Talk:Air ambulance

Merging
see Talk:Air medical services — Preceding unsigned comment added by SnowballGR (talk • contribs) 16:58, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Comment
Air Ambulance evacuations are actually logistically simpler than commercial stretcher evacuation with in-flight o2 and medical escort. Air Ambulances are pretty much restricted to the severely/critically ill who cannot travel by any other means. If you arrange an air ambulance without the involvement of your designated assistance company, the insurance company may have grounds to deny your claim later.

Cut POV section

 * and therefore travelers who may need the service need to purchase adequate travel insurance with a high enough medical evacuation benefit to pay for such emergency transport services, should the need arise. It is better to travel insured and have an assistance company negotiate on your behalf with the air ambulance provider than to deal with the air ambulance company directly as an (uninsured) individual.  The assistance company has the authority from the travel insurance company (pending verification of coverage) to pay the provider directly, and can usually negotiate a better rate than private individuals.  However, the assistance company is bound to follow the insurance policy guidelines exactly, which usually stipulate the transport must be medically necessary, and requires transporting the patient to the nearest adequate medical facility, which is not necessarily the patient's home hospital in many cases.  Some travel policies can be purchased as annual, renewing memberships and allowing insureds to choose destinations for air ambulance transports, but these are rare and more expensive than policies purchased to cover individual trips.

RainbowCrane 02:58, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Cut insurance info
This belongs on a page about travel insurance rather than a page about air ambulances.
 * The air ambulance coverage in many Travel Insurance policies is "reimbursable", meaning, if you can't afford $10,000.00 to as high as $100,000.00 to pay for the flight, you will not be on it. If you can afford it, you will be subject to dollar limits and could be stranded away from home. Emergency assistance membership associations exist which are not insurance, therefor they can not require claims payments, deductables or co pays. All services are pre-paid by being a member. Association members have all arrangements made for them. The first and largest such association is Medical Air Services Association. The pre-paid air ambulance industry was invented by Frank M. Halley in 1974.

RainbowCrane 03:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * That's not quite accurate RainbowCrane. It may be true for the U.S., but in Germany, the largest of the automobile associations, ADAC, has been operating such a program for considerably longer than that.  Indeed, ADAC operates a good number of German emergeny air ambulances (on scene calls) directly, and operates its' own aircraft specifically for the purpose of medical repatriation (at no cost) to their members from locations worldwide.  There are a number of photos of ADAC aircraft on the main page, including a HUGE Dornier under the heading of 'Heavy lift.' Emrgmgmtca (talk) 13:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Images
The following images have been removed from the article since they only served to clutter the article without adding anything new - we now show one helicopter (in flight), one plane (grounded) and one interior...everything that is necessary. These images do belong on WikiCommons though, with a link from this article to see Air Ambulances on Wikicommons, if somebody wants to take the time to move them. Sherurcij (Speaker for the Dead) 08:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC) thumb|200px|right|North West Air Ambulance, Wheelton, Lancashire Autumn 2006thumb|200px|right|A Beech KingAir of the Australian Royal Flying Doctor Service.thumb|200px|right|The London Air Ambulance is an MD-902 helicopter.thumb|200px|right|Spectrum Health in Grand Rapids, Michigan operates Aeromed, a Sikorsky AUH-76

Military applications
Only other applicable article is MEDEVAC but looks like its US only. Details on the 1936-39 operation can be found in The history of Anesthesia Contributions of the Legion Condor to the Wehrmacht's surgical care during WW2. (R.J. Defalque, A.J. Wright) Fluffy999 12:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The first military air amnulances were used during the First World War. I'm not sure why the 1936 service is especially historically notable? Random Passer-by (talk) 14:45, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Go ahead and delete it out if you like, its unjustified according to the cite, but I truly dont give a shit. Fluffy999 17:49, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

The reason the Spanish Civil War evacuations are important, though not stated in the article, is that this was the first example of long-range, high-altitude, evacuation (over the Pyranees) in unpressurized aircraft. Much was learned from the experiences of the Condor Legion in this regard, which guided much actual evacuation policy in WW2, from all nations. Medevac6 (talk) 14:51, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

This section states that: "This conclusion inspired the first experiments with the use of civilian paramedics in the world.[2]" Depending on how you want to define " Paramedics", this is certainly not true. The French began formally training Flight Nurses to provide in-flight care, including emergency care, in 1935. They later formed a group called the IPSA (Infirmieurs, Pilotes, et Secouristes de l'Air) to provide this service both in a civilian and military setting. I have not deleted this sentence, but I do think it should be modified to more clearly define exactly what it is claiming. Medevac6 (talk) 16:48, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

New image
Hi all. I have uploaded this image of Hartford Hospital's LifeStar air ambulance just prior to taking off from a limited access highway accident scene. I noticed that none of the other images demonstrate the helicopter's unique ability to drop in just about anyplace. Think it should be included? &mdash;Elipongo (Talk contribs) 02:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Well I guess that answers that question. Thank BillCJ! &mdash;Elipongo (Talk contribs) 16:03, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Incomplete
There should be a paragraph on safety issues. Air ambulance flights have poor crash statistics compared to regular, scheduled helicopter flights due to use of improvised landing and take-off sites, flights under poor meteorological conditions and the general great hurry, crew stress (flying after eye-witnessing moste terrible accidents), etc. 82.131.210.162 08:40, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Additional Information
The article does not tell me as a punter much about an air ambulance, it relies heavily on external links, or links to articles about specific air ambulance providers. I would like to see more information on the aircraft used, both fixed wing and rotary. There is also heavy bias in the text towards 2 countries, missing all the remote services such as those in Australia, etc.

