Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Continental Airlines Flight 1883

Why this article meets WP:AIRCRASH

 * (From my message to the closing admin)

I believe that with two sources this article would meet at least two of the notability criteria specified in WP:AIRCRASH:
 * 1. General criteria: It involves unusual circumstances: This occurrence, of an airliner landing on a taxiway is extremely rare, as attested in this Associated Press article: "Plane landing on Newark airport's taxiway a rare occurrence"


 * 2. Air carrier criteria: It is a non-injury incident which materially contributes to a change in industry or aircraft procedures: After the incident was investigated by the NTSB, two different types of changes were instituted at and around Newark Airport: a. The lighting differentials between the taxiways and runways were increased (to reduce possible confusion between them in future); and b. Two new arrival procedures were added, to be used instead of the one which caused the incident (GIMEE 19-7-1 and GRITY 19-7-1A). See the NTSB report for more details.

In summary, as one can see in the AP article, this was an unusual and rare event, which fortunately did not result in casualties, but one can imagine what would have happened had there been a vehicle and/or personnel, or even another aircraft, on the taxiway that evening as the Continental plane landed. The FAA used this event to modify its procedures, both on the ground by changing the lighting scheme to reduce confusion, and in the air to improve the navigation to the runway. Sometime events like these, which end up with no apparent harm, sound a warning bell and help prevent future disasters, as this one may, if we don't ignore it. Crum375 (talk) 01:51, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

How rare is a taxiway landing?
A clarification regarding the "rareness" of the taxiway landing event. I think this varies by general region. In the Newark/northeast U.S. region, we are told: "Russ Halleran, president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association union at the Newark airport, said he could not remember a jet landing on a taxiway in his 18 years as an air traffic controller." OTOH, in the Seattle/northwest U.S. area, the same reporter tells us: "It is rare for a jet to set down on a taxiway, however. Sea-Tac, for instance, had three such landings over a recent four-year span. Officials there issued special warnings to pilots and painted a 25-by-25-foot "X" near the end of a taxiway." By the way, it is unclear from the source if the Sea-Tac landings were by airliner, or by a smaller business jet (but see the Sea-Tac section below).

In any case, this specific incident occurred in the northeastern U.S., where such events are reportedly rare (none remembered in 18 years), so this should be the rareness yardstick for this case. If the incident were not notable or significant, the NTSB wouldn't be involved or investigate it fully as they did here (they let the FAA investigate non-notable cases), and there wouldn't be procedural changes, both on the ground and in the air, as a direct result of this incident, as the NTSB report tells us. Crum375 (talk) 05:45, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Sea-Tac incidents
I found an article which discusses possibly the same Sea-Tac incidents. Sea-Tac appears to be a special case, as it has a broad taxiway at the outer edge of the field which can lead to confusion. Some of the reported incidents mentioned were by smaller non-airliners, or non-jets. Some were cases where the pilot almost landed on the taxiway, but corrected at the last moment and landed on the runway. I can only see one case in that article, even in Sea-Tac, of an apparent jetliner landing on the taxiway, and that is not an inner taxiway, located adjacent to the ramp and buildings, as was the case in Newark (and the Sea-Tac landing was apparently in daylight &mdash; see Nighttime section below). In any case, this shows that such events of jet airliners landing on taxiways, as stated by safety experts and professionals, though not unheard of, are extremely rare. Crum375 (talk) 12:35, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Nighttime aspect
While discussing the Sea-Tac incidents, aviation safety expert John Nance states that night time taxiway landings would be unlikely, because the differential lighting makes it much harder to confuse taxiway for runway at night. The Continental 1183 incident at Newark, while not technically at night by FAA standards (60 minutes after sunset), was effectively at night since it was under dark conditions (30 minutes after sunset and broken cloud layer). This would make the Newark incident, with the subsequent runway/taxiway lighting and arrival changes, even more unique.

The safety implications of nighttime taxiway landing are also far more serious than daylight, since obstructions on the taxiway, such as vehicles, personnel and aircraft, would be less likely to be spotted at night, greatly enhancing the chances for disaster. Crum375 (talk) 13:56, 2 July 2009 (UTC)