Talk:Accidents and incidents involving the JAS 39 Gripen

Bullets versus date headings

User:Akradecki suggested making each item a bullet point, instead of having date headers. Well, I think bullets look kind of awkward when there is more than one paragraph within them. So I'll stay with the date headings for the moment. But thanks for the tip.

LarRan 10:14, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Article name

We might ought to use another word in the title besides "List". The page is really more detailed than that, and pages with "list" in the title are AfD magnets. (Esp with our new friend COrvis nursing a grudge!). - BillCJ 01:52, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, what do you suggest? "Crashes involving the JAS 39 Gripen"? LarRan 12:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

"Accidents and incidents involving the JAS 39 Gripen"? Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 22:24, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Date headings

User:John removed the date headings, as they were (in his opinion) "unhelpful".

My opinion is the opposite: having the dates as level 4 headings separates one crash from another, which as only natural, since one crash isn't necessarily connected to another. Also it gives a structure to each crash: the course of events leading to it, and the explanation (if any).

With no date headings, it all becomes one massive "chunk" of text, which is not - in my view - encyclopedic.

Also, the headings become visible in the contents-box, making it possible to go straight to a specific crash. In other words: it is very helpful.

What do you think? Check the history versions.

LarRan 23:41, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I think you make valis points in this case. It does look like one big "blob" to me. However, I'm open to hearing John's solutions to the blob problem. - BillCJ 00:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Bullet points? I just thought it looked kind of clunky with the date headers; there is also the problem that U.S. and UK English users have different expectations of how dates are displayed, and so the dates will look "wrong" to half our users. Fairly minor issue though. --John 00:27, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

As I mentioned under "Bullets versus date headings" I don't think bullet points look very good when you have more than one paragraph within them. So since you don't mind, John, I'm putting the date headers back. I'm buying the rest of your changes. LarRan 13:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't say I didn't mind, as I explained there are problems with using date headers. You don't need to have more than one paragraph within them. --John 17:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

What about just month and year in the section label? Then mention the full date in the text. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:44, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

October 2006 incident

SHK has published its report on the incident (in Swedish). I'm currently reading it through in order to produce a summary in English. LarRan 14:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• Surely this report (and other similar ones) supports more than just "The investigation". Based on where the reference is placed, that's all someone could say for sure. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:55, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
  • I just thought that it felt natural that when one is reading the paragraph "The investigation ..." one asks oneself "what investigation?", that's why I moved it. But I see your point. And I think I also subconciously used the words "investigation" and "report" interchangeably, which is false. Feel free to move it back, or maybe have multiple uses of the same reference. I'll have a look at it myself. LarRan (talk) 19:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
    • Thanks, that's fine. I'd help with that, but can't read the reports. Looks like SHK runs the accident investigation. So that could be clarified by changing to "SHK's investigation ...". I'll do that... -Fnlayson (talk) 19:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Birdstrikes

I was thinking: are the birdstrikes really worth mentioning? Maybe we should cut them out, and only keep those that are "major" (I think the other two qualify). LarRan (talk) 19:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

It seems worth mentionning: on 21st August a plane crashed because of that (see aviation safety report), please include it in the page if you think this is worth mentionning it (I think so). begReq (talk) 10:23, 21 August 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.6.123.253 (talk)

Dead web-link?

Reference No. 1 points to News footage of the 1989 and 1993 crashes from Sverige television. This web-link appears to provide footage of current events, but no sign of anything to do with the JAS 39 Gripen. Ideally, the link can be amended to take the reader to footage about the JAS 39 Gripen. Dolphin51 (talk) 02:45, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I guess they must have "archived" it. It was there not long ago. LarRan (talk) 08:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

August 1993 wrong?

