Talk:ValuJet Flight 592

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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.	Aviation Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated projects or task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Aviation accident task force

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

I moved a lot of the text from the Valujet article relating to the crash and merged it with the text already posted. WhisperToMe 01:36, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)

592 didn't really destroy ValuJet, just forced the transformation into the AirTran of today. Perhaps that text should be editied. 129.21.143.179 04:57, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Should it matter mentioning the false "empty" status of the canisters? I was taking a Hazardous Materials course right after the crash, and we discussed the crash (still in the news) at length as a rolling practical exercise. The canisters were supposed to be marked for cargo aircraft only. The canisters are also classified to be treated the same if they are empty or full. As you may know, some chemicals are more dangerous as vapor than liquid, so an "empty" container may contain the vapor making it more dangerous. Regardless, the empty/full status is irrelevant when handling oxygen generators. BenWilson 14:14, 2 October 2007 (UTC)