Talk:Scandinavian Airlines System Flight 751

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)