Cutaway68 4 #1 May 8, 2013 http://www.komu.com/news/court-upholds-damages-in-mo-sky-diving-deaths/ Don't Pull Low... Unless You ARE!!! The pessimist says, "It can't get any worse than this." The optimist says, "Sure, it can." Be fun, have safe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davelepka 4 #2 May 8, 2013 A quick search reveals that Doncasters Inc produces turbine fan blades, and I'm guessing provided the ones in the failed engine. However, I seem to recall that the engines were well past TBO, does that ring a bell? How is it the company can be held responsible for the failed components when they are used outside of their intended purpose? To the tune of $28 mil? I guess it's anothe case of 'deep pockets'. My search revealed revenue of '$1000 million' (I always thought that was 1 billion, but whatever). I would guess that between that and the monster insurance policy that goes along with being a billion dollar aircraft component company, they had the deepest pockets. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnMitchell 14 #3 May 8, 2013 Definitely deep pockets syndrome. Even when the crash was totally pilot error, sue the manufacturer. . . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 197 #4 May 8, 2013 JohnMitchell Definitely deep pockets syndrome. Even when the crash was totally pilot error, sue the manufacturer. . . Only because the manufacturer's history is one of settling. Tort reform man, tort reform! ETA: was it pilot error or owner negligence?Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jtval 0 #5 May 8, 2013 Bravo to the family that did not join the lawsuit! Wonder which family and what their reasoning was.My photos My Videos Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnMitchell 14 #6 May 8, 2013 Quote Only because the manufacturer's history is one of settling. Tort reform man, tort reform! ETA: was it pilot error or owner negligence? I was actually thinking of (too) many other crashes I've known, pilots flying perfectly good airplanes into the ground with the engines running. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnMitchell 14 #7 May 8, 2013 Quote Wonder which family and what their reasoning was. I know a guy who was seriously busted up in a plane crash, clearly pilot error, who told me he had lawyers visiting him in the hospital, urging him to sue. Even though he had little insurance to pay the bills, he refused to sue. That was a long time ago, though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #8 May 8, 2013 JohnMitchell Quote Wonder which family and what their reasoning was. I know a guy who was seriously busted up in a plane crash, clearly pilot error, who told me he had lawyers visiting him in the hospital, urging him to sue. Even though he had little insurance to pay the bills, he refused to sue. That was a long time ago, though. Not surprised. Chasing pay days themselves. "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jonstark 8 #9 May 8, 2013 I seem to remember that there was a blade manufacturer who falsified fatigue test data. The blades had to survive so many hours under full running stresses. They failed prematurely but the company just installed new blades and continued on with the testing and claimed their blades lasted the required amount of time and were fine. There has been at least one fatal accident that I am aware of caused by these bogus parts. Could this accident have been due to these bogus parts? Would this change anybody's mind as to the legitimacy of the wrongful death claims? jon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycatcher68 7 #10 May 8, 2013 QuoteAt trial, Robb’s team presented evidence that Doncasters used a different alloy in a compressor turbine blade than called for by Pratt and Whitney Canada, the engine’s manufacturer, and hid documents showing the part in question failed performance tests. No sympathy from me.What if the Bible had been written by Stephen King? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydiver30960 0 #11 May 8, 2013 skycatcher68QuoteAt trial, Robb’s team presented evidence that Doncasters used a different alloy in a compressor turbine blade than called for by Pratt and Whitney Canada, the engine’s manufacturer, and hid documents showing the part in question failed performance tests. No sympathy from me. Well, that settles that if the above is true. It's just interesting how well this case proves that tragedies happen not because of just one failure, but often because of a series of failures in the system. So in this example, if the manufacturer had followed their procedures, or if the blades had been replaced on time, the disaster MAY have been averted. We can learn the same lesson: taking just a moment at the DZ to address a seemingly minor issue may make all the difference in the world. Asking a fellow skydiver "did you know your RSL is disconnected" or "did you notice this worn spot on your pilot chute bridle" might be all it takes. Don't just say "meh, they have lotsa jumps, I'm sure they know about it" and walk away. Elvisio "SPEAK UP!" Rodriguez Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BeteNoire 0 #12 May 8, 2013 skycatcher68QuoteAt trial, Robb’s team presented evidence