Reading http://royal.pingdom.com/2009/03/19/10-historical-software-bugs-with-extreme-consequences/ suggests that the incident had a software error as a cause, but unfortunately, the web page does not give any details. It would be worthwile checking on that, imho. 80.135.191.12 (talk) 12:27, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

My understanding of the 1989 and 1993 crashes is there there was NOT in fact a software error. There were two distinct problems, firstly the computer hardware was inadequate and had to abandon various tasks when it became overloaded, turning on a warning lamp to advise the pilot that he must abstain from aggressive manoeuvering until it sorts itself out. (Very unhelpful in a dogfight or close to the ground or another aircraft!) Secondly, there was velocity saturation in the servo jacks. It was a matter of woefully inadequate SYSTEM design, and the software itself was quite possibly correct. I worked in a company which made flight control systems at the time of the first crash, and in one which made various items on the Gripen at the time of the second crash, and the reaction of the engineering teams was one of shock and utter disgust when we heard what actually happened. Saab were a laughing stock in the flight control industry for some considerable time. (They were ridiculed for other problems too, including many on the 340 and 2000 twin turboprop airliners, on which I will never be persuaded to fly. Fortunately they are out of that business now.) The "software error" was basically a cover-up for gross incompetence, all the more so because it happened TWICE. I do know which company designed the FCS, and they became an object of ridicule too. They have been responsible for several other real horrors. But without documentary evidence I don't think that we can say very much about this on the main page. I can't read Swedish so even if any documents were available I would not be able to make sense of them, but maybe there is a proper report somewhere and someone can? Tiger99 (talk) 04:25, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Accidents and incidents involving the JAS 39 Gripen. 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/20070702075105/http://www.havkom.se:80/index-eng.html to http://www.havkom.se/index-eng.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140811130111/http://www.havkom.se/virtupload/reports/rm2002_02.pdf to http://www.havkom.se/virtupload/reports/rm2002_02.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100818081553/http://www.havkom.se/virtupload/news/rm2007_03.pdf to http://www.havkom.se/virtupload/news/rm2007_03.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090326100725/http://svt.se:80/svt/jsp/Crosslink.jsp?d=22620&a=810111 to http://svt.se/svt/jsp/Crosslink.jsp?d=22620&a=810111
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100817223747/http://www.havkom.se/virtupload/news/rm2008_01.pdf to http://www.havkom.se/virtupload/news/rm2008_01.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100817221654/http://www.havkom.se/virtupload/reports/RM2010_01.pdf to http://www.havkom.se/virtupload/reports/RM2010_01.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051102093016/http://www.gp.se:80/gp/jsp/Crosslink.jsp?d=119 to http://www.gp.se/gp/jsp/Crosslink.jsp?d=119&a=509963
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090809010622/http://www.nyteknik.se:80/nyheter/fordon_motor/flygplan/article614384.ece to http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/fordon_motor/flygplan/article614384.ece
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720130432/http://www.forsvarsmakten.se/sv/Aktuellt/Nyhetsarkiv/I-Sverige/Norrbottens-flygflottilj-F-21/16813/Haveri-med-JAS-39-Gripenflygplan/ to http://www.forsvarsmakten.se/sv/Aktuellt/Nyhetsarkiv/I-Sverige/Norrbottens-flygflottilj-F-21/16813/Haveri-med-JAS-39-Gripenflygplan/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110612080332/http://svt.se/2.56952/1.2023007/fragetecken_kring_skenande_jas-plan?lid=senasteNytt_1850951&lpos=rubrik_2023007 to http://svt.se/2.56952/1.2023007/fragetecken_kring_skenande_jas-plan?lid=senasteNytt_1850951&lpos=rubrik_2023007
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070702075105/http://www.havkom.se:80/index-eng.html to http://www.havkom.se/index-eng.html

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) 07:33, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Accidents and incidents involving the JAS 39 Gripen. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://bigstory.ap.org/article/072120cfa2ff40debad65de98752e361/hungary-pilot-stable-after-crash-landing-gripen-fighter-jet
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110612100447/http://www.havkom.se/virtupload/reports/rm2007_04.pdf to http://www.havkom.se/virtupload/reports/rm2007_04.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.havkom.se/index-eng.html

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

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) 00:51, 1 June 2017 (UTC)