Talk:Buffalo Airways

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Main Base[edit]

From the show Ice Pilots NWT, it looks as if their main base is Yellowknife, and not Hay River. Can anyone confirm or deny?Casual T .30-06 (talk) 23:17, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Crash?[edit]

I can't figure out if this BBC news report is related to Buffalo Airways or not. The first sentence after the subheading "dedicated individuals" refers to a "water-bombing Buffalo airplane". I posted it just in case. Manning (talk) 10:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was Conair Group I think, based on the Vancouver Sun and CBC. The Sun says it was a Convair CV-580 which looks nothing like the de Havilland Canada DHC-5 Buffalo aircraft but the Buffalo does look a bit like the Canadair CL-215. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 23:27, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the update. By the way, I found a bottle, I think it's blue. Manning (talk) 03:28, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Canso[edit]

The Consolidated Vultee(Canso)PBY-5A Waterbomber was sold to a collector in Season 3 episode 3 of Ice Pilots NWT. Would someone please update their fleet?[[1]] 24.84.200.123 (talk) 23:21, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually what the list of episodes says is "...a series of delays puts the sale of an old Canso waterbomber in jeopardy." but it does not say that the Canso was sold nor does it say that it was the operational one. I checked the source and it is still listed so it may have been one that was down in Red Deer. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 07:09, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Accident and incidents[edit]

This was removed as non-notable, but since it is highly promoted part of Buffalo history, given news coverage and an entire episode for the reality show based on Buffalo, it would seem to pass notability (though maybe not wikibureaucracy) -- 70.24.247.127 (talk) 07:01, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Almost all aircraft accidents in the north will get some sort of coverage in the news. In this case the accident is reported in slightly more detail because Buffalo has a TV show and by a stroke of luck the camera crew was on hand to film the landing. As per the advice given at Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Aircraft accidents and incidents the accident is not really notable. In November, Buffalo had a similar accident with a C46 that was also reported in the news but they must of not had the film crew on hand. As to a whole episode being on the one crash, well the whole show seems to revolve around the fact that the aircraft are in a perpetual state of almost having an accident of one sort or another. Thus having an accident, with no fatalities, while the cameras were rolling with makes for great TV but not for notability. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 14:04, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Buffalo has had other accidents on film, which the producers have not devoted an entire episode to cover (such as when they crashlanded a CL-215 in Turkey). The filming of the incident and devoting an entire episode to it makes it notable to the history of Buffalo. -- 70.24.247.127 (talk) 16:04, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also note, that this is in effect, a reality TV star. So in similar circumstances, would Halle Berry breaking a foot during filming bear mention in her bio, or if Snooki had a crash and an entire episode of Jersey Shore were devoted to it, would that bear mention in her article? I think that would be yes. While it might go in the television series section instead of the accidents section, it should still be in this article. -- 70.24.247.127 (talk) 00:24, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There's no entry for this incident at Aviation Safety Network, which makes the occurrence not notable.--Jetstreamer Talk 14:30, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Doesnt appear to be notable or unusual to be mentioned in either the airport or airline article. MilborneOne (talk) 14:37, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Jetstreamer, what about this? OhanaUnitedTalk page 19:01, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is now an edit dispute, because of a new accident being entered. This accident is in the ASN, and I think it is notable because of all the news coverage it got, and because an engine fire, loss of altitude and crash, even though no-one died and the aircraft is fixable, is one really shitty situation that deserves to be in this section. -General Staal (talk • contribs) 20:17, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it got news coverage but why? Was it genuinely newsworthy or just because it was Buffalo? If it had been Air Tindi would the news coverage have been the same? Other criteria that could be taken into account is how the Transport Canada Classes of occurrences view it. However, in this case there is no class given yet but I do see that all the reports are not calling for further action. Also what about 2013C1426, 2006C0041, 2009C0944, 2012C4842 and 2012C0905? I don't think any of them are listed at ASN but all say the damage was "substantial". However, all but 2006C0041 are listed as Class 5 which I would see as not making any except for the Class 3 notable. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 23:09, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@CambridgeBayWeather: Reviving this 2+ years' old of discussion up. I have removed some accidents that did not meet WP:AIRCRASH but there is two IPs that has been constantly reverting my removal. I have left a message but I didn't get any response. Could you take a look and see if something needs to be done? OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:42, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OhanaUnited. I agree with you and have also removed them. It's hard when the IPs change. The edit summary said to bring it here for discussion. Otherwise it looks like page protection request. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 04:22, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If an aircraft is substantially damaged, then it is fair to allow its inclusion in this article. Any major airline who's aircraft has suffered serious damage is an event worth noting. Likewise, any serious damage to an aircraft is considered a major event and its fair and to be in line with Wikipedia's rules to allow for it to be noted when the aircraft is damaged to the point of removal from service and major repair. The incident whereas the Electra landed with partial gear retracted resulted in extensive damage to the aircraft and it was only because the Electra airframes are in short supply did it get ferried to Red Deer and repaired.

