Originally Posted by
KyleRB
Of course that’ll be the job of Boeing lawyers to mitigate and try to reduce liability but ultimately the main culprit will come down to MCAS, it’s design, certification, discreet implementation, lack of redundancy and ultimately its power to overcome pilot actions without crews being made fully aware of its capabilities.
CurtainTwitcher
Perhaps as the lawyers are debating and dissecting second by second details, they should do it with the continuous Stick Shaker loop in the background. It really is an asymmetric situation for the crews, if they don't do something (following the NNM for the stick shake and shove the nose down) and save the day at that point they get no credit, yet they don't do something else everyone wants to point to them and say see, pilot error. For the manufacturer it is a business decision to hang the crew if possible as it reduces their liability. They get to cherry pick the inevitable forced pilot errors in such difficult circumstances and gloss over the manufacturers errors and omissions.
Originally Posted by
CodyBlade
going to be judged not by your peers or professionals who can intepret the data objectively.But by mom and pop.
Not a lawyer. Presumably there are differing degrees/amounts of liability. More important are punitive damages, which can be many multiples of the actual damages claimed. All of these will be argued intensely, and the various role players will have differing inputs into this process, other than the dead pilots.