This saddens me.

[diverborg 0]

Well, I know I haven't posted here in long time, but I'm curious how anybody can think this is a good idea. I guess I expected a little more from a civilized country like France.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25508979

[TheAnvil 0]

It's goat fuck stupid.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[kallend 1,683]

Quote

It's goat fuck stupid.

Was this wrong too?

A record $100 million* out-of-court wrongful death settlement was reached on behalf of J. and Rev. D.S.W. of the south side of Chicago. After calculating the wrongful death damages, this is believed to be the largest wrongful death settlement to a single family in the country. Rev. and Mrs. W., both age 50, were the parents of six children killed in a fiery van crash at approximately 10:30 a.m. after Rev. D.W. struck a piece of debris that was lying in the roadway. The debris turned out to be a mud flap/taillight assembly that detached from a truck's chassis and became lodged in the van's gas tank. Sparks from the assembly caused an explosion and/or fire, which engulfed the van and its occupants in flames. Rev. and Mrs. W. were burned, but narrowly escaped. Their six children perished in the fire.

Seems pretty similar to me, except it was a truck and not a DC10 dropping debris.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Skyrad 0]

Gross negligence at best. As for France being a civilised country, where did you get that one?

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[diverborg 0]

Thats a tough one Kallend, but I see a big difference between a civil suit from an accident compared to manslaughter charges. I think the concorde issue is quite a bit further of a stretch because they are actually pressing manslaughter charges to the engineers that designed the concorde because it should have had thicker fuel tanks. Not to mention bringing some very circumstantial claims into the case. Should Continental and Aeropostale be liable in a civil case, thats a whole other issue. Should either be liable in a criminal case, thats treading on dangerous ground and will have absolutely no positive outcome on anything, especially the aviation business as a whole. If they started doing this in the states, you're going to find a quick shortage of engineers and mechanics.
While this might be normal in some countries, I think this type of event would be a sad day in our country. Sadly this may cause some problems with international flights based from us companies as well as those who work here.

And, before you bring up the valujet crash, those are entirely different circumstances because, just having the O2 bottles in the baggage compartment was a criminal act.

This is just as bad as the accident in Brazil, where the two american pilots were held on criminal charges for the mid-air collision that could hardly be blamed on them.

[billvon 2,487]

>I think the concorde issue is quite a bit further of a stretch because
>they are actually pressing manslaughter charges to the engineers that
>designed the concorde because it should have had thicker fuel tanks.

That is indeed stupid - but again, every country does it. The company that made the epoxy that was supposed to hold up the Big Dig tunnel ceiling was charged with manslaughter. Never mind that it wasn't used correctly. SOMEONE MUST PAY!

=========
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
Big Dig Epoxy Provider Facing Manslaughter Charge

Powers Fasterners Inc. of Brewster, NY is being charged with a single count of involuntary manslaughter in the death of a 38-year-old Boston woman. Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley announced the handing up of charges this afternoon. A grand jury handed up these charges today.

Milena Del Valle was killed in July 2006 with a portion of Boston's Big Dig Interstate-90 connector tunnel ceiling collapsed and crushed the car she was riding in with her husband.

Powers Fasteners provided the epoxy used to secure the bolts to suspend the tunnel roof ceiling.
==========

[TheAnvil 0]

Yes. Tragic? Absolutely. Justified - no. This 'somebody has to pay' for every tragedy that happens bullshit doesn't fly with me. It's evidence of a legal system run amok. If someone is culpable, find them so in criminal court. This bullshit does nothing for society and nothing to assuage the pain of tragic occurrences.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[diverborg 0]

Wow, I hadn't even heard of that one. Well I guess my hopes of that not happening in our country are already crushed.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

The company that made the epoxy that was supposed to hold up the Big Dig tunnel ceiling was charged with manslaughter. Never mind that it wasn't used correctly.

In fairness, it seems there are at least 2 sides to the story on that issue:

http://www.designnews.com/article/CA6459232.html

The trial will be a classic "battle of the expert witnesses."

[billvon 2,487]

>In fairness, it seems there are at least 2 sides to the story on that issue:

As there always are. In this case, it seems like the contractor used the wrong grade of epoxy _and_ used it incorrectly; the anchor bolt epoxy fills had a lot of voids in them. However, the epoxy supplier also said some odd things, like "both grades of epoxy should have worked."

I have no doubt that there are similar issues going on with the French case.

[diverborg 0]

So do you think those that designed this epoxy deserve prison time?, even with all the other construction problems that the report you referenced pointed out. I can only hope that you're not taking that side.

Well I gotta try and pull away here, I'm wasting too much time in this forum again. I told myself I wouldn't do this. Will check back later. ttfn

[Darius11 12]

I think everyone needs to sign a "shit might happen" contract at birth.

You understand that we will not intentionally try to hurt you and anyone who does will be held accountable, and you will understand that SHIT happens once in a while.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

I think everyone needs to sign a "shit might happen" contract at birth.

You understand that we will not intentionally try to hurt you and anyone who does will be held accountable, and you will understand that SHIT happens once in a while.

