I'm afraid that link doesn't work jrpilot.

Cheers.

James

Quote:


I 100% agree with you on that.

Sorry on the link.

CraigL don't you think that $75 million is a little to much?  I know they have a every right to sue.  Maybe you would sue for that much but me personally I wouldn't.

Craig, the difference here is that it wasn't the airlines fault-hell, you could have a debate as to whether it was the pilot's fault or not (whether they should've diverted or not).

I always say-when judging a decision, the outcome of the decision does not matter at all, it has absolutely no bearing on the making of the decision itself. 

The only thing that matters when judging a decision is the set of circumstances the decision was made under-perhaps the pilots had been told that there wouldnt be any tstorms over the airport, that they could be vectored through, perhaps the pilots had shot a gazillion tstorm approaches, etc.

Basically, the right decision can have the wrong outcome-it's still the right decision.

I was just forced to execute an extremely dangerous approach into West Palm beach Int'l, hitting pockets of extreme turbulence and descending directly through tstorms with strikes all around me-seconds before I touched down, the airport was struck by lightning, just to the right of the runway.

I had three possible weather diverts, I knew about these conditions an hour before I touched down, and I have no problems with diverting-I've done it before.

So why didn't I?

Because the entire ****ing eastern seaboard is one big tstorm right now.  There wasnt a single viable alternate within my fuel range (I had taken on an extra 8,000 lbs just in case this type of thing happened), not even Atlanta was looking good.  Therefore, I made the decision to continue with the approach.

One way or the other, its not the airlines fault-sue mother nature, take the pilots to civil court, whatever.

Craig I just flew that flight an hour ago in the POSKY 752-but it still applies lmao

(although we did have tstorms closing in on us on my last xcountry)

I forget to put in a bit about the airlines training the pilots-yes, they trained them, but they're not the ones who made the game-time decision... of course, you could still say that the decision that was made was as a result of the airlines training, but I really think thats reaching a bit far.

It just seems to me like the decision to descend into a thunderstorm or not is immensly personal-there are no hard and fast rules on when to and when not to descend into tstorms-and if there are, they are often blatantly disregarded, ops in tstorms are rather common.  It's kind of like the "go/no go" decison for a private pilot, it's really mainly the personality of the pilot that's going to influence the decision, not necissarily what the manual says. (imho)

Quote:

Unfortunately, that's not far from the truth

Heres my two cents: I think that it depends on this passengers situation. Are they injured and traumatized? If so, then it would only be fair for the airline to pay their medical bills, and maybe for them to see a shrink. But $75M is WAY to much. It sounds more like they are trying to make money off of the situation, and don't care if they screw Air France over in the process.

Quote:

I can't read that article as the site is down. Assuming this concerns the recent incident at Toronto I think that both you & these passengers are being a little quick to judge Air France & Airbus. The official enquiry hasn't even started yet. We don't know the facts about the accident (it was an accident & not deliberate.) I hadn't heard about the door but we don't know why it jammed. It was presumably working properly when it was last checked. The frame could easily have been distorted in the crash. From the photos I've seen it was pretty severe. Fortunately everyone escaped without serious injury. In my view they were lucky to get away with it & they will most likely receive fair compensation automatically & without needing to sue anyone.

I'm getting sick & tired of this compensation culture. The only ones to benefit are usually the legal profession. I won't tell you my opinion of them. Let's just say I have a lot more faith in the airlines & aircraft manufacturers.

You could be right Craig although I don't remember anyone ever suing a car manufacturer for being unable to open the door after an accident. This has happened to me in the past & it would never have occurred to me to blame anyone for it. For pity's sake let's return to a little common-sense before you have to be insured the moment you get out of bed.

Might of hit a thermal-not uncommon in rainstorms.