Thanks for copying that snippet! It's probably the most interesting paragraph in the whole article. I'm baffled why it was left to very end. This should be the lead!
The author typically ends their articles with "what changes came about because of this type of crash, or exist today that would have prevented it", after describing all the factors that played a role.
> Following the crash and the publication of the NTSB’s damning final report, substantive changes were finally made to prevent similar accidents from happening again in the future. The FAA launched an industry-wide campaign to root out the myth of “ice bridging,” and it became standard practice to activate the deicing boots immediately upon entering icing conditions. The FAA mandated that all EMB-120s and several other aircraft types be fitted with automatic ice detection systems; Comair increased its minimum speed in icing conditions to 170 knots; and the FAA required all manufacturers to provide clear minimum maneuvering speed information for flight in icing conditions. The FAA also established standardized communication channels between FAA experts and POIs stationed at airlines; created a new database to more carefully track airworthiness matters involving foreign manufacturers; and most importantly, launched major research initiatives designed to ensure that the requirements of FAR Part 25 Appendix C were realistic and covered all ice shapes that were likely to form in flight, including thin layers of sandpaper-type ice. These resulted in a series of revisions to FAR part 25 to reflect state-of-the-art knowledge of aircraft icing, which continued all the way through 2016, including via the addition of further testing criteria not originally identified by the NTSB. As a result, it is now known exactly how every aircraft currently in service will react to all the types of in-flight icing which are likely to occur, and limitations exist to ensure that controllability is not compromised.
