Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - pilot's family awarded $10.5M

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

pilot's family awarded $10.5M
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

larry(at)ncproto.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 12:19 pm Post subject: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

I'll start an interesting  and likely charged thread.  A court here in Washington State has  awarded the family of Don Corbitt a settlement of $10.5M; from the EAA and  Northwest EAA.

  

  First, what happened to  personal responsibility ??  If this pilot had not crashed in the first  place, this would not be an issue.

 Second, how is this not  the sole fault of the pilot ??  The pilot could have (and we can now argue  "should have") installed an on-board fire suppression system; again eliminating  the issue.  Or the pilot could have (should have) been a better pilot;  again, elimination the issue.

 Third, the rest of the  story: this pilot took off having left the passenger seat-belt buckled around  the control stick.  That's right, this pilot messed up pretty big.  It  is common and good practice to secure an aircraft's control surfaces while  parked and one easy way to do this is to hold the control stick full aft with a  seat belt.  It is also common and good practice (mandatory) to  pre-flight the aircraft before flying.  It is also common and good practice  (mandatory) to perform a control check (all flight controls full and  correct movement) before launching.  Obviously these two items were not  done and the pilot paid heavily for his error.  This is also the  nature of flying; it is relatively safe, however mistakes can add up  and have rather large consequences .......  and the person responsible is the PIC.

  

 How our court system  determined that someone should pay for this series of pilot errors is  beyond me.  And the family that instigated and maintained this suit is a  disgrace.  And it is now they that will be rewarded for this pilot's  mistakes.  This is sick.

  

 If this guy didn't crash  in the first place there wouldn't be an issue. Or if he had installed a  built-in-fire-suppression system we wouldn't be talking about it either. Why is  it always someone else's fault ?? We should go lynch the family and heirs and attorneys that will now profit from  their husband / father / son /  client's death. What a bunch of crap. Oh, did I mention that I  have an opinion on this ????



  

 Larry E. James

  Pacific  Northwest

Blank_Bkgrd.gif

Description:

Filesize:

145 Bytes

Viewed:

17070 Time(s)

Bob Collins

Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 12:41 pm Post subject: Re: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

I'm really going to regret wading into this but in the interest of accuracy, from my reading of the matter (not via ANN would was not very professional in its coverage, imho)suit wasn't over the fact the plane crashed. The suit was about the contention the pilot survived the crash but died because the responders the EAA contracted with to provide services, took more than  minutes to arrive. 



The trial took 2 1/2 weeks, which is quite a long time in a trial so I'm going to suggest that maybe the details that went into the verdict were considered  and were numerous, and beyond our present ability to judge the worth of the family to continue living  on this planet until we know a bit more.



I would advocate for more information before we lynch the family and burn down the town.



In the meantime, I suspect that help on a runway is now less than 5 minutes away at major fly-ins, so maybe some good can come of it.



Let's hold fire and learn more.

_________________
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
Letters from Flyover Country
http://rvnewsletter.blogspot.com/

wdleonard(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 1:54 pm Post subject: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

Larry,

  

 I couldn't agree more.  I blame the lawyers much more than the family.  The lawyer seek out this kind of high profile incident, talk the family into cooperating, then walk away with an outrageous proportion of the settlement.   

  

 I submit that a large majority of Americans despise this practice (although wouldn't turn down a few million bucks if offered by the legal team).  This practice is destroying America, our freedoms, and our economy.  Medical costs for example, a large percentage of the GNP, are driven largely by CYA practices to keep the sharks away.  There is no way to accurately estimate this cost, but it is well in excess of 50% of all costs associated with medicine.   

  

 But the American population is powerless to do anything about it because the lawyers make the laws to suit their own interests.

  

 A physician can loose his career and sometimes even get jail time for making an honest mistake while doing his very best for a patient.  Meanwhile, the D.A. in the Duke case is immune from both civil an criminal action despite the fact that his actions were clearly deliberate and ruined the lives of many people. 

  

 Ok, time to stop, I am making myself really mad...



-- 

David Leonard



Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY

My websites at:

http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/rotaryroster/index.html 

http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/vp4skydoc/index.html

http://leonardiniraq.blogspot.com 

  

  

 On 1/16/07, Larry E. James <larry(at)ncproto.com (larry(at)ncproto.com)> wrote:  	  Quote: 	
		    I'll start an interesting and likely charged thread.  A court here in Washington State has awarded the family of Don Corbitt a settlement of $10.5M; from the EAA and Northwest EAA. 

