Talk:Mohawk Airlines Flight 40

Pennsylvania Low‑importance

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania 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.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania 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 been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the Aviation accident project.

Disaster management Low‑importance

	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.

A fact from Mohawk Airlines Flight 40 appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 13 September 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that in 1967 Mohawk Airlines Flight 40 crashed after a fire was sparked by a non-return valve being installed backwards?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/September.

Wikipedia

Installed Backwards?

Reading what the FAA Airworthiness Directive has to say I think the valve was defective in design was not installed backwards?

And the replacement valve has to be insulated and the piping replaced with higher melting point Stainless Steel.

Mkouklis 09:36, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just got through doing some wikification to the article and making sure the links work but now that I've read the whole NTSB report I'm inclined to agree with Mkouklis. I couldn't see anything explicitly stating the part was in backwards, only that it was defective, its flaps were warped, etc. It appears that the only thing 'backwards' or 'reverse' was the airflow due to the defective part, not the part itself. Welcome any proof to the contrary because otherwise, while it's a worthwhile article, the investigation section wording would have to be modified and it negates the reason it was nominated for DYK... Cheers, Ian Rose 10:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The entry at Mohawk Airlines said it was installed backwards. - Blood red sandman 16:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So I see. Was that your only source for the wording in this article? Maybe the guys who wrote the Mohawk Airlines article misinterpreted their sources and it started there. I checked that mechanic's memoir and he didn't say anything about the part being installed backwards either. As ever in the wonderful world of Wikipedia, I'm not so much concerned with truth as verifiability and at this stage I can't see anything to verify it. I'll see what I can find from the Mohawk Airlines editors and if no joy there we'd better change both articles to something more in line with the NTSB report's wording. Cheers, Ian Rose 05:57, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I'm going to go ahead and remove the information about faulty instalation from the articles for now, before it does any more damage. If a source turns up it can allways be replaced. Changing the wording from "installed backwards" to "failed" shouldn't be a problem since even if it was installed backwards, it still failed. Therefore, while slightly more vague, at least it isn't downright misleading. - Blood red sandman 06:14, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mohawk Airlines Flight 40. 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) 21:31, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Names of the Victims added (February 2020)

I examined all 34 death certificates of the victims and added their names here. Each is listed with their year of birth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.115.215.48 (talk) 12:22, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]