Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

MK Airlines settlement with victims crash Halifax

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

MK Airlines settlement with victims crash Halifax

Old 13th Aug 2007, 16:26
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Ostend, Belgium
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
MK Airlines settlement with victims crash Halifax

MK Airlines that employed the seven crew members killed during a plane crash near Halifax three years ago has reached a multimillion-dollar settlement with the victims' families.
http://www.standard-freeholder.com/w...catname=Canada
snarfel is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2007, 23:34
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Central London
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So who is to blame?
Halifax lawyer Raymond Wagner confirmed Tuesday that MK Airlines Ltd. agreed last fall to pay out $3.5 million to the 35 relatives of the crew although the matter of who is financially responsible for the crash is far from finished.
"They have other cross-claims, counterclaims, third-party claims" against the other defendants, Wagner said.
Also being sued are Worldwide Flight Services Inc., the Halifax International Airport Authority, Jeppessen Sanderson Inc., Nav Canada and Transport Canada.
"What MK is doing is paying out the funds, and then they're seeking contribution from the other defendants," Wagner said.
v
Phil Space is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2007, 23:57
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Great White North
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
MK Airlines settlement with victims crash Halifax

$3.5 M seems a very small sum for all the people who have had their life altered forever?

$3.5 M could be rationalised as a positive cost/benefit for risk analysis . . . if you are an airport operator, air traffic services provider, or air carrier?

I hope they are all more vulnerable to further liabilities . . . as they will continue their practises if this is all they will be penalised . . . not even the cost of a commercial aircraft?!
RESA is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2007, 01:10
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Aren't some aspects of this accident similar to the 8/2006 KLEX CRJ accident?

In one case the crew lined up on a too-short runway, with corresponding performance shortfall; in the other the crew used too low a thrust level for the existing TOGW etc. with corresponding performance shortfall. In both cases crew alertness on the task at hand was a major issue, albeit with some distractions.
barit1 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.