Hooknswoop 19 #1 January 7, 2004 You are flying an airplane, fairly new, all inspections, etc up to date, within it’s operating limits. The tail falls off and you are severely injured in the crash. Accident investigation determines there was a design defect in the tail that caused it to separate in flight. Do you sue the manufacturer? Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ACMESkydiver 0 #2 January 7, 2004 Yes. Design flaw. Manufacturer should indemnify me for my pain, suffering, loss of quality of life, etc... They caused me damage due to their negligence (did not thoroughly review their design for safety). Edited to add: If I am still alive to sue... Otherwise my family should.~Jaye Do not believe that possibly you can escape the reward of your action. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bsoder 0 #3 January 7, 2004 On the flipside - if the product was built to standard WHEN IT WAS BUILT there shouldn't be a case. ie. the case recently in CA of the Ford Bronco that flipped, it met the standards of the day when it was built but not current ones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Push 0 #4 January 7, 2004 Don't know much about piloting. If the flaw was caused by negligence on the part of the manufactorer, either in not following testing procedures or using substandard materials, then yes. If shit happened, first of all I probably wouldn't sue, second, even if I did I should not win anything significant (in Eugeneland, anyway, heh). -- Toggle Whippin' Yahoo Skydiving is easy. All you have to do is relax while plummetting at 120 mph from 10,000' with nothing but some nylon and webbing to save you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TitaniumLegs 8 #5 January 7, 2004 Not enough information to answer. Was there or should there have been a regular maintenance procedure to prevent this from happening? Did they inform you of the procedure? If not, is it reasonable to expect you to know of the issue/procedure? Is it reasonable for any other typical pilot to know of it? Did you make modifications to the aircraft? Did you operate the aircraft in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations and/or standard procedures and/or FARs, etc.? You wouldn't happen to be talking about the A300 would you? OTOH, this sounds like an aviation equivalent to what happened to me. I didn't sue, for a number of reasons, but there were also reasons to sue. (>o|-< If you don't believe me, ask me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sarge 0 #6 January 7, 2004 You as the injured party or as an estate? Is this hypothetical? This isn't a good question to ask in a 'public' forum if it is reality Derek. .-- I'm done with the personally meaningful and philosophical sigs!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Push 0 #7 January 7, 2004 I believe he's putting this in another perspective. -- Toggle Whippin' Yahoo Skydiving is easy. All you have to do is relax while plummetting at 120 mph from 10,000' with nothing but some nylon and webbing to save you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #8 January 7, 2004 Quotethere was a design defect in the tail that caused it to separate in flight. Too many unanswered questions. My first thought would be "no" though. Was the design defect known or unknown by the manufacturer? What type of testing did the aircraft go through before it was marketed? etc. You can't expect any machine "designed" by humans to be 100% infallible. You, as the pilot, utilizing a mode of transportation that has risks must take some of the responsibility. If the company blatantly ignored a critical design flaw in order to meet production requirements or increase profits then "yes" I would sue them. If the company was unwilling to be completely cooperative in an investigation to determine the root cause of the design flaw then I would sue them. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #9 January 7, 2004 QuoteWas there or should there have been a regular maintenance procedure to prevent this from happening? No. QuoteDid they inform you of the procedure? If not, is it reasonable to expect you to know of the issue/procedure? Is it reasonable for any other typical pilot to know of it? N/A QuoteDid you make modifications to the aircraft? No. QuoteDid you operate the aircraft in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations and/or standard procedures and/or FARs, etc.? Yes. QuoteYou wouldn't happen to be talking about the A300 would you? Nope, hypothetical. Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cloudseeker2001 0 #10 January 7, 2004 Well, if a person were driving down the highway in a brand new car(of new or old design), and suddenly the car rips in half into two pieces........yes, of course, sue. No different with a plane, especially with todays testing technology-even before the plane leaves the CAD computer(notice I did not say the drafting table!). Manufacturers must take a minimum responsibility in respect to delivering safe products to the public regardless of the interest.Think of all the changes in the Auto industry that have been made in the last 20 years to make cars safer..........The big three did not make those changes because they love people! Better By Design, Zooropa, fly the friendly skies............ "Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance, others mean and rueful of the western dream" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #11 January 7, 2004 The key, for me at least, would be if there was something negligent in the design, testing or manufacture of the aircraft. In the hypothetical case the (?)NTSB(?) determined there was in fact a design defect. By that I assume you mean it was determined that something like more or fewer or a different type of rivets or something should have been used. In fact, there has been at least one case that I can think of where for testing purposes a manufacturer used one design spec for FAA certification purposes and then when it came time to mass manufacture the aircraft, they used different materials and as a result, there was at least one in-flight break-up. Sorry, but that's definitely grounds for a law suit. So, again, it all depends on the situation. BTW, I hold FAA certificated aircraft to a slightly higher standard than say, a parachute system. Generally speaking, a parachute can only kill one person at a time (the jumper) and most certificated aircraft can usually kill at least one other person that may have no idea whatsoever about the risks.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #12 January 7, 2004 Anyone that says they would sue needs to step away from aviation since its a nature of the beast. Design flaws are found every day of the week in almost every product. Some like software bugs might just cause a cursor to blink too fast, others like Xray machine might give lethal doses of Xrays under the wrong conditions. The difference between having an Xray machine injure you and being in a plane that injues you is that its a personal choice to get in to the plane. You full know by steping into the plane that you will be taking off and there are a lot of unknowns in flying, but the only thing for certian is you will land. How many pieces you land in depends on a lot of things... design and testing of the airplane, your piloting skills, the weather and hundreds of other little factors. Some of these are in your direct control, and others are not. You can eliminate the risk of the factors out of your control by avoiding the situation completly. If the software industry was able to be sued for every "design flaw" that they had no one would be employed in IT since all the companies would be out of business by now.