ANG Pilot Sues Boeing Over F-15 Break-Up

[ORAC]

From the token amount he is claiming, it would seem more a matter of outrage and concern rather than money.

U.S. Pilot Sues Boeing Over F-15 Falling Apart (http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3442487&c=AME&s=AIR)

The pilot of the F-15C Eagle that broke apart in November, forcing an U.S. Air Force-wide grounding of F-15s, has sued the jet's builder.

Maj. Stephen Stilwell's lawsuit accuses Boeing Co. of endangering the lives of F-15 pilots and claims the company should have known the fighter wasn't built to specifications.

The lawsuit seeks more than $75,000 from Boeing. The 27-year-old jet was built by McDonnell Douglas, which became part of Boeing in 1997.

The "misconduct of Boeing constituted gross indifference" and a "conscious disregard for the safety of F-15 pilots," the lawsuit filed March 21 in St. Louis, Mo., federal district court claims.

The lawsuit says that Stilwell, a Missouri Air National Guard and commercial airline pilot, has not been cleared to return to flying military or civilian jets because of the injuries he suffered as the plane broke into pieces and he ejected. Calls to Boeing were not immediately returned.

After the Nov. 2 breakup, an Air Force investigation which included assistance from Boeing, determined that the fighter broke apart behind the cockpit because one of the support beams - called a longeron -that reinforces the fuselage snapped apart. The aluminum-alloy longeron failed because it was thinner than what specifications called for and its rough finish left the longeron susceptible to cracking.

The breakup occurred as Stilwell flew a 7.8G-turn, a standard training maneuver.

An inspection of all Air Force F-15s turned up 149 that also had thin or rough finished longerons and nine jets with cracked longerons.

Since the inspections, the Air Force has cleared most of its 420-plus F-15s to return to flight. However, Eagles with questionable longerons must be inspected more often.

[Flyingblind]

Worms.....Can.....and open.

Good luck to him of he's lost his ability to fly commercially and support him and his.

[minigundiplomat]

Seem to remember a similar case with a US car manufacturer a few years back. The company issued an MPV with a known fault to save money on launch. Said fault injured a family and they took manufacturer to court.
The court ruled that as money had motivated the company to launch the car too early, it should form the basis of the punishment and awarded huge (and I am talking hundreds of millions) in damages.

Interesting precedent if the context can be applied.

[S76Heavy]

So a bad batch of parts? But shouldn't it (also) have been picked up during maintenance by the AF/ANG?

What is the situation for reservists who get injured during their reserve duties and subsequently cannot return to their regular profession? Is there any decent insurance to cover it?

Just wishing the Major well on all fronts..

[dmanton300]

"So a bad batch of parts? But shouldn't it (also) have been picked up during maintenance by the AF/ANG? "

Probably not. We're unlikely to be talking about stuff visible during normal maintenance, and I wouldn't think (although I remain to be corrected of course!) that normal ANG/AF maintenance procedures would include crack detect, non-destructive or otherwise. I could show you pieces made from T1 rather than T6, which, assuming the T1 standard didn't distort horribly during assembly (bloody stuff, I don't miss working with it!), once installed would be basically impossible to tell apart, completely different hardness though they may be. That's an extreme example using alclad of widely differing hardnesses and suitability for job but the point is valid. I'd be interested in seeing the paperwork from Boeing (or McDD as it was) relating to inspection of these longerons, presumably they are traceable items. Be very informative to see how they slipped through the net. And so many too.

Interesting that the keel of Swiss and Finnish F/A-18C/D models are made from titanium rather than aluminium as all others are. Stresses those bugs for 9G rather than the 7.5G of normal legacy Hornets.

That post mostly from memory, I left Aerospace manufacturing six years ago and now arrest people for a living!

[saudipc-9]

Fair enough and good luck to him.

[US Herk]

Structural components aren't likely to be serviced by front-line units. If they were suspected of an issue, it may gain an increased inspection interval (C-130 wings come to mind).

If this longeron was installed during manufacture, there's no way to catch it. If it was installed as part of a life-cycle update at some point, it would have most likely been at depot-level maintenance and again, the front-line units would have no reason to inspect it.

If it was an inferior part manufactured by a sub-contractor, than the primary contractor (McDonnell-Douglas -> Boeing) is responsible for ensuring all sub-contracted parts meet spec.

If this part is indeed out of spec, and M-D/Boeing had oversight, I believe there is a liability that may be exploited here.

[brickhistory]

Reservists/Guardsmen pulling duty are covered medically.

If the accident happens while not on orders and doing something not related to Uncle Sam's military, they suck up the medical costs.

The longerons are not part of the normal inspections, hence the fleetwide grounding and surprise at finding other jets with the defective - too thin - parts.