I think there should also be some split between the emergency provision, rapid response units, and the planned mobile ICU type flights moving critical patients around the world with information on each. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.202.149.175 (talk) 17:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Air Ambulance Services
I'm still trying to grasp why exactly an air ambulance service in the united states does not belong under a headline, in the category of air ambulances, called "United States Air Ambulance Services". I'm not a pro at wiki editing. I've just started to get involved by helping out with air ambulance related articles (added more recent time-line updates, although there is a big gap between 1978 and 2005 that needs to be filled in; also added some info about the crash controversies and CAMTS). I posted a notable company name, and it's been removed twice thus far. I will fess up that my first post sounded a bit too much like an advertisement, so the second time around I left it solely with the name, and a link going to the wiki company stub, which has also been edited to remove bias (VIP Air Ambulance).

I honestly believe that this company deserves to be on that list just as much as any of the others. The company generally assists hospitals and insurance companies for organ transportation, medical emergencies, and other various time-sensitive global/long-distance issues.

Ringo380 (talk) 19:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


 * A key principle on WIkipedia is WP:NOT. One of its points is that Wikipedia is NOT a collection of indiscriminate lists, meaning we don't try to list everything that can be listed. Most lists are restricted to items which have articles on Wikipedia, as they have been established as Notable. An article's notability must be proven in the article itself by the contributors to the article. If the company is as important you believe it is, there ought to be plenty of third-party reliable sources avaible tht can attest to its notability.


 * My reason for removing the link now is that the article is up for deletion. If it passes, then its notability has been proven, and it's fine to link it here. I'd suggest you tke a look at Articles for deletion/VIP Air Ambulance, and weigh in onsaving it before it's too late. DOn't be too defensive there, but try to learn wht needs to be done to keep the article, and do what you can to improve it. Be willing to ask for and accept help in doing that, and you'll find most of the editors who have participated in the AFD will be willing to help out. - BillCJ (talk) 19:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Notable air ambulance services
Hello, a few days ago I cleaned up the Notable air ambulance services section by deleting services that didn't have an article yet. I left a comment at the head of the section explaining that listed services should have Wikipedia articles. I was almost immediately ignored and in fact accused of deleting listings without an explanation. The discussion above this one would seem to reflect that my opinion that only services that already have Wikipedia articles should be listed, or am I in fact alone in this? Thanks! &mdash;Elipongo (Talk contribs) 02:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, since there's been no discussion to give a good reason to Ignore all rules, I'm going to fall back on silence is consensus and apply the default consensus of the External links guideline and clean that section back up. If anyone objects, please address it here. Thanks! &mdash;Elipongo (Talk contribs) 22:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Concur. I thought I had responded (I had intended to), tho I have tried to clean the section up both before and after you posted here about it. This is one of those lists where many users "feel" that the services close to them in locality or nationality "belong" here simply becuase they exist. Hard to fight that kind of "thought" process, but it has to be done per WP:NOT "a collection of indiscriminate lists". - BillCJ (talk) 01:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Bill, from a cursory look at the program developed by the Quebec non-profit organization, they truly do have a long-established lineage and are an important element in aerial ambulance services in that part of the world. There are a number of other organizations that should also be mentioned including the Saskatchewan and Manitoba government air services which have major air ambulance operations. FWIW Bzuk (talk) 07:05, 2 March 2008 (UTC).
 * I would like to join in on the discussions with air ambulance. I would also like to post a link to our website. Is this possible without it being deleted? I believe we need to emphasize more on the companies who are out there trying to help families and patients, instead of trying to make money off of them.

Thank youAirambulancenetwork (talk) 16:55, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Assessment

 * 1) Equipment and interiors has no refs, but I'm not sure that the omission is significant. ==See also== might benefit from short descriptions.  Please also avoid including anything in that section if it's already linked in the article or in a navigation template at the end of the article.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:38, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Notability
This is not free advertising. Every listing here should explain, in at least a sentence, why they are notable. If your claim is extravagant, please support it with a legitimate reference. Any entry without this support will be removed in fourteen days from today. Emrgmgmtca (talk) 19:43, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * As previously stated, those links which have not demonstrated notability have been removed from the article. They have been placed here on the off chance that someone wishes to make a case for their return.

Bear in mind that each service will require a brief explanation for why it is notable, and suitable references, where appropriate.Emrgmgmtca (talk) 11:03, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Great North Air Ambulance (England)
 * St John Ambulance Australia
 * STARS (Canada)
 * SMURD (Romania)
 * Mayoral Executive Jet (Spain)
 * ARCH Air Medical Service (US)
 * Flight for Life (US)
 * Life Flight (US)
 * Stat Medevac (US)
 * Mercy Flights (US)
 * AirAmbulanceLatinAmerica.info (Latin America) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.93.154.67 (talk) 05:27, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't know why I missed this discussion when it was made, but I did. Anyway, as long as these servises have articles, they are notable by WP standards. If the articles don't assert notability per WP:N, then they are candidates for deletion. They should be added back in the appropriate places, but I haven't a clue where that it right now! I'll look later. - BilCat (talk) 12:43, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

CAMTS
Is there a reason for discussion about air ambulance safety in the USA to be split over two sections in different parts of the article? Could someone with knowledge of CAMTS tidy and condense it all a little, and if possible give a less US centric view? --Aaronsharpe (talk) 21:29, 22 September 2009 (UTC)