How would you treat the middle ground when corners are intentionally cut, with knowledge that safety will be compromised, in an effort to save money?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[Channman 2]

Quote

Quote

It's goat fuck stupid.

Was this wrong too?

A record $100 million* out-of-court wrongful death settlement was reached on behalf of J. and Rev. D.S.W. of the south side of Chicago. After calculating the wrongful death damages, this is believed to be the largest wrongful death settlement to a single family in the country. Rev. and Mrs. W., both age 50, were the parents of six children killed in a fiery van crash at approximately 10:30 a.m. after Rev. D.W. struck a piece of debris that was lying in the roadway. The debris turned out to be a mud flap/taillight assembly that detached from a truck's chassis and became lodged in the van's gas tank. Sparks from the assembly caused an explosion and/or fire, which engulfed the van and its occupants in flames. Rev. and Mrs. W. were burned, but narrowly escaped. Their six children perished in the fire.

Seems pretty similar to me, except it was a truck and not a DC10 dropping debris.

Well Kallend I might be able to understand the payment for pain and suffering, but could not if on a jury convict an individual or individuals for manslaughter.

100 million is excessive, maybe not to the victims, but having attorneys walk away with 40 million is excessive. I would award no more than 12 million to the victims and only pay the hourly rate to the attorneys.

Have a great 4th, and may all your Avgas purchases be less than $4.00

Now I must return to my self imposed banning.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

I think everyone needs to sign a "shit might happen" contract at birth.

You understand that we will not intentionally try to hurt you and anyone who does will be held accountable, and you will understand that SHIT happens once in a while.

How would you treat the middle ground when corners are intentionally cut, with knowledge that safety will be compromised, in an effort to save money?

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
The Ford Pinto's gas tank comes to mind.

[billvon 2,487]

>>with knowledge that safety will be compromised, in an effort to save money?

>Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! The Ford Pinto's gas tank comes to mind.

So you would claim that the lawsuit against Aerospatiale is justified?

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

>>with knowledge that safety will be compromised, in an effort to save money?

>Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! The Ford Pinto's gas tank comes to mind.

So you would claim that the lawsuit against Aerospatiale is justified?

Might be. The article says, "The French judicial inquiry also determined the tanks lacked sufficient protection from shock — and that Concorde’s makers had been aware of the problem since 1979." The "lack of sufficient protection" is more or less a straight product-liability concept. But it's the accusation that the Mfgr knew about it & (possibly) did nothing to correct it - impliedly, thereby knowingly (or at least recklessly) placing lives at risk - that is the real damning accusation here. Definitely some parallels to the Ford case, on the face of it: a fuel tank known by the vehicle mfgr to have an undue (key-word: "undue") propensity to rupture, ignite and immolate the passengers. Should be an interesting trial.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Well, I know I haven't posted here in long time, but I'm curious how anybody can think this is a good idea. I guess I expected a little more from a civilized country like France.

Ah, when I read this, I was expecting the link to be about the new line dancing craze in France:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4036375.ece

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

he French judicial inquiry also determined the tanks lacked sufficient protection from shock — and that Concorde’s makers had been aware of the problem since 1979

Then, why didn't the French judicial system do something about it in 1979? Tort systems are broke, thoughout the western democracies.

We are all engines of karma

[billvon 2,487]

>Then, why didn't the French judicial system do something about it in 1979?

Because then the state would have to approve every component of every aircraft that anyone built in France.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Might be. The article says, "The French judicial inquiry also determined the tanks lacked sufficient protection from shock — and that Concorde’s makers had been aware of the problem since 1979."

How great a defect is it if nothing happens for over 2 decades, and then only once?

The pinto problem wasn't theoretical, Ford just decided it was cheaper to let people blow up rather than fix all of them. Potentially similar question with the alledged bad tires with the SUV rollovers.

[billvon 2,487]

>Ford just decided it was cheaper to let people blow up rather than fix all
>of them. Potentially similar question with the alledged bad tires with the
>SUV rollovers.

Right. And Aerospatiale decided that it was OK to accept a certain fatality rate to save money and/or make their product more competitive. Every other manufacturer of vehicles out there does that.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>Ford just decided it was cheaper to let people blow up rather than fix all
>of them. Potentially similar question with the alledged bad tires with the
>SUV rollovers.

Right. And Aerospatiale decided that it was OK to accept a certain fatality rate to save money and/or make their product more competitive. Every other manufacturer of vehicles out there does that.

The difference remains that there were no failures. They didn't ignore a developing problem.

Lord knows how French law works, but I see no cause for criminal prosecution here, and it's a bit spotty on the civil side at best.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

Because then the state would have to approve every component of every aircraft that anyone built in France.

Don't they do something along those lines any way?

We are all engines of karma

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

The difference remains that there were no failures. They didn't ignore a developing problem.

"The French judicial inquiry also determined the tanks lacked sufficient protection from shock — and that Concorde’s makers had been aware of the problem since 1979."

They ignored an accident waiting to happen.