83 survivors to sue Boeing and Asiana

[criticalbass]

But there is. However, the pilots on the flight deck in this particular plane were almost all "newbies". Not new to flying, but new to this aircraft. The auto systems from Boeing planes to Airbus planes differs substantially. One of the pilots who was in the cockpit, I wont say flying because clearly none of them were, was new to the Boeing jet and was coming from years in an Airbus plane.

The guy in the right seat was deep in the 777. He was making his first trip as an instructor in an effort to get the guy in the left seat qualified in the 777. Left seat had only 43 hours in 777, but Right seat had a whole bunch. If (when I think) pilot error is named the primary cause, right seat will be ultimately responsible.

If the NTSB does its job thoroughly, it will also blame the system that allowed such an unfortunate pairing to occurr. Not sure what the jump seat guy was doing, but simple pilot error usually isn't so simple. I wonder how many Asiana flights have come close to a similar outcome but did not report it to their safety folks. Chances are high that a lot of "free lessons" went undetected.

 

[criticalbass]

Why should they even be able to sue Asiana?
Is anyone REQUIRED to fly with Asiana?
Won't market forces sort it out?

You know why--same reason dogs lick their nethers. Because they can.

An attorney could give you the legalese about how one has a realistic expectation of safety, but thank any gods that may be, I am not an attorney.

And no, market forces driven by this accident won't appreciably affect Asiana in the long run. "Goin to Seoul?'' "Cheaper than the other guys?" "When do we leave?"

Have you noticed how many news readers pronounce it "Assiana" rather than "Aziana?" Reminds me of a lot of older church ladies with little shaggy dogs that they insist on calling "****-zoos" when it's really "/ˈSHē ˈdzo͞o/" according to the Oxford English dictionary. But, it gives 'em a chance to say "****" without penalty. Still can't dance, but . . .

Wow! Just noticed that the forum program changes the "s" word to ****. Well **********!

 

[ignerntbend]

Try Spelling it with a + rather than a t.

Also, note that even though you caint say ****, you can say horseshit, ********, and even batshit crazy.

 

[Dave70968]

Why should they even be able to sue Asiana?
Is anyone REQUIRED to fly with Asiana?
Won't market forces sort it out?

Nothing in libertarian philosophy or "market forces" is offended by holding players responsible for the consequences of their actions. Being 30+ knots below approach speed on short final is negligence, and doing it after being called out on it is gross negligence. A suit against the operator (which is liable for the actions of its employee) is entirely justified here.

As to suing Boeing, my first defense would be 14 CFR 121.535:

(d) Each pilot in command of an aircraft is, during flight time, in command of the aircraft and crew and is responsible for the safety of the passengers, crewmembers, cargo, and airplane.
(e) Each pilot in command has full control and authority in the operation of the aircraft, without limitation, over other crewmembers and their duties during flight time, whether or not he holds valid certificates authorizing him to perform the duties of those crewmembers.
(f) No pilot may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger life or property.

When I was teaching flying, we covered regs. The FAR/AIM is about a two inches thick. In all of that book, the only thing I required my students to memorize (and be able to repeat verbatim) was 14 CFR 91.3 (general aviation flies under part 91, major carriers under part 121):

91.3
(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.
(b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule in this section to the extent required to meet that emergency.

I made them memorize that so that they'd understand just how deep their responsibility ran, and that the FAA takes that responsibility so seriously as to give them explicit permission to toss the rulebook out the window in order to meet that charge.

In this case, the pilot screwed the pooch. Boeing didn't make him fly too slowly. Even if the autothrottle had failed, he still had the option of reaching his hand over and pushing the go-stick forward. PIC is responsible, period.

Airspeed is life.

 

[jsl_pt]

Must be Boeing's fault that the pilot drug the 777's ass on the sea wall.

They just build the planes, they can't fly them for the airlines, too.

My thoughts exactly!

 

[cichlid-dave]

This is not the first time a pilot has head elsewhere while landing his aircraft.

 

[RickN]

When I read things like this, I always wonder if the people contacted the law firm wanting to sue or if it was the other way around.

CHICAGO - A Chicago law firm says it has taken steps to sue aircraft manufacturer Boeing Co. on behalf of 83 people who were aboard the Asiana Airlines flight that crash-landed in San Francisco earlier this month, claiming in a court filing that the crash might have been caused by a mechanical malfunction of the Boeing 777's auto throttle.

 

[FamousAJ]

Nothing in libertarian philosophy or "market forces" is offended by holding players responsible for the consequences of their actions. Being 30+ knots below approach speed on short final is negligence, and doing it after being called out on it is gross negligence. A suit against the operator (which is liable for the actions of its employee) is entirely justified here.

As to suing Boeing, my first defense would be 14 CFR 121.535:


When I was teaching flying, we covered regs. The FAR/AIM is about a two inches thick. In all of that book, the only thing I required my students to memorize (and be able to repeat verbatim) was 14 CFR 91.3 (general aviation flies under part 91, major carriers under part 121):

I made them memorize that so that they'd understand just how deep their responsibility ran, and that the FAA takes that responsibility so seriously as to give them explicit permission to toss the rulebook out the window in order to meet that charge.

In this case, the pilot screwed the pooch. Boeing didn't make him fly too slowly. Even if the autothrottle had failed, he still had the option of reaching his hand over and pushing the go-stick forward. PIC is responsible, period.

Airspeed is life.

You sir, are good in my book.