  

  First, what happened to personal responsibility ??  If this pilot had not crashed in the first place, this would not be an issue.

 Second, how is this not the sole fault of the pilot ??  The pilot could have (and we can now argue "should have") installed an on-board fire suppression system; again eliminating the issue.  Or the pilot could have (should have) been a better pilot; again, elimination the issue. 

 Third, the rest of the story: this pilot took off having left the passenger seat-belt buckled around the control stick.  That's right, this pilot messed up pretty big.  It is common and good practice to secure an aircraft's control surfaces while parked and one easy way to do this is to hold the control stick full aft with a seat belt.  It is also common and good practice (mandatory) to pre-flight the aircraft before flying.  It is also common and good practice (mandatory) to perform a control check (all flight controls full and correct movement) before launching.  Obviously these two items were not done and the pilot paid heavily for his error.  This is also the nature of flying; it is relatively safe, however mistakes can add up and have rather large consequences  ........ and the person responsible is the PIC.

  

 How our court system determined that someone should pay for this series of pilot errors is beyond me.  And the family that instigated and maintained this suit is a disgrace.  And it is now they that will be rewarded for this pilot's mistakes.  This is sick. 

  

 If this guy didn't crash in the first place there wouldn't be an issue. Or if he had installed a built-in-fire-suppression system we wouldn't be talking about it either. Why is it always someone else's fault ?? We should go lynch the family and heirs  and attorneys that will now profit from their husband / father / son / client's death. What a bunch of crap. Oh, did I mention that I have an opinion on this ????



   

 Larry E. James

  Pacific Northwest

	


  [quote][b]

Bob Collins

Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:04 pm Post subject: Re: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

 	  wdleonard(at)gmail.com wrote: 	
		  Larry,

 Medical costs for example, a large percentage of the GNP, are driven largely by CYA practices to keep the sharks away.  There is no way to accurately estimate this cost, but it is well in excess of 50% of all costs associated with medicine.   	




Due respect and all. This is stated as fact so often that people accept it as such. Do a Google search for "what drives medical costs" and you can see. My wife, who's in the health care industry, insists that burdensome paperwork does the same thing. Who knows. But the jury -- pun intended -- is still out.



Anyway, I can see this thread is heading for "talk radio" land so I'll just say..."hey, how about those RV airplanes!!!!!!!!!!!"

I think they're pretty cool. How about you?

_________________
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
Letters from Flyover Country
http://rvnewsletter.blogspot.com/

Terry Watson

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 290
Location: Seattle, WA USA

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:15 pm Post subject: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

[img]cid:image001.gif(at)01C73978.5F4B2F10[/img]    

Larry,  

   

Thanks for bringing this up here on the RV list where I think it needs to be aired. I too was shocked and disappointed to read in the local papers about the award. I knew Don Corbitt slightly; I had flown down to Scappoose and back with him maybe a month or so before the accident at Arlington. I didn’t see the accident but I know some on this list were there and did see it. The curious thing in the newspaper article and the Avweb version of the story was the difference in the time it took the fire department to respond. I think the Corbitt’s layer said in the Seattle Times that it was half an hour; others said less than 5 minutes.  

   

My only disagreement with your description of what happened is about Don having taken off with the stick still strapped down. My understanding is as I described it in a discussion with a friend about it last night, that no one knows for sure but it seems highly probable, given the evidence.  

   

But regardless of the reason, I find it hard to imagine a pilot saying it was anyone other than Don’s fault that his plane crashed. But when bad things happen, someone has to be blamed and if the most certainly culpable person is already dead, it seems to be human nature to start casting about for someone else to hang the blame on, and in today’s world that means make them pay and pay dearly. So instead of putting the blame on the pilot, we put the blame on the people who couldn’t save him from the fire after the crash. I can just imagine the jury deliberations where a group of non-pilots have no appreciation for the absolute responsibility that resides with the pilot. I hope some appeal to the verdict backs it way, way down. I don’t think they every get dismissed.  

