Talk:Hughes Airwest Flight 706

Fiscal aftermath
Did Uncle Sam pay the victims' families or did they sue the airline? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.210.162 (talk) 17:30, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Eurowhite or banana yellow
I just unlinked the image from the infobox, because it shows a yellow plane. According to the eurowhite and Hughes Airwest articels, Hughes Airwest changed to their yellow livery as a consequence of this collision. Presumably as a kind of warning colour. Airliners.net has an image of the accident aircraft in the old livery.--ospalh (talk) 13:20, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I've been dealing with an old arbcom ruling so have been away from the commons. Man I wish I'd of known that the livery changed after the crash, that banana livery was a pain in the arse. (Live and learn) I'll definitely get that fixed ASAP :) Anynobody(?) 02:48, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks.--ospalh (talk) 08:11, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Phantom image
It seems strange that the article is lacking a representative image of the Phantom II involved. file:F-4Bs VMFA-115 323 DaNang Jan1966.jpg has similar aircraft from VMFA-323 a few years earlier, I could cut one out if required. Alternatively, a representative F-4B of a similar type/date from another squadron? File:F-4B VMFA-314 1968.jpg ( Hohum  @ ) 15:37, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * The second, File:F-4B VMFA-314 1968.jpg, looks pretty good, I think. I'll see about adding it in ... once I figure out the best place for it. -- Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû (blah?) 16:33, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

BuNo 458
The article uses 'BuNo 458' to refer to the Phantom II fighter involved for three reasons: clarity, precedence, and consistency. Generally speaking, other articles that refer to specific aircraft in this manner use the "BuNo XX" format, where XX is a number. (See, for example, Flight 19 and Naval Air Station Banana River.) Additionally, the Aircraft Accident Report by the NTSB refers to the aircraft as BuNo 458. As the accident report is, for the most part, the most important of our sources (being the definitive and official document explaining the accident), we generally don't want to contradict that. Finally, by referring to the aircraft in question throughout the article as "BuNo 458" and not substituting any other naming convention, we maintain consistency within and without the article. (See also WP:MOSFOLLOW.) -- Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû (blah?) 23:29, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Hughes Airwest Flight 706. 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/20080422015034/http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aviation/instrument_flying_handbook/ to http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aviation/instrument_flying_handbook/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140615070203/http://www.museumofflight.org/pre-flight-primp to http://www.museumofflight.org/pre-flight-primp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070104165559/http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/ha706/photo.shtml to http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/ha706/photo.shtml

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:38, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hughes Airwest Flight 706. 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/20110711002626/http://ca.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac./FDCT/CCA/1973/19730319_0000016.CCA.htm/qx to http://ca.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac./FDCT/CCA/1973/19730319_0000016.CCA.htm/qx

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:05, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

VFR/IFR
In the 'flight histories' section it states 'VFR require pilots to "see and avoid"' which is true, but that requirement is also applicable to IFR aircraft. Later in the paragraph it is mentioned that see and avoid is applicable to all aircraft in VMC but it is unlikely to be obvious to a non-pilot that IFR aircraft are also required to participate in see and avoid when not in IMC. Right of way rules do not consider whether an aircraft is IFR or VFR, so each aircraft has equal responsibility for see and avoid in this scenario. However, the way the article currently reads implies that the F4 was responsible for maintaining separation. Bpt848 (talk) 19:38, 24 February 2020 (UTC)