Talk:World Airways Flight 30

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Aviation: Accidents

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the Aviation accident project.

Fraud claim (supposed fatalities)

Supposed Fatalities? Source opinion blog "Ask the pilot" "In fairness to the blog, the way it is expressed infers that it is nothing more than a passing opinion (and the author even states that the probability was that the 2 people in question did die), and it is therefore incorrect to be using this content in this Wikipedia article.--NiceDoge (talk) 14:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)" WOW! The "Probability" Wow! The only fraud is the perpetuation of lies. May I suggest this blogger "Ask the pilot" switch careers; damage control, spin spin spin, you have the qualifications! Why is this crap allowed on here? <ref> Lisakjorg (talk) 09:08, 30 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.94.10.141 (talk) 06:55, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone find a reliable source for the claim that the two passengers who were initially thought to have died had actually left the scene, faking their own deaths? While not totally impossible, this sort of "crime of opportunity" seems to me to be an unusual and unexpected happening, justifying a request for proof. Please be careful not to cite a source which appears so similar to this article as to suggest that it might have been copied from Wikipedia. Richwales (talk) 05:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The claim of two missing/dead/defrauding passengers is in conflict between this page and its sources and the summary page listing commercial aircraft incidents per year. The article here suggests they were fatalities, the summary page lists them as having been discovered to be missing as part of a fraud. It appears the summary page is wrong and this page right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.57.180.60 (talk) 17:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The source of the claim that the 2 official fatalities didn't actually happen appears to be an opinion blog called "Ask the pilot". The blog doesn't offer any evidence to support this, other than "local lore", but doesn't refer to any interviews etc. of locals to support this claim. In fairness to the blog, the way it is expressed infers that it is nothing more than a passing opinion (and the author even states that the probability was that the 2 people in question did die), and it is therefore incorrect to be using this content in this Wikipedia article.--NiceDoge (talk) 14:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The main thing that lead to all fraud claims was the fact that it took several days for officials to realize that the two passengers were missing. The rumors of fraud began almost before the press conference ended. 70.88.213.74 (talk) 21:28, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Response to above User Talk: "The main thing that lead to all fraud claims was the fact that it took several days for officials to realize that the two passengers were missing." That is Very Interesting. Did you mean to write that it took Officials several days to acknowledge that what they had been told at the time of that incident was verfifiable and that they had neglecred to ensure that all passengers were accounted for? 24.94.10.141 (talk) 09:35, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

70.88.213.74 (talk) 21:28, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. It appears to be unsubstantianted, so I undid the previous edit. Particularly, I took issue with the statement, "Initial reports indicate that two passengers died.[5][6] However, no bodies were ever found and it is thought that the two passengers in question left the scene of the accident and were later found and arrested for defrauding World Airways." Firstly, this statement implied that the 2 "faked" deaths is a fact, when there appears to be no supporting evidence fpr this. Secondly, reading the contents of the cited reference for this statement says that it was conjecture, but probably the true version of events was that the 2 passengers had in fact died in the crash. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NiceDoge (talk • contribs) 03:32, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added a {{fact}} to the somewhat neutral-ish bit about the two missing people surving. I removed "very shallow waters". Very shallow to me means something like 10 cm. (For Americans, half a foot.) If you look at the images linked at the bottom, the landig gears didn't collapse and the water is deeper than the length of the landig gears. The belly of the plane is in the water. I guess that would be something like 2 m of water. (Or 7 feet) AFAIS that water is deep enough to drown and for bodies to be washed away. Exactly the thing that "very shallow waters" implies (to me) couldn't have happend.--ospalh (talk) 12:16, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It took less than 24 hours for the police to bring me photos of the (father and son) Metcalf. I was a flight attendant on #30 and they sat facing me. Yes the water was freezing but relatively calm. Those of us in the water made it out ok. I always thought it was odd they could not be found. I was contacted years later by a man investigating insurance fraud cases. He told me they were caught and had served time in prison. Lisakjorg (talk) 09:08, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following text was added to the lead and I post it here for the record. "This was never updated! I was a flight attendant on this flight. The 2 missing men were father & son, last name Metcalf. Years after the accident I got a phone call from an insurance investigator who was writing a book on insurance fraud. These 2 men were alive that night. They snuck away and with the help of a family member they hid away so the family would get a cash settlement. I had never heard this in all the years since! They were eventually caught and both served time in prison! I told the author my recollection of the event. These men sat directly in front of me, facing me. I was the one who identified their photos for police. I never heard from this author again and could not find any book about this. I tried to trace the Metcalf family and nearby prisons and got nowhere. I contacted the Boston Globe and they could not find any information. To set the record straight: no one died on flight 30. A tv show called What Happened did an episode about it. This accident gave me PTSD that took several years to conquer. Yes I still fly." Mdewman6 (talk) 20:16, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Investigation section

This article needs significant expansion including another section detailing the NTSB investigation, its findings, and the subsequent developments including lawsuits, to put it in line with other aircraft accident articles. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:45, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We might add for instance that the landing relatively far down the runway was due to a bungled approach, which necessitated some manoeuvring seconds before touchdown. Ironically, if the subsequent accident had not occurred, we might applaud the airmanship in the smooth way the DC10 (a difficult plane to handle on landing) was brought down, undergoing last-second course correction and touching down like a feather. As it is, it contributed to the overrun at the end of the strip. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:CDC3:613B:5CF6:84D0 (talk) 13:52, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bad link

The Wayback Machine link takes you to some spam site that put malware on my computer. Beware. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8001:2A00:7428:F93E:D5B5:267E:FC9A (talk) 22:25, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]