   

The thing that this leaves me with is this:  Don was a good man – smart, full of energy and well liked and respected by those who knew him. But like most of us, I don’t think he realized just how far our responsibility extends out behind us like some sort of wake turbulence when we climb into a cockpit. I am sure he would have been devastated to know that his moment of bad decision would not only take his life and cause enormous loss to his family, but could possibly bring about the end of the annual Arlington EAA air show. He was intent on bringing his talent and capitol to make experimental aviation better; instead he lost everything and is dragging many others off track too.  

   

I understand that he left his wife and four small kids pretty well off. Ironically, that may have contributed to the size of the jury’s award. Since he was capable of earning a lot more than most of us, then the financial damage of his loss was greater than for most people, so the jury gives them more.  

   

I hate to be so cynical, but the only winner I see in this whole disaster is Mrs. Corbitt’s lawyer. Everyone else – Don and his family and friends, you and I and the EAA and general aviation all lost.  

   

Sorry to be so long winded.  

   

Terry  

RV-8A finishing  

Seattle  

   

         

  

From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry E. James

 Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 12:14 PM

 To: rv-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: pilot's family awarded $10.5M  

  

     

I'll start an interesting and likely charged thread.  A court here in Washington State has awarded the family of Don Corbitt a settlement of $10.5M; from the EAA and Northwest EAA.  

    

   

      

First, what happened to personal responsibility ??  If this pilot had not crashed in the first place, this would not be an issue.  

    

Second, how is this not the sole fault of the pilot ??  The pilot could have (and we can now argue "should have") installed an on-board fire suppression system; again eliminating the issue.  Or the pilot could have (should have) been a better pilot; again, elimination the issue.  

    

Third, the rest of the story: this pilot took off having left the passenger seat-belt buckled around the control stick.  That's right, this pilot messed up pretty big.  It is common and good practice to secure an aircraft's control surfaces while parked and one easy way to do this is to hold the control stick full aft with a seat belt.  It is also common and good practice (mandatory) to pre-flight the aircraft before flying.  It is also common and good practice (mandatory) to perform a control check (all flight controls full and correct movement) before launching.  Obviously these two items were not done and the pilot paid heavily for his error.  This is also the nature of flying; it is relatively safe, however mistakes can add up and have rather large consequences ........ and the person responsible is the PIC.  

    

   

    

How our court system determined that someone should pay for this series of pilot errors is beyond me.  And the family that instigated and maintained this suit is a disgrace.  And it is now they that will be rewarded for this pilot's mistakes.  This is sick.  

    

   

    

If this guy didn't crash in the first place there wouldn't be an issue. Or if he had installed a built-in-fire-suppression system we wouldn't be talking about it either. Why is it always someone else's fault ?? We should go lynch the family and heirs and attorneys that will now profit from their husband / father / son / client's death. What a bunch of crap. Oh, did I mention that I have an opinion on this ????  

  

    

   

  

Larry E. James  

Pacific Northwest

image001.gif

Description:

Filesize:

145 Bytes

Viewed:

17076 Time(s)

billshook2000(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:38 pm Post subject: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

There must be something in there that we are missing.  Sure, lawyers are scum and

lawsuits can be bogus but I have to think that $10.5M is not awarded unless someone did

something pretty bad.  I don't know the details of this suit, but that kind of money is

not just handed out.  Taking responsibility for a fly-in is taking the world on your

shoulders...I sure hope they are not doing so with nothing but volunteers making safety

decisions.  If they are...well, they are risking everyone who attends.  Lets hope there

is more foresight than that at work.  All the good intentions in the world are no

substitute for a professional in charge who understands safety.  I nominate Charlie

Kuss.



Still..we could just hang all the lawyers.



Bill

-4 wings

--- "Larry E. James" <larry(at)ncproto.com> wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   I'll start an interesting and likely charged thread.  A court here in

 Washington State has awarded the family of Don Corbitt a settlement of

 $10.5M; from the EAA and Northwest EAA.

  

 First, what happened to personal responsibility ??  If this pilot had not

 crashed in the first place, this would not be an issue.

 Second, how is this not the sole fault of the pilot ??  The pilot could have

 (and we can now argue "should have") installed an on-board fire suppression

 system; again eliminating the issue.  Or the pilot could have (should have)

 been a better pilot; again, elimination the issue.

