at sea?

Neither JFK, Jr, his wife or her sister were veterans of the US armed forces, nor otherwise qualified for burial at sea from a US Navy warship. Why was this done, at considerable cost to US taxpayers? Decorated Naval veterans have difficulty getting burials at sea, and their families have to settle for a video of their cremated remains being dumped at sea by a sailor saddled with the task. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.221.254.164 (talk) 06:26, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

goofed in the remark I placed in the revision history

I meant to say today that I removed "final" (because the flight was then going to go from Martha's Vineyard to Hyannis Port), and added the remark that Lauren was to have gotten off at Martha's Vineyard.

Search and recovery operation

Information about the recovery of Kennedy's spouse and sister-in-law's bodies has been repeatedly deleted from this section. But the recovery of their bodies is mentioned in the Washington Post story referenced. If you have a reliable source stating that their bodies were not recovered, please supply it and mention that that is the case if you delete this again. Thank you. Ghostofnemo (talk) 07:09, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Restored body references that have gone missing, yet again !? One of the removals traces back to an IP in Canada —although that is not conclusive, what with Tor and bots. WurmWoode^T 04:14, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Article currently states coordinates as 41.29367N 70.97756W and cites the NTSB accident report. Both the precision and the accuracy of these coordinates seem a little wrong.

The NTSB report does not give a very precise crash location. It speaks of a series of abnormal flight maneuvers implying loss of pilot spatial orientation, beginning at "about 7 miles from the approaching shore". There is no indication given of the time, distance, or direction of these maneuvers. They could just as easily end where they began, or miles from that location.

This information does not support the current coordinates, which are 8-9 miles from the shoreline---especially given the coordinates' precision of five decimal positions, which has a resolution of well under one meter (see WP:OPCOORD).

I was unable to find more specific location information online, so I am

1. adjusting the coordinates to a location 7 miles from the nearest shoreline, and
2. reducing the precision to three decimal positions, giving a resolution of about 80 meters. Going by the suggested resolution of one-tenth of the object size, this implies a circle with a diameter of about 800 meters (0.8 km or 0.5 mi). While even this is probably too precise---given the amount of available information, a half-mile circle is too small---it seems preferable to the next step down (two decimal positions), which would give a circle ten times that diameter.

The new coordinates are: 41.301N 70.959W. Mandruss (talk) 08:26, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

UPDATE: After updating the deadlink ref for the NTSB report, I have revised the coords per the coordinates given in that report for the wreckage location. Those coordinates are: "about 41 degrees, 17 minutes, 37.2 seconds north latitude; 70 degrees, 58 minutes, 39.2 seconds west longitude." I dropped the decimal positions from the "seconds" values to reduce precision slightly; per WP:OPCOORD the difference is insignificant for our purposes. ―Mandruss ☎ 00:37, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

instruments qualification NOT legally required?

In the "sequence of events" section, I find this regarding need for flying by instruments, which we have already heard JFK was not yet qualified for:

>The crash occurred in conditions not legally requiring such qualification. Other pilots flying similar routes reported no visual horizon due to haze.

OK for the 2nd sentence I just quoted (in other words, couldn't determine where the sky ends and the water begins), but is there some difficulty in changing the LEGAL requirements to handle this situation in case it happens again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.20 (talk) 15:44, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't understand. Are you lobbying for a change to FAA regulations on a Wikipedia talk page?   Mandruss |talk  21:33, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I am NOT involved in lobbying, but why, given the reports about lack of a distinguishable horizon, do I see "not legally requiring such [fly by instruments] qualification"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.20 (talk) 15:19, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't know that a visual horizon is required to fly VFR. Even if it is required, I don't know that "Other pilots flying similar routes reported no visual horizon due to haze" was enough evidence that there was no visual horizon, to the extent that it made VFR illegal. You're assuming a lot about the regs, unless you're an experienced pilot. If you're an experienced pilot, and you know that the article is incorrect, go ahead and fix it. But no one should change it just because they feel VFR should have been illegal under those conditions.   Mandruss |talk  05:49, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

"Visual Meteorological Conditions prevailed". The requirement for Visual Flight Rules in the airspaces flown means there must be greater than 3 miles visibility at night, and the pilot must remain 500 feet below clouds, 1000 feet above clouds, or 2000 feet horizontal to clouds. Since Martha's Vineyard reported 6-11 mile visibility with sky clear (no clouds), "Visual Meteorological Conditions prevailed" and the pilot is REQUIRED to approach and fly visually. Even if the pilot has an instrument qualification, and while on an instrument flight plan, the pilot may use instruments to assist him but must approach and land at MVY visually. As a side note, the ATC tower manager at MVY confirmed "stars were out and planes were reporting visual contact within 12 miles of the airfield". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.22.1.19 (talk) 17:54, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Not just Kennedy in this paragraph!