Cambridgebay and OhanaUnited are purposely removing factual events that comply with Wikipedia's rules for inclusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.3.155.219 (talk) 05:33, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that these are incident worthy of including. The Wikipedia rules allow for listing accidents or incidents which involve substantial damage to the aircraft. The Electra incident was not insignificant and should be included. The C46 landing gear collapsing due to the hammer cause damage to the aircraft, but it might not be considered substantial. I would elect to include the Electra incident and exclude the C46 incident. There was also a Buffalo CL-215 on lease in Greece which dd a belly landing without gear extended causing major structural damage to the under-body; it was repaired and returned to service as well. This might be worthy of including as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Norsemanmick (talk • contribs) 20:29, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Because of Ice Pilots NWT there is a tendency for the airline to have better coverage than normal, which leads to more incidents being listed here. Some of these incidents might be better featured in the Ice Pilots article or List of Ice Pilots NWT episodes. Starting with the C-54A (C-GPSH). The nose was damaged and was "could not be salvaged, was repaired in July 2007 with the nose section from C-54 C-GXKN." So the nose was salvaged/repaired or was GPSH repaired using a different nose? If it was the latter then the incident is on the edge of being notable. Next the L188 FBAQ. That's the one featured in the show and discussed above. Not notable then or now. The C-46A C-GTXW (first incident as BFL509) was also featured in the show and still isn't notable. The last, C-46A C-GTXW as BFL525 should be included as per Buffalo C46 near Deline on Sep 25th 2015, engine oil leak, prop did not feather, intentional gear up landing and runway overskid and Engine oil, propeller speed factors in Buffalo Airways crash near Deline: preliminary report both of which say the aircraft is a write off. If you look above at the links to the CADORS reports there are multiple incidents where the damage is listed as "substantial" but still are not worthy of inclusion here. Pinging OhanaUnited. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 08:25, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I tided up the references. I removed one to http://avcanada.ca as it was a copyright violation from CBC and I can't find the CBC report. I also removed some to forum sites as they don't really hold up as reliable. One of the ASN links was to the user generated section and not reliable. The links to pictures were removed as they don't actually form a reference. I fixed the last incident to indicate the plane was written off. I hadn't intended to remove any incidents as we are currently discussing them. However, I removed

On 19 May 2004, a loaded Buffalo Airways C-46D (C-FAVO 44-78028 33424 C-46D-15-CU), was seriously damaged when the crew applied power to the engines while trying to get the tail wheel back onto the runway after slipping off during a turn while taxing for departure. The application of power caused a sideways load which resulted in buckling and serious damage to the fuselage between Empennage and Rear Cargo Door. There were no reported injuries and the Transportation Safety Board performed an investigation. (Investigation #A04W0102). Although the aircraft was substantially damaged, it was subsequently repaired and returned to active service using a section cut-off of a derelict airframe of Everts Air Cargo Express, Fairbanks, Alaska; 42-96578 - N4860V C46 30240.[4][5]

as I can't find the TSB report. The only report at CADORS for that time frame is the "CADORS report for Buffalo Airways (BFL326)". Transport Canada. which is a week later than the report. A complete list of all FAVO incidents at CADORS is here and the three TSB reports, none of which concern this aircraft. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 10:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think this incident is notable as the aircraft was structurally damaged and was taken out of service requiring major repairs from a donor aircraft. The Transportation Safety Board of Canada has this on record as #A04W0102. I contacted them today to confirm this to be true and it was correct. What kind of citation is required to prove this? Does it have to be an internet link or can the incident number be enough? This incident pre-dates the Ice Pilots series and meets the Wikipedia's requirements as the aircraft was substantially damaged. Cambridgebayweather, is there an appeal process I can go through to have this independently verified to be a factual event? I would like to edit the date and further details (the date is now clear, as it was out by 1 calendar week on original posting) and have this included. If you search for the pictures involved, the aircraft was indeed severely damaged. Is there a reason why these incidents which clearly cause damage to the aircraft are being hidden from public record on Wikipedia? The basis for "accidents & incidents" is just that. A record of both accidents and incidents. Generally when an airplane is damaged, it is a major event and one which warrants inclusion. Imagine if it was Air Canada and an aircraft was structurally damaged or crash landed. Would that be notable? It would seem the article about Buffalo Airways is being purposed protected from true events which are legitimate and comply with Wikipedia's rules. Cambridgebayweather and Ohanaunited. Are you both open to including these events? If not, can you please explain why you consider these not notable? I understand minor incidents should not be included, but damage to an aircraft to the point of removal from service is an event which is notable. Please help me understand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Norsemanmick (talk • contribs) 03:52, 9 February 2016 (UTC) Norsemanmick (talk) 04:34, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cambridgebay and OhanaUnited, please help me understand. Will you be ammenable to this being included?Norsemanmick (talk) 04:34, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I have limited Internet access (amazing how quick you get through 100gb) so couldn't reply. It's possible that the incident is notable but the current references are not much use given that the date is wrong. The CADORS reference is good and being able to see A04W0102 would be better. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 19:46, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cambridgebay and OhanaUnited,I have added this incident back and updated the text and links. Please contact me or post a response here on the talk forum to address any further issues with this incident. Please lets be civil, I only; want this article to represent facts. We need to be constructive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Norsemanmick (talk • contribs) 19:15, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Norsemanmick. Looks good. I fixed the link to the CADORS. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 12:27, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Section references[edit]