 Third, the rest of the story: this pilot took off having left the passenger

 seat-belt buckled around the control stick.  That's right, this pilot messed

 up pretty big.  It is common and good practice to secure an aircraft's

 control surfaces while parked and one easy way to do this is to hold the

 control stick full aft with a seat belt.  It is also common and good

 practice (mandatory) to pre-flight the aircraft before flying.  It is also

 common and good practice (mandatory) to perform a control check (all flight

 controls full and correct movement) before launching.  Obviously these two

 items were not done and the pilot paid heavily for his error.  This is also

 the nature of flying; it is relatively safe, however mistakes can add up and

 have rather large consequences ........ and the person responsible is the

 PIC.

  

 How our court system determined that someone should pay for this series of

 pilot errors is beyond me.  And the family that instigated and maintained

 this suit is a disgrace.  And it is now they that will be rewarded for this

 pilot's mistakes.  This is sick.

  

 If this guy didn't crash in the first place there wouldn't be an issue. Or

 if he had installed a built-in-fire-suppression system we wouldn't be

 talking about it either. Why is it always someone else's fault ?? We should

 go lynch the family and heirs and attorneys that will now profit from their

 husband / father / son / client's death. What a bunch of crap. Oh, did I

 mention that I have an opinion on this ????

  

 Larry E. James

 Pacific Northwest

 


	


 

Be a PS3 game guru.

Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! Games.

http://videogames.yahoo.com/platform?platform=120121

<pre><b><font size  color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">

Bob Collins

Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:42 pm Post subject: Re: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

 	  Terry Watson wrote: 	
		  [img]cid:image001.gif(at)01C73978.5F4B2F10[/img]    

 I can just imagine the jury deliberations where a group of non-pilots have no appreciation for the absolute responsibility that resides with the pilot. 	




Again, perhaps I'm reading the wrong account but reading this thread seems to suggest that the jury was asked to decide who was responsible for the plane crashing, and suggested the jurors got it wrong.



I don't believe the jurors were asked to determine any such thing. 



I would also contend that the fact someone makes a mistake and has responsibility for it, does NOT give a pass to anyone else to be negligent.



Now, it seems to me we're roasting the lawyer, the court, and the award, but we haven't really thought about what EXACTLY it was about.



IF the EAA hired someone to provide emergency services and IF that agency was negligent in doing so (on this thread it seems to be anywhere from 5 minutes to a half hour. Do anybody KNOW for certain what was entered into evidence.), and if the pilot survived the crash but died as a result of that emergency service not being provided, then there's a basis of culpability.



I'm all for personal responsibility, but not absolute personal respnsibility. If a fire breaks out in my home, and I pay taxes for fire protection and the fire department can't come because they're all drunk at the firehouse, then the fact that I shouldn't have been building a house in that town in the first place doesn't absolve the fire department for performing its responsibility for which it was contracted.



Look, all I know is the jury heard the evidence and looked at the evidence and listened to EXACTLY what the judge was instructing them to decide. And then they decided.



Maybe we should consider that maybe -- just maybe -- they put more into it than we -- so far -- have.



Let's get the whole story.

_________________
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
Letters from Flyover Country
http://rvnewsletter.blogspot.com/

lifeofreiley2003(at)yahoo
Guest

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:58 pm Post subject: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

.."hey, how about those RV airplanes!!!!!!!!!!!"

We will all be saying this when nobody can afford to

insure and fly one. (RV Airplane)



GAR... (Get a rope)... and hang an attorney 



      Darrell Reiley

  RV7A QB Slider "Reiley Rocket"

  N622DR  Reserved 

  N469RV  Reserved

   

  CenTex_RV_Aircraft-owner(at)yahoogroups.com

   

  

 

Get your own web address.  

http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL

n616tb(at)btsapps.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:59 pm Post subject: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

I just have a couple of things to say on this.  First, I was there and I did

see the crash.  The emergency services did NOT take 30 minutes to arrive.  I

don't know if it was 5 minutes as I didn't time it, but it wasn't much

longer than that.  As far as a fire extinguisher; I have serious doubts if

he would have survived regardless of the fire.  He came down very vertical

and very hard.  I was shocked he survived the initial crash at all.



Bill, air show or not, this is a general aviation airport where this

accident could have happened even without the fly-in going on.  I am

convinced they had more available services and professionals on site than

had this happened any other time.  We all have an obligation to do our due

diligence every time we get in an airplane weather there is paramedics

standing by or not and weather there is a fly-in going on or not.



I will sadly hate if Arlington and other fly-ins get shut down because they

can't protect every pilot from themselves.



