Talk:XL Airways Germany Flight 888T

Title and Headings

It is misleading to call it an "XL Airways" aircraft/flight rather than an Air New Zealand one. Air New Zealand is the aircraft owner and it had already been repainted in Air New Zealand colours following the termination of the XL lease (ref for colours - TVNZ news). It's next flight was to be a ferry flight to Auckland via Frankfurt, under Air NZ control.dramatic (talk) 10:03, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

The aircraft was being operated by XL Airways at the time of the accident. It was not an Air NZ flight, although Air NZ personnel were on board. Mjroots (talk) 16:02, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I have changed it back to XL Airways Germany, it was a german-registered aircraft being operated by XL Airways Germany at the time. It may have been due to return to ANZ within a few days but at the time of the accident it was legally a XL Airways Germany flight. I think we need to consider re-naming the article to agree with the facts. MilborneOne (talk) 16:07, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Article rename

Propose the article is renamed to 2008 XL Airways Germany accident to reflect that the aircraft was registered to and operated by XL Airways Germany at the time of the accident. Need to either come to a consensus or take to WP:MOVE for further input, Thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 16:22, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Support article rename. If article is moved then an adequate redirect will be created. Mjroots (talk) 19:44, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Oppose. Every news story I can find is referring to it as the Air New Zealand crash (granted, I am in New Zealand), therefore WP:COMMONNAME should apply. dramatic (talk) 01:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

The BBC correctly reports that it was an XL Airways flight. Mjroots (talk) 11:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I SUPPORT article rename. At the time of the accident the aircraft was being operated by XL Airways Germany. The signing over to Air NZ would not take place until after completion of a successful test flight.

Support renaming - registration and control of flight was definitely with XL(even though here in NZ it is being treated as an Air NZ plane)121.73.90.127 (talk) 07:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Proposal has been open for more than a week - Article has been renamed following above comments. MilborneOne (talk) 19:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

It's unfortunate for XL Airways that its name is attached to this flight. However, technically it was an XL Airways flight, even though the instructions to perform dangerous manoeuvres came from Air New Zealand staff, and the plane was painted in ANZ colours. The article title is still too long, and should be shortened.--Lester 01:22, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

To meet the guidelines on titles for accident articles it should be XL Airways Germany Flight 888T. MilborneOne (talk) 08:07, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Investigation files

English

• http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/perpignan/perpignan.php
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zlrjGwdP
• http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/perpignan/synopsis.en.pdf
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zlrrFRC9
• http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/perpignan/findings.en.pdf
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zlrsBdJo
• http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/perpignan/causes.en.pdf
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zlrt4vFm
• http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/perpignan/recommendations.en.pdf
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zlrtwn3k
• http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/perpignan/pressrelease24february2009.php
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zlrwFDHz
• http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/perpignan/pressrelease08january2009.php
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zlrx4bhh
• http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/perpignan/info29december2008.php
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zlrxvGN4
• http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/perpignan/pressrelease03december2008.php
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zlryoGdR
• http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/perpignan/pressrelease27november2008.php
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zlrzhbB1

French

• http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/perpignan/perpignan.php
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zlro4AqQ
• http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/perpignan/animation.d-axla.1024x768.xvid.avi
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zlrlIaeJ
• http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/perpignan/presse.php
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zlrpAqfC
• http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/perpignan/dossier.de.presse.16062010.pdf
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zlrq6erM
• http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/perpignan/com24fevrier2009.php
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zls218JB
• http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/perpignan/com08janvier2009.php
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zls2xbJw
• http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/perpignan/info29decembre2008.php
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zls74Q0u
• http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/perpignan/com03decembre2008.php
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zls8CmsB
• http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/perpignan/com03decembre2008.php
  • http://www.webcitation.org/5zls9OJF7

WhisperToMe (talk) 05:06, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Number of crew

Currently this page lists two crew and fives passengers. I think the AirNZ check capt should be counted as crew making it three crew four passengers.--Bgeller (talk) 01:52, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Although this is not a clear cut thing and rather unique. The flight was an XL airways flight the Air NZ and Airways NZ staff on board did not work for XL airways so were not crew. This being so it is my opinion that the split should be 2 staff rest passengers. Andrewgprout (talk) 02:03, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

The official report says two crew and five passengers. MilborneOne (talk) 11:21, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Date coincidence

Do we need the section linking this accident to Air New Zealand Flight 901? Even the source used for it includes the quote "It's just a terrible tragedy. I wouldn't want people to read into it in anyway whatsoever. It would be purely coincidental that it has turned out the way it has on the same day [as Erebus]. When people start reading into things, I don't think that is appropriate." I think we should heed these wise words, and remove the paragraph from the article. 86.5.176.168 (talk) 14:46, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I don't understand what you are trying to say. Read what into it? Andrewgprout (talk) 05:27, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on XL Airways Germany Flight 888T. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721063026/http://www.bea.aero/docspa/2008/d-la081127.en/pdf/d-la081127.en.pdf to http://www.bea.aero/docspa/2008/d-la081127.en/pdf/d-la081127.en.pdf

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) 17:42, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

XL Airways Germany or Air New Zealand?

So is XL Airways Germany on behalf of Air New Zealand correct to mention it in the operator panel in infobox aircraft occurence? Per the Aviation Safety Network reference. Username006 (talk) 03:33, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

No. Partly because the template instructions don't indicate that the operator stanza is dealt with in this way, but mostly because this is a complex situation that the current edit does not aid understanding of this situation, in reality it probably hinders such understanding. The ASN reference does not say this by the way. The flight was a requirement of the agreement between the airlines when returning an aircraft, as such I maintain that this flight was not being operated of behalf of Air New Zealand as Username006 maintains. I intend sometime in the future to revert this change unless there is further discussion here with a consensus that is different. Thanks Andrewgprout (talk) 03:50, 31 January 2022 (UTC)