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #13 January 7, 2004 I think it would depend on a lot of factors, but yes, I'd probably sue. I don't think I'd sue for billions, but I'd expect a new rig or two when I recover, and of course all medical expenses paid and all that. Maybe a free plane and gas for life too (once they fix the design flaw). On the other hand, if I was never going to fully recover and I would never be able to fly or skydive again, I'd probably try to put em outta bidness! If the plane was 15 years old and I was in an accident because a seat rail was worn and the seat suddenly rolled backwards on short final, due to a poor design, I'd be far less inclined to sue. As a system safety engineer for an aircraft company, I'd be very curious to learn how such a serious design flaw made it past all the design reviews, etc. I'd also feel REALLY bad for the guy that has my job for that company! Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ACMESkydiver 0 #14 January 7, 2004 QuoteGenerally speaking, a parachute can only kill one person at a time (the jumper) and most certificated aircraft can usually kill at least one onther person that may have no idea whatsoever about the risks. -I'm sure I could find a way to screw up bad enough to take someone else out with me when I go...~Jaye Do not believe that possibly you can escape the reward of your action. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #15 January 7, 2004 then why is everyone so upset over someone suing a parachute manufacturer over a design flaw? edit: not directed at Quade, but a general comment, he was just last when I hit reply. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #16 January 7, 2004 QuoteYou as the injured party or as an estate? Injured party. QuoteIs this hypothetical? Yes. QuoteThis isn't a good question to ask in a 'public' forum if it is reality Derek. Purely hypothetical. I know of no incident as I described. Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ACMESkydiver 0 #17 January 7, 2004 I dunno, Phree...if we took this point of view, auto insurance would not be necessary. And if you bought a brand spankin' new Chev Suburban of f the lot, say, and the steering column locked up suddenly in a turn at 45 MPH and caused serious injury...well I don't know about you, but I would be calling my attorney.~Jaye Do not believe that possibly you can escape the reward of your action. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #18 January 7, 2004 QuoteIf the software industry was able to be sued for every "design flaw" that they had no one would be employed in IT since all the companies would be out of business by now. Very true. Imagine if you'd die if your computer crashed. That's what happens in a fly-by-wire aircraft. Those computers don't crash. Or if they do, they have backups and ways of recovering. But it's not just reliability of software that's important. Software safety is a real field, used in applications where software can kill. I totally disagree that design flaws are to be expected in aircraft. 100% safety will never be guaranteed in an aircraft, but when you step into a certified aircraft, you SHOULD expect that no important parts will fall off, assuming the aircraft has been maintained and flown correctly. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cloudseeker2001 0 #19 January 7, 2004 yep! see my post^ "Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance, others mean and rueful of the western dream" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PLFKING 3 #20 January 7, 2004 Quotethen why is everyone so upset over someone suing a parachute manufacturer over a design flaw? Personally? It pisses me off because there's no way he can claim he didn't know it's dangerous....sorta like someone smoking all their lives, then their survivors sue the tobacco companies for billions. Surely he realized there was a reason for initialing those waivers 20-30 times at each new DZ he visited. My question is (before Nightingale's questioned caught my eye) Don"When in doubt I whip it out, I got me a rock-and-roll band. It's a free-for-all." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #21 January 7, 2004 Parachute manufacturers are much smaller than most aircraft manufacturers. Certification standards for aircraft are much higher. Much more analysis is done on an aircraft. And I know the risk I'm taking when I skydive. It's a LOT higher than the risk I'm taking when I fly. (here we go again! Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChileRelleno 0 #22 January 7, 2004 Was the design defect inherent, was it not found when the aircraft was designed and certified airworthy? If it was not found then and the manufacturer did not know about it or cover it up, then they are not responsible. Now if there was foreknowledge of said defect or cause of defect (i.e shoddy material/ manufacturing ect...) and the aircraft was not recalled and refitted, if there was criminal negligence. Then I would sue the manufacter. Only then. ChileRelleno-Rodriguez Bro#414 Hellfish#511,MuffBro#3532,AnvilBro#9, D24868 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #23 January 7, 2004 seems like he wasn't claiming that he didn't know it was dangerous. he was claiming that the flaw in the canopy made by the party in question increased that risk out of the normal level. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #24 January 7, 2004 QuoteIn the hypothetical case the (?)NTSB(?) determined there was in fact a design defect. By that I assume you mean it was determined that something like more or fewer or a different type of rivets or something should have been used. Correct assumption. I'll ad to it and say that because of your crash, and the accident report, the manufacturer issues a SB to fix the desgin on all the other aircraft witht he same design. Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #25 January 7, 2004 Quote then why is everyone so upset over someone suing a parachute manufacturer over a design flaw? There are certain situations in skydiving that can happen that -nobody- should expect your rig to save you from. Firing a reserve into a horseshoe malfunction, for instance, is one of those situations. The reserve -may- deploy and save your life and then again, it may become entangled, ball up and you'll die. Generally speaking, this is not a design flaw, but simply the way things are. On the other hand, there -may- be real case of negligence if you could prove that the rig had a defect in it that caused the horseshoe in the first place. Should you sue? Well, maybe, depending on the situation. Sueing could carry the risk of putting the company out of business in which case you may actually be worse off than before if you can't recover your court costs. I'm not going to say sueing is a "good idea" in almost any case, but I can certainly leave the door open to understanding why it might happen.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