that Doncasters used a different alloy in a compressor turbine blade than called for by Pratt and Whitney Canada, the engine’s manufacturer, and hid documents showing the part in question failed performance tests. No sympathy from me. There you go, that's that explanation for this seemingly incomprehensible court ruling. And now that we have all the facts, it makes perfect sense. I hope someone has tracked down all the other aircraft that these substandard parts have been insstalled in, so that corrective maintenance can be done before another tragedy occurs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #13 May 8, 2013 skycatcher68 Quote At trial, Robb’s team presented evidence that Doncasters used a different alloy in a compressor turbine blade than called for by Pratt and Whitney Canada, the engine’s manufacturer, and hid documents showing the part in question failed performance tests. No sympathy from me. Same here. "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #14 May 8, 2013 jtvalBravo to the family that did not join the lawsuit! Wonder which family and what their reasoning was. I disagree here because I think this family should have joined in and gotten a piece of the pie since the other families were already going to sue anyway.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydiver30960 0 #15 May 9, 2013 popsjumper I disagree here because I think this family should have joined in and gotten a piece of the pie since the other families were already going to sue anyway. I'm ambivalent on this one. On one hand I've had "the talk" with my wife because I hate it when we have one of those "you can do everything right and still die" kind of skydiving incidents and everyone starts lawyering up. OTOH: it seems that, in this case, not one but TWO corporate entities had their heads COMPLETELY up their asses. In a situation like this, I might tend to look more favorably on reaching for the big guns. Elvisio "it's tricky" Rodriguez Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pchapman 261 #16 May 9, 2013 jtvalBravo to the family that did not join the lawsuit! Wonder which family and what their reasoning was. I'm guessing it was Scott Cowan's family -- one of the six killed. He was also the pilot who wasn't able to keep the plane airborne, and co-owner of the DZ. So it isn't quite as surprising that his family might not be involved, although I guess it could go either way. (Would his family have as strong a claim? Would their making millions be protected from any potential suits against the former DZ, and co-owners, dead or alive? I don't know how the system works.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #17 May 9, 2013 popsjumper***Bravo to the family that did not join the lawsuit! Wonder which family and what their reasoning was. I disagree here because I think this family should have joined in and gotten a piece of the pie since the other families were already going to sue anyway. I would be interested in knowing why that family didn't join the lawsuit. Maybe they decided they didn't need the money, or could use the money but didn't care because it wasn't going to bring their loved one back."Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 197 #18 May 9, 2013 BillyVance******Bravo to the family that did not join the lawsuit! Wonder which family and what their reasoning was. I disagree here because I think this family should have joined in and gotten a piece of the pie since the other families were already going to sue anyway. I would be interested in knowing why that family didn't join the lawsuit. Maybe they decided they didn't need the money, or could use the money but didn't care because it wasn't going to bring their loved one back. Pilot was also co-owner of the DZ maybe?Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Snowwhite 0 #19 May 9, 2013 [ We can learn the same lesson: taking just a moment at the DZ to address a seemingly minor issue may make all the difference in the world. Asking a fellow skydiver "did you know your RSL is disconnected" or "did you notice this worn spot on your pilot chute bridle" might be all it takes. Don't just say "meh, they have lotsa jumps, I'm sure they know about it" and walk away. True story: I told a skydiver that his closing pin had fallen out of his loop, and he should have that checked and repaired before he used the rig on a jump. He grabbed the rig and ran for the plane. I found the Sand TA and told him of the closing loop failure. He took the jumper off of the plane and sure enough, it the closing pin had fallen out of the loop again. He grounded the guy until the repair to his rig was made. To this day, that jumper won't talk to me. JACKASS! Elvisio "SPEAK UP!" RodriguezskydiveTaylorville.org [email protected] Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 197 #20 May 9, 2013 Agreed. When it comes to aircraft it gets a bit more difficult.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mx757 4 #21 May 10, 2013 jtvalBravo to the family that did not join the lawsuit! Wonder which family and what their reasoning was. • David Pasternoster, 34, of Claycomo, Mo., was not a party to the lawsuit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
