Re:
 

EU laws and MC 99 give a 24 months time frame for a legal action against the carrier. We found two witnesses which where on that flight. I am trying to find more passengers who were on that plane. I have collected all medical documentation. In January we want to present case to the court in France.

Re:
 

I was in seat with a belt on as usually when i take a flight. My upper part of body was slight to the right because right hand was on the armrest and it's to low for my height. As a plane hit a ground just with a right wheel that caused imbalance in a spine and a uneven pressure on discs as a results causing the injury. All discs are injured on the right back side in a same direction as a airplane wheel (if you compare a position of a body in seat 12 c and a right A320 wheel with a MRI of a injury they are in the same line)

I don't think anyone will fall for a claim of back injury in a landing that did not damage the a/c or require a heavy check. The g loadings for these are remarkably low, way way below what could be seen as culpable, let alone what is usually believed to injure people. My company had a heavy landing in a 320 that was witin .1 or .2 g of requiring a main landing gear change. No one was injured. The a/c was grounded for some considerable time while Airbus was consulted. istr they hadn't had one that hard before and weren't entirely sure what to do about it.
I think you're on very thin ice here.

Re:
 

How you explain that the angle of a damage on the discs-all 5(herniation) is on a same angle with a wheel (angle between 12c and right main gear) that hit a ground?

I can't and neither, I suspect, can you. How deep was the wingtip underground at this angle between seat 12c and the wheel?
What says spinal damage has to be in line with seat 12c and the wheel anyway?
Who says what angle you were sitting at?
You could get spinal damage anywhere in the plane with enough g, regardless of angles between seats and wheels.
And once again, an impact sufficient to damage spinal vertebrae is going to be associated with a major engineering problem. That there clearly was not one is a pretty convincing argument that this injury was not/could not have been caused by the landing you've referred to.
Why was no one else affected, even slightly?

The same problem here with claims of whiplash in car incidents at less than ten miles per hour.

As a plane in a first landing attempt hit a ground just with the right main gear a force that was transmitted trough the landing gear and plane frame is transmitted to the human body from the same direction. In a same moment the plane start to drift to the right side so you have also rotational force tending to twist a spine to the right putting a spine out of balance, disabling a core muscles from they role to stabilize the spine, all the the pressure stays on the spinal discs for a next seconds till a plane take off again. Discs bulge, herniate on a point of the biggest pressure if they can't withstand the force and that is the one from which the force is applied. For this is important the position and point of impact, distance from the seat to the gear, weight of the plane, speed, total time that plane stayed on a single gear, horizontal rotation of the plane.... From a flightaware data you can see that this was not quite a normal landing.

So with so much damage how did you get of the aircraft?

I'm assuming telekinesis, but it's just a pet theory.

I do love this repeated BS about the arm-rests being too low for his height, as if that was some kind of culpable negligence. Personally I think he suffered the back injury through falling off a step ladder while trying to reach the top shelf of the Insurance Scams section in the Flywheel Shyster and Flywheel Memorial Library (but again, that's pure speculation on my part)

PDR

Pain and damage from disc herniation don't function that way. You can blow your disc (in most cases you feel just a short sharp pain in a moment of herniation) and a real symptoms permanent pain, sciatica...appear gradually after in hours or days.

Good call PDR1.

Could you explain how you have worked that out ?

I have many tall friends, obese friends and even short and/or skinny friends but no one has ever moaned about the position of armrests and their contribution to discomfort.. All the more so no one has blamed them for contributing to an injury.

​​​​​​You don't need armrests to sit up straight during landings. Simply put feet at on the floor and press your back against the seat back; don't slouch. This alleged injury was not caused by the landing per se; if it was there would be other injuries and damage to the aircraft. The fact there are none means that this injury was probably an exacerbation of a known pre-existing issue and the OP is hoping to garner some money without good reason.

Most people on here have flown hundreds of times and have at one time or another experienced a hard landing. I have experienced two; one so hard the Lufthansa pilot stood at the cockpit door apologising as we walked off the plane. But no one suffered an injury as a result. This claim is without merit.

Disc herniation normally occurs during lifting an object when the spine is curved, in line vertical impact will not herniate a disc. this case lacks any merit.

k2neno, perhaps you're getting the message that no-one believes you.

k2neno, did you perhaps lift a very heavy suitcase off the baggage belt just after your "heavy" landing? I'm not going to be unkind and suggest that you are trying to con anyone, but it could well be that the injury was caused prior to or post that landing and that your only recall of anything unusual roughly in that period was the landing.

Was wondering the same thing. Or if there had been a prior injury even longer before that created an unstable situation prone to further injury. Without more info, it's impossible to know, and these are the kinds of questions a defense attorney (for the airline) would be asking. I think proving injury from such a landing would be a low probability event.