Having split the remarks about JFK Jr.'s last will into a separate paragraph, I now have this paragraph included in "sequence of events" section:

>In the evening of July 21, autopsies at the county medical examiner's office revealed that Kennedy had died upon impact. At the same time, the Kennedys announced their plans for memorial services.[8] In the late hours of July 21, Kennedy's body was taken from Hyannis to Duxbury, where he was cremated in the Mayflower Cemetery crematorium. On the morning of July 22, Kennedy's ashes were scattered from the Navy destroyer USS Briscoe off the coast of Martha's Vineyard. A group of about 15 relatives carried the "cremated remains" of Kennedy onto the USS Briscoe. The Briscoe spent about half an hour off the Vineyard's southwest coast. It was two or three miles away from the crash site.

In the part before "The Briscoe spent ...", I don't understand why the references are to Kennedy (presumably JFK Jr., although by marriage Carolyn Bessette was also a Kennedy) only. Why not all 3 crash victims? Recall that there was a contemporary remark that, if this incident turned out to be the tragedy we now know about, the Bessettes lost 2 daughters, thus this incident wasn't just a Kennedy tragedy. <--- unsigned, source unknown --->

See "Search and recovery operation", above.   Mandruss |talk  21:40, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I think there is a similar writeup in the JFK Jr. wikipedia article, mentioning all 3 victims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.20 (talk) 15:18, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Disqualified or unqualified? A vocabulary issue

Ok, we've been back and forth on this twice in the last several weeks, so let's talk about vocabulary. The phrase in question, as it currently stands:

Kennedy was disqualified to fly his plane by "instruments only"

disqualify

• to deprive of the required qualities, properties, or conditions : make unfit

unqualified

• not having the skills, knowledge, or experience needed to do a particular job or activity

Unqualified means not qualified, which is precisely what he was with respect to instrument flying. There was nothing that permanently barred him from instrument flying, he simply had not gotten the training required for an instrument rating. He had not received the rating and then had it revoked.

I am changing the word back to unqualified. Please get consensus here before using disqualified. Thanks.   Mandruss |talk  05:26, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Now using "not qualified", maybe that will fly better than "unqualified". "Disqualified" is clearly wrong, per above. ―Mandruss ☎ 16:56, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Comma before Jr.

In the main article about JFK Jr., I have removed the comma before the Jr. in all occurrences of his name, including the article title. Now I'm doing the same here, for consistency. See the main article's talk for the rationale.   Mandruss |talk  03:51, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Bodies of wife and sister-in-law also recovered

Info about the bodies of Kennedy's wife and sister-in-law also being recovered has be deleted repeatedly from the "Search and recovery operations" section, despite this being clearly stated in the supporting reference: "The bodies of John F. Kennedy Jr., his wife and his sister-in-law were recovered from the ocean floor by Navy divers and taken by motorcade to the county medical examiner's office. Autopsies reveal that the crash victims died upon impact." Why is this being deleted? Is there some doubt that their bodies were recovered? If so, can you provide a reliable source saying this? Ghostofnemo (talk) 01:50, 10 September 2014 (UTC) Here's the diff of the last deletion: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_F._Kennedy_Jr._plane_crash&diff=618862600&oldid=618708450 Ghostofnemo (talk) 01:56, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

That's some serious vandalism. I'll try to repair it. Thank you for spotting this. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 02:08, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

spatial disorientation not just in airplanes

I am writing a paragraph which I also put into the talk page for spatial disorientation.

