Talk:Air Canada Express Flight 8646

The reaction of important people about the crash

Canadian prime minister Mark Carney, Quebec PM François Legault and US President Donald Trump has already posted their reaction of the crash. Should they be posted in the article? Stmbus (talk) 17:36, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Mark Carney is the PM of Quebec, since he's the PM of Canada. François Legault is premier of Quebec, not PM. Canterbury Tail talk 20:23, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Injuries of the flight attendant

I am listening to CBC news that said that the legs of the flight attendant's who was ejected were broken and she will need surgery. Can anyone find a written source and add this? Ladybharmal (talk) 20:57, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

The flight attendant's name is (BLP violation removed) and her daughter said that she was found 100 meters from the plane still in her jump seat. Ladybharmal (talk) 20:58, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

I've added two sources for Tremblay's name from the National Post and the Guardian, with this edit. Both mention 100 meters and surgery, although I'm not sure where to include this yet, so hopefully someone assists with this. Limmidy (talk) 21:12, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

See WP:BLPNAME, it is sometimes better to omit names in favor of some level of privacy. ~~I don't feel at this point that the article would gain much from her name~~ (this could change if she later becomes more prevalent in the media). Alpacaaviator (talk) 23:26, 23 March 2026 (UTC) Editing: The flight attendant has now been widely named by RS; I would not be opposed to her name being included since it is a fairly notable injury/survival story. I will leave that decision to other editors.Alpacaaviator (talk) 03:50, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

I would be opposed to her name's inclusion as she's still a private individual. While it is miraculous she survived, we can document her survival without naming her. She very obviously hits WP:BLP1E, and she's only known for this one event. guninvalid (talk) 05:50, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm neutral on whether to include her name. But BLP1E is about whether someone should be the subject of a standalone article, not about whether they should be named within another article. the wub "?!" 11:37, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Response section is getting chunky

Responses are a bit long, and about the length of the accident section. It's probably worth trimming it down by maybe 30-50%. guninvalid (talk) 23:00, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Agreed, and in particular, the part about Michael Rousseau should be 3 sentences at most. That in itself may solve the problem. Carguychris (talk) 18:06, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

I tried to edit that section but got reverted: Special:Diff/1345960987/next. I still maintain that most of this content is not pertinent to an article about an aviation accident. Relevant content is "where, why, how and how to avoid in the future", human tragedies don't really belong to technical texts. I don't think that the boilerplate expressions of sorrow that politicians or other public figures utter every time something deadly happens, be it a mass shooting, a flood, a sinking of a ship, a trainwreck or a plane crash are suitable for more than at best a temporary padding on a budding article. They can be removed as impertinent as soon as sufficient technical content is known, in my opinion. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 10:23, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

I agree that it should be concise and they are often boilerplate statements, but it does importantly show the notability of an event when it merits a response from public officials. Alpacaaviator (talk) 16:35, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

@Alpacaaviator: You IMHO don't need knee-jerk responses by public figures to argue for notability of air traffic accidents. There's WP:AIRCRASH and WP:LASTING for that, the politician's stuff rather looks like WP:DOGBITESMAN and gives a vibe of actually being detriment to notability. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 17:43, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Statements by major public figures are commonly included in aircrash articles. I suggest seeking WP:AV consensus on the project Talk page before striking them completely. That said, I stand by my previous response that most of the content about Michael Rousseau is WP:UNDUE here, and removing this dross would roughly halve the section length and solve the problem. Carguychris (talk) 18:33, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

I have no objection to cutting down on his comments, I just wouldn't eliminate them completely. So far there seems to be consensus on that on this talk page. Alpacaaviator (talk) 18:54, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

I did this: Special:Diff/1346402008/1346421124 after I found that the Michael Rousseau content is actually found in his article. Furthermore, @Carguychris, about your notion of Statements by major public figures are commonly included in aircrash articles. - Let us check some articles. High profile ones:

-> None has such a section with reactions from politicians.

Let's do the same for some accidents and incidents that aren't this well-known:

-> Same conclusion, no such text.

There are some reactions to be found in e.g. Yeti Airlines Flight 691, TransAsia Airways Flight 235 and, from the military, the 1998 Cavalese cable car crash. One can safely say that expressions of sorrow are uncommon, and not recommended per Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Style guide/Layout (Accidents)#Page structure. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 19:16, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

These sorts of statements are more common in more recent aircrash articles. I don't personally have a strong opinion one way or the other. That said, I think that Michael Rousseau deserves a brief mention here because his resignation stems directly from his statement about the crash, so I added a drastically scaled-back version. I omitted the details of what everyone said and only discuss the consequences. Carguychris (talk) 19:49, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Looks good, thanks! Personally, I'm happy with that compromise about Rousseau, as I actually see the value in demonstrating these repercussions. I'd have kept such content myself, but the multiple references that were listed before before made it a pain to edit the source: I did not manage to streamline the section. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 20:46, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

I agree in that removing 10kb of text including major politician comments is not consistent with usual wikipedia practices. I am reinserting some as a possible compromise. Vanguard10 (talk) 21:13, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

The sentence US president Donald Trump called the crash "terrible" and referred to the aviation industry as "a dangerous business". is exactly what I meant with "boilerplate expressions of sorrow", it's totally meaningless and should be removed under a rationale derived from WP:SENSATIONAL. Same for Mayor Zohran Mamdani of New York City described the incident as "tragic." - unless we're speaking of Darwin Awards, show me an accident with dead people that isn't tragic, please. The last addition, The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the United Arab Emirates expressed condolences towards Canada and the United States, along with the victims' families. is IMHO non-pertinent for that accident here. It would rather be appropriate for some PR section in 2026 Iran war, as the intent for the UAE is obviously to cozy up with the US. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 22:33, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't think it's a good idea to remove things simply due to a personal political opinion. While the UAE may be cozying, there is no factual evidence, just a hunch. Thus that is not grounds for removal. Also including political responses is pretty normal for air crashes from the 2020s. Relton66 (talk) 22:46, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Injury count

The infobox currently states 40 injuries, while part of the article had stated 41 (39 on the aircraft plus two on the truck).

this article states injuries for both flight attendants, so we should have consensus on:

2 pilot deaths
2 ground injuries (truck)
2 crew injuries (flight attendants)

This source states 43 people were taken to the hospital, while other articles I believe have stated 41. I'm not sure if the ABC article would include the pilots being taken (if they were). The most conservative approach would probably be to take a lower agreed upon number and state "at least x injuries" unless we know we can trust the ABC source.

I would also prefer not to use the term "hospitalized," as in some definitions that means being admitted and staying in the hospital which was not the case for all of the victims. Alpacaaviator (talk) 15:32, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

I've updated the injury count to reflect 41 total based off of this NBC source. It clearly states 41 total injuries, while the previous sources were less certain: one said "around 40," and one discussed 43 taken to the hospital but did not specify if that included the deceased pilots. Alpacaaviator (talk) 19:37, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

The NTSB Preliminary report states 39 non-fatal injuries; the article has been updated to reflect this. Alpacaaviator (talk) 04:41, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

ARFF photo?

Someone definitely has a photo of the firetruck model involved. I think we should have one, even if it's not this particular truck. guninvalid (talk) 22:24, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

It was removed a few days ago for being placed in the wrong area. Relton66 (talk) 22:47, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

This seems like a decent picture to me, and it is the appropriate two-axle variant. Alpacaaviator (talk) 23:56, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Including the collision footage

There is official security footage of the collision from a most likely 45 to 90 degree angle view, it would be reasonable to add the video as it includes the exact aftermath. DayroXD (talk) 00:55, 24 June 2026 (UTC)