The loss is SAD! Very SAD! But nobody else is responsible for it.

Tim



[quote] --

n616tb(at)btsapps.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:06 pm Post subject: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

Bob, I think you are absolutely right about most of this.  However, I am not

sure I could agree with this:

IF the EAA hired someone to provide emergency services and IF that agency

 	  Quote: 	
		   was negligent in doing so (on this thread it seems to be anywhere from 5

 minutes to a half hour. Do anybody KNOW for certain what was entered into

 evidence.), and if the pilot survived the crash but died as a result of

 that emergency service not being provided, then there's a basis of

 culpability.


	


Unless the pilot hired someone to provide those emergency services, how can

he than expect it would be provided.  What the EAA or Arlington group

contracted for was their business only.  Now if there was some published

document indicating certain services will be provided during this event,

maybe that could be construed as a failure.



Just my opinions

Tim

Do Not Archive



[quote] --

Bob Collins

Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:15 pm Post subject: Re: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

//I just have a couple of things to say on this.  First, I was there and I did

see the crash.  The emergency services did NOT take 30 minutes to arrive.



Just for the record, the lawyer in the case never said, as near as I can tell, that it took 30 minutes. On an EAA board, from what I read. he said five.



//I was shocked he survived the initial crash at all.



But he did and because he did, it must now be dtermined -- and this is a tough task -- as to whether he could have survived had he not burned to death? I don't have the answer to that. But, again, I'm not ready to say these jurors are idiots because they don't know as much as I do about a case they heard and evidence they viewed and deliberations they made that I didn't.



//Bill, air show or not, this is a general aviation airport where this

accident could have happened even without the fly-in going on. 



The case, though, is about a legal contract.  The EAA is not blameless because as someone putting on an airshow, they had a responsibility to provide proper services.  The people they contracted with had an obligation because they signed a contract and a contract is a legal document with -- and here's the key, I think -- it's own set of responsibilities.



It may be true that nobody but the pilot is responsible when a plane crashes. OTOH, if someone here bends an airplane tomorrow and the insurance company refuses to pay, even though it had a contract, because, well, if you hadn't been flying you wouldn't have had a loss, that we'd all be wanting to hang insurance companies tomorrow and the idea of "personal responsibility" would be conveniently forgotten.



The gentlemen who died had a responsibility to fly his plane correctly. He didn't and he crashed as a result. 



The people who were paid to provide emergnecy services had a responsibility to provide those services. The fact he didn't fly his plane correctly doesn't alleviate the others of THEIR responsibility.



Cases like this don't usually get to the jury if there isn't something to the case. So in 2 1/2 weeks, I'm  guessing  the jury got some information that we haven't considered in 2 1/2 hours.  



Me? I'd personally start with the autopsy and the cause of death.  I'd also like to know exactly where the fire services were at the time of the crash. If the equipment wasn't at the airport and there weren't people sitting IN the equipment ready to go.... well... in my opinion y'all need another tree and more rope.

_________________
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
Letters from Flyover Country
http://rvnewsletter.blogspot.com/

tedd(at)vansairforce.org
Guest

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:15 pm Post subject: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

On Tue, 16 Jan 2007, Larry E. James wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   We should go lynch the family and heirs and attorneys that will now profit

 from their husband / father / son / client's death.


	


You'll be lynching the wrong people.  If it's a jury trial it's the jurors who

are to blame.  If not, then it's the judge.  Or perhaps it's past juries and

judges who've set a precedent that was followed in this case.



It's generally a bad idea, though, to assume the results of a trial are unjust

unless you know all the details.  It's in the same league as speculating on the

cause of a crash before the facts are known.  But I agree that in this case

it's hard to see how anyone but the pilot could have been found negligent.



Tedd McHenry

Surrey, BC

Bob Collins

Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:29 pm Post subject: Re: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

 	  Quote: 	
		  Unless the pilot hired someone to provide those emergency services, how can

he than expect it would be provided.  What the EAA or Arlington group

contracted for was their business only.  Now if there was some published

document indicating certain services will be provided during this event,

maybe that could be construed as a failure.

	




I'm not a lawyer although I suspect there are plenty of RV owners who are (and who are probably ducking this whole deal), but to the extent that one person's negligence has an impact on someone else, I don't believe it's just the business of those who had a contract.



