This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. 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 This article is supported by the Aviation accident project. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. New York (state): Western NY Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Western New York (assessed as Low-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. United States Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A happened before B or B happened before A??

Article says

In its final moments, the aircraft pitched up 31 degrees, then pitched down 25 degrees, then rolled left 46 degrees and snapped back to the right at 105 degrees.

but later says

Data extracted from the FDR revealed the aircraft went through severe pitch and roll oscillations shortly after the extension of flaps and landing gear, which was followed by the activation of the "stick shaker" stall system. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.113.99.191 (talk) 08:50, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks but you may get a better response if you are not so rude. Also you may like to explain what you think is wrong as both extracts are saying the same thing. MilborneOne (talk) 08:58, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Colgan Air Flight 3407. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090217201441/http://www.katu.com/news/local/39566412.html to http://www.katu.com/news/local/39566412.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/MapItDrawServlet?geo_id=16000US3615000&_bucket_id=50&tree_id=420&context=saff&_lang=en&_sse=on
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110711010731/http://flightwise.com/pu/info/newss.aspx?ni=320 to http://flightwise.com/pu/info/newss.aspx?ni=320

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) 12:40, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@OrbitalEnd48401:, MilborneOne, WilliamJE, Sjones23. 194.207.74.71

I hope this is not going to degenerate into an edit war. The NTSB did state that pilot fatigue was a factor. Indeed, it is mentioned on the second page of the NTSB report into the accident. IMvHO, it is appropriate to display pilot fatigue in the infobox as one of the major factors. The issue was also covered in the Aircrash Investigation programme covering the accident. Mjroots (talk) 06:04, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have not read the report! but if Mjroots things that it is approporiate then I dont have a problem with that. MilborneOne (talk) 10:42, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! No i dont want to start a war haha, i'm chilled, i always want to sort situations like these out ambiently. Like i say, i'd recommend reading the report as it does state that pilot fatique was also a specific cause to the accident. Like i said I dont want to argue or anything, im a big plane person and i always make sure i back my edits with evidence. OrbitalEnd48401 (talk) 16:52, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should, in fact, read the pertinent part of the report. See p.161. There was disagreement on the board about including fatigue as a cause, with the 2:1 majority voting (against the chair) to exclude it. The reasons are discussed at length. I do not believe WP editors should be changing the findings of the board, per wp:NOR. Reporting that there was disagreement (as has been done) is quite sufficient. LeadSongDog come howl! 23:01, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, I understand, I did read about the board disagreement, like I say it's why I wanted to discuss it with you all, as you all know this more then I do, but this is fun to discuss. If you feel like there is or isn't enough evidence to conclude whether pilot fatigue was a factor to the crash, like the previous editor said, it should remain on the summary unless someone disagrees. 195.195.244.197 (talk) 10:16, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Colgan Air Continental Connection DHC-8-400 N200WQ.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:09, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"The autopilot was in control until it automatically disconnected when the stall-warning stick shaker activated."

This question is answered by Mentour Pilot on YouTube in 'The CRASH that Changed US Aviation', but no mention of it here. The pilots had set the Ref Speeds switch due to icing concerns. This switch is used to positively bias stall threshold speeds because ice on wings can cause stalls at a lower angle of attack. BUT they used an approach speed that would be appropriate with this switch off, and which was much closer to the reprogrammed stall threshold at that stage of the flight. The investigation found that the aircraft was not ice effected and the stall was in fact not imminent when the stick shaker triggered - though the pilot's pitch up reaction was sufficient to bring the aircraft to a true stall. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.47.51.78 (talk) 02:16, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This feels very tedious, but to avoid the progression of an unnecessary edit war I will start a discussion on the talk page regarding the addition of the term "pilot error" in the summary of this accident. @Sjones23 has been protectively monitoring and reverting changes made to this page and feels that my specific addition needs a "new consensus." A majority aviation accidents on this site include one or more of the primary causes for the accident in its summary. These causes will usually align with the primary ones given by the aviation agency investigating the accident (NTSB, BEA, AAIB etc.) According to page 92 the NTSB official report on the accident, one of the main probable causes for the accident was "an improper pilot response to the stall warning, including failing to advance the power levers to maximum and inappropriately raising the flaps."[1] Along with this, several reliable sources such as NPR for example mentioned the fact that the pilots made errors before takeoff when inputting data in regards to the icing conditions. "the pilots of the ill-fated flight erred even before take-off from Newark International Airport, with the pilot entering data into an on-board computer that anticipated icing conditions and the co-pilot entering conflicting information."[2] I would like Sjones23 to provide their reasoning for why this umbrella term shouldn't belong in the summary parameter of the infobox please. ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ (talk) 17:36, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, there. We've actually had some discussion on that "pilot error" terminology in the past here. Also, the term does not appear in the NTSB report itself. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:51, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding, I will highlight the point that you made about the NTSB report not mentioning the term "pilot error". It is not relatively difficult to allude that the phrase "improper pilot response" stated in the NTSB report certainly means error. To back this, a PBS article from 2011 states that the NTSB concluded that "pilot error was to blame for this accident."[3] Even if you don't agree with my point, it would be still definitely be quite fruitful to have new discussion due to a potential consensus change due to WP:CCC. ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ (talk) 18:11, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a question about this issue to the Talk page of template:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Infobox_aircraft_occurrence#Accident_cause DonFB (talk) 23:51, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]