The accident was notable in that all but one person survived the initial impact, however 27 people died in the subsequent fire, after failing to open the emergency exit.

As noted in the NTSB accident report, downwind landings at Tweed New Haven Regional Airport were prohibited by an Allegheny Airlines company directive.

[2]: 6 According to the NTSB accident report, the aircraft struck three adjoining beach cottages at an altitude of approximately 29 feet m.s.l.

Investigators found this decision was likely made in case poor weather at the airport forced him to abandon a landing attempt and proceed directly to New Haven.

[2]: 23–24 When the flight departed from the gate, air traffic control (ATC) gave the aircraft permission to taxi to Runway 15.

The NTSB report noted, "Time would have been saved if Runway 3 could have been utilized as it is closer to the company gate and more nearly aligned with the routing to be flown after take-off."

"[2]: 23–24  Therefore, upon reaching Groton, where the weather was poor,[2]: 8–10  Eastridge elected not to divert to an alternate airport or proceed direct to New Haven, but circle overhead until conditions improved.

"Thinking ahead," the NTSB noted, "about fuel requirements and down-line scheduled operations, the captain attempted to get his airplane onto the ground.

The NTSB report stated, "He decided to descend to about 200 feet, calculating that sufficient visibility would be available to permit a safe landing.

[2]: 18–19 Several witnesses stated that, when they first arrived at the accident site, they heard voices of people inside the aircraft and that several violent explosions occurred shortly after impact.

The female surviving passenger also recalled seeing seven or eight persons up and moving about the cabin and hearing the sound of a male voice calling, "Try to get to the back.

"In their analysis of the accident, the NTSB stated that, "with the exception of the captain, who sustained fatal injuries on impact, everyone aboard this flight could have survived if rapid egress from the fire area had been possible or if flame propagation had been retarded.

The Board stated they believed "the possibility for a greater number of survivors would have existed had a second cabin attendant been aboard this flight.

"[2]: 37 The Board also noted the limitations of the aircraft's non-precision approach equipment, suggesting that a more precise instrument landing system could have reduced the likelihood of an accident.

In addition, the Board commented on the need to disassociate pilot compensation from flight punctuality, noting that such an arrangement could "derogate safety.