The issue isn't whether the plane would or wouldn't have crashed through some action of the EAA or the group contracted to provide services. The question, as I read it, is whether the inaction of one party CONTRIBUTED to the death of another. 



There's too many "ifs" here for me to give into the "ready, fire, aim" thing that our emotions  naturally lead us to do.



I'd be very anxious to read more about this verdict because I believe if the actions of the emergency crews and EAA are easily documented and defended, this case never gets to a jury and it sure as heck doesn't take 2 1/2 weeks to get there. 



Believe me, I love the EAA and I'd hate to see any of their airshows go away. On the other hand, if you have an airshow and invite a thousand pilots to fly into your field, you've got some responsibility to ensure as much safety as can practically be provided.



The EAA's responsibility for that was right up until the moment when there was no other expectation of an outcome other than the pilot's death. 



That's why I want to know if the pilot could've survived his crash.



But I'm going to give the jury some credit for at least figuring out that their case wasn't about what caused a plane to crash.

_________________
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
Letters from Flyover Country
http://rvnewsletter.blogspot.com/

Bob Collins

Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:40 pm Post subject: Re: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

 	  lifeofreiley2003(at)yahoo wrote: 	
		  We will all be saying this when nobody can afford to

insure and fly one. (RV Airplane)

	




Well, keep in mind, that insurance is a matter of spreading around the responsibility for paying for your mistakes. I suppose the ultimate expression of personal respnsibility would be to fly without it. (g)

_________________
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
Letters from Flyover Country
http://rvnewsletter.blogspot.com/

rtitsworth

Joined: 16 Jan 2006
Posts: 76
Location: Detroit, Mi

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:13 pm Post subject: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

Bob,



I totally agree with you.



Hopefully, my local airport and others take heed to the logic inferred by

your statement/opinion that the EAA has a responsibly to provide "proper"

service to GA pilots who crash as no direct result of the airport (or EAA,

or whoever) - especially with respect to "proper" being defined by an

arms-length jury thinking that it is the airport's (or EAA, or whoever has

$) responsibility to save pilots from crashes, even if he/she was in the

perfect position to avoid it in the first place, or worst yet, caused it.



If setting the rules and guidelines for "proper" (emergency) service is left

to a preponderance of the pilots who might potentially use the service, and

who have a likely stake in the economic cost, we are probably not going to

get nearly as much "proper service" as we will with a jury of the general

public with little or no stake in the costs.



Hopefully this realization will catch on and we'll have ever increasing

levels of emergency services at all venues and airports.  After all, I'm

just a likely to have an incident at a desolate remote strip as at an

airshow, perhaps more, so it should apply to all.



If an airport or airshow can't justify the "proper" service levels because

of infrequent activity, or whatever, then it should probably be closed.

Anything less would be unsafe.



Likewise, if some of the good (still alive) pilots can't pony up the added

implicit $ to cover the costs of the increased services for the bad (dead,

or soon to be dead) ones, then they should just fly less, in the name of

safety.



NOT!



If anything, pilots have a responsibility to safely operate their airplane

(explicitly mandated in the FARs).  Thus in this case, the EAA should be

suing the pilot's estate for recovery of the entire cost of having whatever

safety provisions were provided (regardless of their ultimate mortal

affectivity) since this pilot was clearly the ex-post-fact causal need for

those contract services to be provided (versus spreading the cost onto all

the other good pilots and spectators that participated safely).

Additionally, the suit should also cover all the other added costs

associated with the crash caused by the pilot's carelessness and negligence,

including compensation to "all" pilots and attendees that may have been

impacted and/or economically disadvantaged.



For those interested enough, sounds like a class action suit against the

negligence of the pilot (his estate).  Seems there might be $10 million in

the kitty, but then again that might not be enough. 

--

deruiteraircraftservices(
Guest

Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:10 am Post subject: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

Hi Larry & All,

  

 where's the reference for this accident on the FAA database? I'm not  familiar with this accident and would like to read the NTSB narrative about it,  even though it doesn't bother me personally as I'm across the pond.

  

 Just like to get an idea of what the problem is, where and how these  enermous claims arise from.

 It's something that we do start to get in the UK/Eire as well, abulance  chasing, advertising on t.v for claims to be made after accident etc.