References

  1. ^ ""Hollywood" landing on Yellowknife runway for "Ice Pilots" airline". 6 March, 2012. An airline currently featured in a reality television program about northern bush pilots saw one its aircraft land at the Yellowknife airport Monday with its right landing gear jammed. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  2. ^ Air Classics Jun 2012 Vol. 48 Issue 6, p. 9. "For the Wreckord". ...a Lockheed Electra CF-BAQ that landed with retracted right main gear at Yellowknife, Canada{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  3. ^ Ice Pilots NWT, "Crash Landing", season 4 episode 6, airdate 12 December 2012
  4. ^ My visit to Yellowknife,NWT
  5. ^ Picture of the Curtiss C-46D Commando (CW-20B-2) aircraft

Arctic Air[edit]

Seems like this airline has been used as the real stand-ins for the fake airlines of Arctic Air... should be added to this article in some way. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 02:05, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well this company began in 1970, Ice Pilots NWT in 2009 and Arctic Air in 2012. So I think it is more a case of Arctic Air having copied the show that is based on the company. However, no matter what you would need a source for the comments. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:32, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They do talk about the show being filmed in the Buffalo Airways HQ so I have added it to the wiki. I have a source from the Director of Operations saying so much however he said it in a Youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qcUzMJ7_Wg&feature=youtu.be&t=1m49s — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.228.150.178 (talk) 06:27, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Economics basis need to be explained in the article, if such a thing exists at all.[edit]

There is one question neither the TV series, nor this article wish to explain. Why do these guys still fly Koran War left-over, piston powered aircraft? I mean less than 10 year old, pristine, ex-european Boeing 737-600 planes are now being dismantled in Arizona for as little as 1,5 million USD worth of salvagable equipment, on the rationale of them no longer being economical to fly in airliner duty with just 125 seats. For 2 million apiece, Buff Airways could get them overnight. The lack of necessity for the job of a flight engineer / inflight mechanic guy in glass-cockpit, two-crew B737 airplanes would save the airline a fortune every year, not to mention the lessened maintenance burden on the ground than comes with automation. Furthermore, jet fuel costs about 1/3rd of avgas per volume, making DC-3/4 planes very effective banknote burners. Is this vintage airline running on TV series advertisement revenue? The article does not tell. 82.131.241.183 (talk) 22:52, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Original research. I understood that Joe McBryan has a liking for the old piston aircraft (some are even older than the Korean War) and only bought the Electra because he would not have been able to get contracts from the Government of the NWT. As for the Boeing 737-600 they would be useless. According to the article the aircraft needs 5,741 ft (1,750 m) to take off. However, that is at maximum take of weight and it is unlikely they would be taking off full anywhere else than Yellowknife. However, according to this it needs 1,268 m (4,160 ft). There are 48 airports in the NWT but only 18 have runways that are long enough. But, there is another problem. I don't think that a gravelkit was made for any 737 other than the 200 series. That means the number of usable airports drops to 6, Yellowknife Airport, Norman Wells Airport, Fort Simpson Airport, Fort Smith Airport, Hay River/Merlyn Carter Airport and Inuvik (Mike Zubko) Airport. Also, it isn't so much that the article does not wish to explain why they use piston aircraft but that there is a lack of reliable sources to explain why. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 01:45, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

History of Buffalo Airways[edit]

There's so much more to the history of Buffalo Airways than is indicated here. As an example and article that states "legendary Arctic aviator Bob Gauchie...was "The founder of Buffalo Airways"" (article found at: http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/01/31/pilot-bob-gauchies-story-of-how-he-survived-nearly-two-months-in-brutally-cold-wilderness-before-his-rescue/ accessed February 2, 2014).

Also, according to Ed Festel at AeroPics.ca (Buffalo Airways) was "established Buffalo Airways in Hay River, NWT in May of 1970 when he (Joe McBryan) bought the operating license from Bob Gauchie" (article found at: http://aeropics.ca/articles/2012/03/buffalo-airways-history-and-current-operations/ accessed February 2, 2014).

There's obviously so much more to the history of Buffalo Airways than what's written here! Julie A. McNeice (talk) 19:13, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Buffalo Airways. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 09:53, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Buffalo Airways. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 07:08, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Buffalo_Airways&oldid=1206470117"