Have you ever been to a haunted attraction which includes you walking on a short catwalk inside a display which is rotating (around an axis which is parallel to the direction you are walking in? You know the catwalk doesn't move (in lieu of you reading instruments in an airplane or flight simulator), yet your body tells you that you are rotating! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.102.56.94 (talk) 00:15, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Please explain the relevance of this comment to the improvement of the John F. Kennedy Jr. plane crash article. If none, please see WP:NOTFORUM. General Ization ^Talk 00:20, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Suspicions of murder

The only reference to all the suspicion and rumor that this was a staged "accident", and actually murder, has now been removed again due to a questionable (non-notable) source. If anyone can find a reliable source that refers to these problems, the article would look less censored. I vividly remember having CNN on when this happened and was struck by the fact that the event decisively was called an "accident" at once by all media, before any investigation at all had taken place. One of the weirdest media spins I ever saw. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:04, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

It was correctly removed for lack of a reliable (not "notable") source. The onus of finding such sources is on the editor who wants to add the content, and I suspect you are as capable of finding them as anyone else. I watched a good part of "Dark Legacy II"—enough to determine that it exhibits all the hallmarks of a conspiracy theory, claiming to prove that the evil Bush41 was involved in the JFK assassination and the evil Bush43 in that of JFK Jr. Show me a couple of reliable sources independent of the subject that take this seriously, and I'll support inclusion of a sentence about it. Otherwise it's properly "censored". ―Mandruss ☎ 18:30, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

My request was meant for anyone who may have seen a reliably sourced item on this or who may see one in the future. It was not intended as criticism of anyone, as a political statement, nor as a fundament for any personal discussion. I did not see the Dark Legacy broadcast but concede that it looks like a less-than-reliable source. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:17, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. ―Mandruss ☎ 23:23, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Lawsuits

Did not the Bessette's sue the Kennedy estate for wrongful death? I believe they settled for millions of dollars. The article should discuss this facet of the deaths. Source – See this video a the 39:47 time mark: [1]. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 07:27, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Accident victims names in infobox

We don't include crewmembers or passengers names in the infobox. If nobody objects I'll remove them in seven days time. - Samf4u (talk) 19:46, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Altimeter? Ignored it?

I always read in explanations of this crash that it was "spatial disorientation" - which I completely understand. And also that he was not certified for instrument landing/flying. But what I want to know is - and this never seems to get discussed - did that plane have an altimeter in it? Surely it did. So, does "spatial disorientation" means that Kennedy must have seen the altimeter indicating that he was descending quickly to zero and ignored it? I mean, if I was in his situation, and I had seen the altimeter showing rapid descent and nearing the surface of the earth, I would have quickly gained altitude (gunned the engine and pulled up on the stick). I just don't get it - how this guy crashed the plane even though he was not qualfied for instrument flying. He must have not even looked at the altimeter. I'm not a pilot - have never even been in a cockpit - so maybe somebody who IS a pilot can address this for me. Thanks in advance.Betathetapi545 (talk) 15:58, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm not a pilot either, but you might find looking into Controlled flight into terrain interesting - the article (and its sources) go into more detail about how a pilot can inadvertently fly their craft into a hill/the ground/what-have-you. It's entirely possible. NekoKatsun (nyaa) 19:55, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Apparently, at those times, the pilot will often refuse to believe the readings, because they conflict with the perceived reality. Valetude (talk) 00:48, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Fatal(?) turn at Point Judith, and alternate route

I find "Shortly after passing Point Judith, Rhode Island, Kennedy's plane headed directly towards Martha's Vineyard. Instead of following the coastline of Rhode Island Sound and Buzzards Bay, ...".

That did indeed send JFK Jr. out over open water. In checking the map, it's a roundabout route to get via shoreline past Buzzards Bay to short hop across water to Martha's Vineyard; would it have been too far across open water to instead cross Buzzards Bay? Carlm0404 (talk) 09:05, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Title of article

why is the name of this article JFK Jr crash when Kobe’s crash had the name changed to remove his name 2600:1700:600:E7E0:519A:D2F5:39F:7621 (talk) 13:26, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 6 June 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved to 1999 Martha's Vineyard plane crash. (closed by non-admin page mover) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 19:18, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

---

John F. Kennedy Jr. plane crash → 1999 Martha's Vineyard Piper Saratoga crash – Similar to the 2001 Marsh Harbour Airport crash and 2020 Calabasas helicopter crash articles, I suggest renaming this one for consistency and out of respect for the other victims. I would also support 1999 Martha's Vineyard crash if the full title is too awkward. NekoKatsun (nyaa) 14:47, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Support moving it to 1999 Martha's Vineyard plane crash as an alternative. Killuminator (talk) 20:29, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support 1999 Martha's Vineyard crash, or, as an alternative, any other title in that vein Red Slash 22:37, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

  I think adding plane is the better version. One of the blue links mentioned in the proposal specifies a helicopter while the other one involves an airport so there's no doubt as to what crashed. Killuminator (talk) 09:22, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.