Southwest KLGA gear collapse.
Originally Posted by aterpster
Many years ago, when NTSB reports did not contain such infections, they used to give the name and age of the operating crew members.
Last edited by Capn Bloggs; 13th Aug 2013 at 02:19. Reason: spelling.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: India
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't have a problem with witholding crew names. An accident could weel have been through no or little fault of their own. With the crazies, fruitcakes and sue-yer-@rse off mentality of the world, especially the yanks, these days, I think it is entirely reasonable that names are not released.
So noble, bravo!
The Asiana pilots of OZ214 must be wondering which planet they crashed onto in early July.
Last edited by Akali Dal; 13th Aug 2013 at 02:07.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
flarepilot, I find it interesting that in the US pilots are never sued and the claim always goes against the company. The UK has a similar principle under Vicarious Liability. However, there is one important bit whereby the courts may be convinced that the employee has gone on a 'frolic' rather than a 'detour' (the actual words used) and under such circumstances the employer is not liable.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capn Bloggs:
My point is that it was done for many years.
As to the lawyers they get the names within days after filing a lawsuit.
I don't have a problem with witholding crew names. An accident could well have been through no or little fault of their own. With the crazies, fruitcakes and sue-yer-@rse off mentality of the world, especially the yanks, these days, I think it is entirely reasonable that names are not released.
As to the lawyers they get the names within days after filing a lawsuit.
Capt Bloggs
Can you provide some comparisons regarding the number of lawsuits in the US as opposed to other modern, lawyered up nations on similar occurrences? Curious if you're simply repeating conventional wisdom minus any research.
Can you provide some comparisons regarding the number of lawsuits in the US as opposed to other modern, lawyered up nations on similar occurrences? Curious if you're simply repeating conventional wisdom minus any research.
"flarepilot, I find it interesting that in the US pilots are never sued and the claim always goes against the company"
Fundamental principle - you sue who has the ability to pay. Only sue the pilots if they carry professional indemnity insurance, which I assume none do. And by carrying insurance, you tend to attract claims...
Fundamental principle - you sue who has the ability to pay. Only sue the pilots if they carry professional indemnity insurance, which I assume none do. And by carrying insurance, you tend to attract claims...
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oakland, CA
Age: 72
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
West Coast - there aren't enough passenger aircraft crashes to get a larger picture but if you look at general aviation, it is highly litigious in the US, there is a whole history of lawsuit in the aviation, there were actions of Congress to curtail this activity which hurt many companies, you can read about the so called tort-reform, etc, etc. So there is not just a 'conventional wisdom' because it is fact with long history, many aviation magazines wrote about it giving stats, even providing such data how much the original aircraft price is inflated to have buffer against lawsuits. If you want examples how crazy it still gets with absolutely frivolous lawsuits look at latest attempts to sue Cirrus Aircraft - after the Cory Lidle crash and after another crash in Minnesota. These were highly publicized crashes with lawsuits dragging for long years but there are many other which don't get front headline news. Fortunately Cirrus won both lawsuits but it took actions by state Supreme Court, nevertheless it costs millions to defend yourself, like I said, against mostly frivolous lawsuits.
Last edited by olasek; 13th Aug 2013 at 20:19.
Asiana crashed because they were Korean. AF because they were French. Southwest because the pilot was a woman. NTSB is wrong because the director is a woman. BEA is wrong because it's French.
There is a problem here and the solution is moderation.
There is a problem here and the solution is moderation.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
james ozzie:
I can't speak to other countries, but in the U.S. the pilots are protected from civil litigation because they are agents acting for the principal.
"flarepilot, I find it interesting that in the US pilots are never sued and the claim always goes against the company"
Fundamental principle - you sue who has the ability to pay. Only sue the pilots if they carry professional indemnity insurance, which I assume none do. And by carrying insurance, you tend to attract claims...
