Talk:Scandinavian Airlines System Flight 751

	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 been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: invalid parameter Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the Aviation accident project.

Denmark Low‑importance

	Denmark portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Denmark 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.DenmarkWikipedia:WikiProject DenmarkTemplate:WikiProject DenmarkDenmark articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Norway

	Norway portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway 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.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Sweden Low‑importance

	Sweden portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles 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.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

File:Sas flight 751 crash.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Sas flight 751 crash.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 17 October 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:41, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NGC says it's an DC9 not MD81 as in the article

The National Geographic Channel programme "Air crash investigation" says that plane type is an DC9 !? and that it's easy to identify by the jet motors located behind the wings. Electron9 (talk) 05:09, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MD81 was developed from DC9 and also have the engine behind the wings and T-tail, just like the DC9. Boeing717 is an even later development of this type. In this particular accident it was a MD81. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.225.24.215 (talk) 19:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was the second generation of the DC-9, but MD-81 was it's OFFICIAL name. MattChatt18 (talk) 14:27, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redundancy

"This effectively destroyed the engines, until eventually, they failed completely" This sentence makes absolutely no sense. If the engines were destroyed they cannot subsequently fail. It is sufficient to say they were destroyed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.34.45 (talk) 17:14, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Inconstancy

In the accident summary it says there was 100 injuries but in the main text it says there was 25. Which is the correct number?Omega13a (talk) 05:35, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aircraft Name "Dana Viking" should be included - https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/mcdonnell-douglas-md-81-oy-kho-sas-scandinavian-airlines/34o09r

Another accident caused by devices installed to prevent pilot actions, that work AGAINST the better pilot judgment?

This accident parallels the two crashes of the Boeing 737MAX in the sense that engineers that are not pilots, decide to implement a certain system to "correct" pilot actions, while the pilot is left without control. The MCAS system kept battling the pilots, and in the SAS accident it was the device that PREVENTED the pilots to reduce the throttles, thus prolonging the compressor surging and causing engines to fail. In both cases, the devices details were not given to the crews, which had no idea what was happening. Therefore, I would suggest someone with more experience to add the two B737MAX crashes in the similar accidents chapter, as in all three cases, the aircraft designers participated in the accidents by designing and installing systems that work against the human pilots.

Thanks unsigned but the see also is for related articles and the MAX accidents have no connection. MilborneOne (talk) 20:56, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]