  

 M

  

 do not archive

Blank_Bkgrd.gif

Description:

Filesize:

145 Bytes

Viewed:

17071 Time(s)

Mark Sletten

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 43
Location: St. Jacob, IL (Near St. Louis, MO)

Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:44 am Post subject: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

Here is the relevant passage from the NTSB report:  

   

“Within a minute after the aircraft impacted the ground, the volunteer fire truck arrived at the scene. After pulling out the necessary hose and completing the hook-up of their respirator system, which they began while en route, the firefighters applied water on the flaming wreckage. Within a minute to a minute and a half after their arrival, the fire was extinguished.”  

   

The report seems to indicate the fire was out within two to two-and-a-half minutes of the crash, but the report is based on witness accounts. The jury’s verdict is also based on witness accounts – I’m sure none were actually at the scene of the crash. If the jury heard different witnesses, the version of the story they considered during their deliberations may have been much different.  

   

Was the NTSB report even admitted into evidence? What should be considered a “normal” or “appropriate” emergency response time for an accident such as this? Should that response time be different because of the air show? Why?  

   

As some have said, without having been at the trial and heard what the jury heard you can’t know what you’re criticizing.  

   

Mark Sletten

 9840 Beacon Street

 Saint Jacob, IL 62281

 (618) 644-2524 - Home

 (618) 791-3939 - Mobile   

   

       [quote][b]

_________________
Mark Sletten
Legacy FG N828LM
http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com

Bob Collins

Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota

Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 5:42 am Post subject: Re: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

 	  rtitsworth wrote: 	
		  Bob,



I totally agree with you.



Hopefully, my local airport and others take heed to the logic inferred by

your statement/opinion that the EAA has a responsibly to provide "proper"

service to GA pilots who crash as no direct result of the airport (or EAA,

or whoever) - especially with respect to "proper" being defined by an

arms-length jury thinking that it is the airport's (or EAA, or whoever has

$) responsibility to save pilots from crashes, even if he/she was in the

perfect position to avoid it in the first place, or worst yet, caused it.

	




If the jury award really was inappropriate, why also the need to make up what the jury award was about? It wasn't about what caused a plane to crash.



I suggest -- and I have before -- that we -- you -- read the court records and learn what the case is about, what evidence was put into place, and what each side presented as its case  and then consider it from a position of knowledge. I simply don't have that data and neither, apparently, does anyone else here.



Until that data is provided, it's all just speculaytive caterwalling of no particular usefulness int he construction of an RV.  If the jury

s decision really is as outrageous as folks think it is -- and it might be --  then the week or two it'll take to research it won't take away the need for a lynch mob. 



Like I said, I'm sure there are plenty of lawyers out there who would assist in obtaining the relevant information.



If folks really wanted it.

_________________
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
Letters from Flyover Country
http://rvnewsletter.blogspot.com/

cjensen(at)dts9000.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:30 am Post subject: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

Bob Collins wrote...



The EAA's responsibility for that was right up until the moment when

there was no other expectation of an outcome other than the pilot's

death. 



That's why I want to know if the pilot could've survived his crash.



*****

Not to split too many fine legal hairs, but even if the autopsy showed

that he would have eventually died of his injuries, fire or no, does not

preclude monetary damages if the fire company was negligent or whatever

the jury finding was in this case.  Even if he would have died anyhow,

but the immediate cause of death was by fire, something I'd rather not

dwell on or contemplate, then the claim in based on the unusual, cruel

and horrendous means of death.  Yes, he would have died any (assuming

that was the case), but the means of death was unnecessarily horrific

due to the negligence of others.  After all, we all are going to

die--that's not in doubt (except for the belief of a few individuals,

but there are medications and medical facilities for those people), but

we have a right to die a natural, peaceful deather unless others

unrightfully cause it to be otherwise, in which case, there may be a

cause for legal action.



My personal opinion; we should wait to find out and know all the facts

the jury considered....but in the mean time, it'd be okay to hang a few

personal injury lawyers since little harm can come from it--unless I

need one!



Chuck

Bob Collins

Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 470
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota

Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:37 am Post subject: Re: pilot's family awarded $10.5M

 	  cjensen(at)dts9000.com wrote: 	
		  

My personal opinion; we should wait to find out and know all the facts

the jury considered... 	




I've asked our research director to poke around today and see if she can find a little more than what was printed in the local rags (which wasn't all that informative, imho).



Do not archive

_________________
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
Letters from Flyover Country
http://rvnewsletter.blogspot.com/

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next
Page 1 of 8

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum