T-39 Crash, families sue

[dodge]

The families of the service members killed in the t-39 crash in 2006 have filed a wrongful death suit against L-3 Communications. The pilot was a 68-year-old retired commander.


the story courtesy of the Pensacola News Journal.
http://www.pnj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080215/NEWS01/80215028/1006

 

[TheBubba]

Wow... that's kinda crazy. Its not like you climb into the jet not knowing that there is the possibility of things going wrong. Its a risk we take having signed on to be Aviators/NFOc/WSOs.

For you legalese speakers out there, do the families actually have a case?

 

[nittany03]

The first two comments on the site say it all. Surprisingly levelheaded and cogent comments for a random news site . . .

 

[Pugs]

Surprisingly levelheaded and cogent comments for a random news site . . .

Right up to this point

"The report stated that said the pilot “was a competent, experienced, well-trained Naval Flight Officer” and concluded that his advanced age was not a factor in the crash."

 

[phrogdriver]

You can't sue the gov't for injury or death in the line of duty, but you can sue companies. It seems they're using that work-around.

 

[Single Seat]

Edited for compassion, I stand by my point though. It's a dangerous business, everyone knows it, every now and then we get an ugly reminder. Lawsuits however aren't going to bring them back or help the cause. As long as there are human beings behind the controls, mistakes will be made. Sometimes, regrettably those mistakes are fatal. If pilots, their employer, and their estates are found monetarily liable for those mistakes, this could be the beginning of the end.

 

[BigIron]

The Feres Doctrine doesn't allow the deceased's estate to sue the Fed Govt, but I don't think it protects contractors. This case (with some similarities) is proceeding forward.

I'm not in these families' shoes and don't judge their reasons for wanting to sue. If they have a claim, they have a claim. There is often financial destruction for those left behind after a death. Maybe they're telling L-3 or fill in the blank contractor to brush up their act. Who knows. It is what it is.

 

[SemperGumbi]

Are there NFO's on here who don't feel the contract pilots were safe? Honest question.

 

[FLYTPAY]

Are there NFO's on here who don't feel the contract pilots were safe? Honest question.

Without committing to a public forum.....how do you feel about elderly driving abilities versus your own? Why does the military not let 68 year olds fly on active duty?

 

[HH-60H]

Why does the military not let 68 year olds fly on active duty?

Because the mandatory retirement age for Admirals and Generals is 64.

 

[nittany03]

Right up to this point

"The report stated that said the pilot “was a competent, experienced, well-trained Naval Flight Officer” and concluded that his advanced age was not a factor in the crash."

I was referring to the comments at the bottom, not the crappy article itself. I did notice that, though. :icon_tong

 

[Crowbar]

Are there NFO's on here who don't feel the contract pilots were safe? Honest question.

There was only one time with a contract pilot that I legitimately thought I might die, and it wasn't a pilot age issue. He was actually one of the younger guys there but liked to show off from time to time.

Sure, the stereotype's there for a reason but for the most part it gets perpetuated by people who have never flown with them. Overall I thought they were good pilots, teachers, and in most cases, just all around swell guys.

 

[milky-f18]

Well, the difference between the two cases would be that one contractor (the Blackwater one) is accused of flat-hatting. It still sets the precedence that contractors can be sued. If you get out and go that route, better get a huge insurance policy, I guess. Hopefully a jury will be smart enough to see that if the pilot was fully qualified and healthy that everybody on board knew the risk they were taking before they strapped in. Would suck to have pilots have as big of insurance policies as doctors.

Milky

 

[jarhead]

...Would suck to have pilots have as big of insurance policies as doctors.

my father in law is a Doc and has his own business ... he pays over 150k a year for liability insurance.

on topic ... IMO, the lawsuit's a money grab, and the lawyer's gonna get rich

here's a question for you sea lawyers ... if I'm flying a hornet with a WSO and we crash, the WSO dies or is hurt and the investigation determines me, the pilot is at fault (for whatever reason), can the WSO's family sue me?

S/F

 

[phrogdriver]

here's a question for you sea lawyers ... if I'm flying a hornet with a WSO and we crash, the WSO dies or is hurt and the investigation determines me, the pilot is at fault (for whatever reason), can the WSO's family sue me?

S/F

You're protected under the Feres doctrine and I'm also guessing that there's immunity from liability for events happening in the course of your official duties. The only penalty you might face is a JAGMAN saying you were AFU.

It's the fact that these were contractors that makes all this interesting. With CTRs taking more and more of a role in gov't, I'm wondering how it will shake out.