Talk:ValuJet Airlines

message: Missed used term.  Its not oxygen Bottle. for flight 592 Its Canister. A bottle represents a pressure vessle carrying compressed gas.  These devices look a bit like a Flash Bang or a Large Smoke bomb and use a chemical reaction to make the o2 not compressed o2
++++
I would prefer the term "Generator" to be used in the tech manuals and especially on the stickers affixed to the devices.  And then people can ask the next obvious question, Well, how does it generate oxygen?  Through a chemical reaction.  And does this chemical reaction produce heat, is it a chemical reaction that is a type of burning?  Yeah, it sure is.  It is a chemical reaction that's a type of burning and it most definitely does produce heat.  Like in excess of 500 degrees Fahrenheit!  Cool Nerd (talk) 16:06, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Flight 592 as [[system accident]]

message: And if the corporate culture had supported this confidence!  
Let's suppose a mechanic writes on the label of one of the oxygen generators in big black magic marker--"These burn at 500 degrees Fahrenheit!!"  
And he shows it to his boss.  The boss says, okay.  It's the noncommital okay.  It's the okay of zen acceptance.  And later on, the boss comes back and says to him, 'Now, it might be a good idea, and it certainly is the signature, salient fact about these cannisters, but can you tell me what the label said before you wrote over it?'  [And he might well use words like 'salient' and 'signature.'  People of all social classes like artful language.  It also serves to lighten the mood.]  And they might have a good discussion about the labels.  True, they are techno-speak, engineer-speak, and worse of all, corporate-speak.  But they might, just maybe, have some valuable information behind all the corporate bullshit.  The boss decides, 'I'll tell you what, you can get other people to write over the labels, you can get other people involved, provided, provided they read the label first.'
And it becomes participatory.  The labels are read, maybe laughingly, maybe only skimmingly, but at least they are read.  Real discussion happens.  And it adds two-way conversation to the corporate culture.
And the boss sends an email one level up.  'Hey, look what we're doing.  And I think it's a hec of a good idea.'  And the pattern repeats itself.  The pattern of 'okay,' the step back, and the zen acceptance.  The gentle coaching, and giving people the okay as long as they are moving in a generally positive direction.  We are allowing open fields for people to operate, we are allowing people's natural competence and natural concern about safety to come forth.  The cannisters do burn at five hundred degrees Fahrenheit.  And that should be stated in good clear English.
And of course we are light years from such a corporate culture.
Cool Nerd 03:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: If the mechanics had had the confidence to write on the oxygen generators . . . 

message: I think that the article on 597 should be merged here. I am going to do it. TastemyHouse 21:47, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Welcome to Wikipedia and documenting history.  Things change but that does not change the past or how things came to be.  Valujet became Airtran -- this is documented by SEC filings, quotes in CNN (and other respected media outlets), and even recent media reports.  Keep in mind that it hasn't even been 10 years since Valujet renamed and even if it had been, the foundation of the company will stay the same.  It's very apparent to everyone else editing this article that many people are motivated to try to remove the horrific history of AirTran -- nobody tries to remove the non-tragic history of Valujet/Airtran, only the portions that reflect poorly on Airtran.   Continental Airlines has history dating back over 70 years. Dbchip 22:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

text: The answer is ValuJet and AirTran are two different airlines, ValuJet Airlines was renamed AirTran Airlines and then merged into AirTran Airways. The reason the general public and the media thought ValuJet became AirTran was because the management was the ValuJet management. The ValuJet management now the AirTran management decided to get rid of its existing airline previously known as ValuJet and chose the airline it purchased as the surviving airline.Granthew (talk) 14:40, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Debate On Name Change

message: I would not consider the severe turbulence incident on flight 109 as "crew error". The NTSB synopsis clearly states that it was clear air turbulence and not detectable by the weather radar.
:Turbulence was perhaps a contributing factor, but the main factor was the oxygen generators in the forward cargo hold which caught fire.  (And the organizational failure was how live oxy generators got loaded onto the plane in the first place.)   Cool Nerd 22:14, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Incidents list: flight 109 not crew error?

message: Why doesn't Valujet have a destination list?? It's readily available information.... QualityControl3533 (talk) 16:53, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Because the airline doesn't exist anymore...? Griffinofwales (talk) 03:48, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Destination List???

message: Two reasons:  Each incident links to the relevant NTSB report, and this tag is for an article, not a section.  Comments/Suggestions?
(N419BH (talk) 13:00, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of citations tag from incidents and accidents section

message: Is it possible to make a separate article on Flight 597? I plan to use the NTSB report on that accident. Tigerdude9 (talk) 14:49, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flight 597 separate article 

message: The “safety problems” section claims Valujet had a dramatic accident rate, yet the accidents section only mentions three accidents. So, what gives? Which were these alleged 14 times more accidents than major carriers?Tvx1 23:54, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accident rate 

message: The redirect Valuejet has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Renerpho (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Valuejet]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]