Fundamental principle - you sue who has the ability to pay. Only sue the pilots if they carry professional indemnity insurance, which I assume none do. And by carrying insurance, you tend to attract claims...
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
flarepilot, I find it interesting that in the US pilots are never sued and the claim always goes against the company. The UK has a similar principle under Vicarious Liability. However, there is one important bit whereby the courts may be convinced that the employee has gone on a 'frolic' rather than a 'detour' (the actual words used) and under such circumstances the employer is not liable.
I can't speak to other countries, but in the U.S. the pilots are protected from civil litigation because they are agents acting for the principal.
http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/kfmb/...lot_letter.pdf
Perhaps this was an attempt to deflect possible future claims of vicarious liability by the pilots themselves i.e. it was due to NW's 'faulty' R/T training, we didn't have proper classes on the DL bid system, the A320 doesn't have an ACARS chime etc. The feds' letter squarely puts the blame on the pilots since they were, it claimed, 'on a frolic'.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: MNL ex CCR ex CLE
Age: 65
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"flarepilot, I find it interesting that in the US pilots are never sued and the claim always goes against the company"
In the U.S., at least....it all comes down to who has the 'deepest pockets'..usually, the corporation. Unfortunately, the U.S. civil legal system has simply become another 'lottery'....there's NO cost, usually to the litigant....and if they WIN.....BINGO!! An example of this happened in Texas when they overhauled the medical malpractice laws to a 'loser pays' system. The number of 'frivolous' law suits went down and more praticioners moved to Texas, especially in the higher risk specialties like anesthesiology and OB. Why we haven't seen more of this? As always.....follow the money....guess who's a large supporter of politicians? Right....the American Trial Lawyers association!
In the U.S., at least....it all comes down to who has the 'deepest pockets'..usually, the corporation. Unfortunately, the U.S. civil legal system has simply become another 'lottery'....there's NO cost, usually to the litigant....and if they WIN.....BINGO!! An example of this happened in Texas when they overhauled the medical malpractice laws to a 'loser pays' system. The number of 'frivolous' law suits went down and more praticioners moved to Texas, especially in the higher risk specialties like anesthesiology and OB. Why we haven't seen more of this? As always.....follow the money....guess who's a large supporter of politicians? Right....the American Trial Lawyers association!
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
Age: 69
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot's Actions In July Crash Face Review
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: ~
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seconds before the botched landing of a Southwest Airlines jet last month at New York's La Guardia Airport, the captain was concerned about touching down too far along the runway and may have throttled back the engines prematurely, according to people familiar with the investigation.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: chicago
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
as weak an argument as it might be , reducing power causes the nose to drop in airplanes with underwing engines
mind you, all you have to do is pull the yoke back a bit while you do it and the nose won't drop.
mind you, all you have to do is pull the yoke back a bit while you do it and the nose won't drop.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: chicago
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with you old boeing driver...it isn't the cause
it is very odd that the NTSB would even mention the reduction in power...we normally reduce power as part of landing ( I know you know this OLD BOEING DRIVER).
and for lord spandex masher...I will revise my statement to only include the B737.
the runway is 7000' long followed by a dip into the water...if the landing occurred in the first third, adequate distance to stop remained...if landing was not to occur in this area, a go around should have been accomplished
this is a nutty one...I'm thinking that the words ''tunnel vision'' might be used at some point. only thinking how short the runway was instead of everything else in the duty of being a pilot.
it is very odd that the NTSB would even mention the reduction in power...we normally reduce power as part of landing ( I know you know this OLD BOEING DRIVER).
and for lord spandex masher...I will revise my statement to only include the B737.
the runway is 7000' long followed by a dip into the water...if the landing occurred in the first third, adequate distance to stop remained...if landing was not to occur in this area, a go around should have been accomplished
this is a nutty one...I'm thinking that the words ''tunnel vision'' might be used at some point. only thinking how short the runway was instead of everything else in the duty of being a pilot.