Miami Personal Injury Lawyer - aviation attorney

Plane Headed For Ft. Pierce Crashes When Taking Off From Charleston. All Are Confirmed Dead.

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 08:44:23 GMT

Tragedy struck again Wednesday for a small airplane and its passengers. Federal authorities said four people were killed when a small plane headed to Fort Pierce, FL, crashed Wednesday shortly after departure in South Carolina. Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman Kathleen Bergen said the Piper PA-23 was engulfed in flames when firefighters arrived. The aircraft crashed shortly after departure at 6:45 a.m.

Bergen said the plane was headed to St. Lucie County Airport in Fort Pierce. The pilot has been identified the pilot as Peter Radding of North Charleston, S.C. One of Radding’s neighbors, Jim Deaton, told The Post and Courier of Charleston, S.C., that Radding had planned to stop in Florida, pick up more passengers, then head to the Bahamas.

It’s the second four-person, fatal crash in the Southeast. On Sept.20, a Piper PA-32R Saratoga plunged into the Everglades killing pilot Bruce Barber, his wife, son and a family friend. It was the "fourth fatal accident at the (Dorchester, SC) airport in recent years" according to Jason Ward, a Dorchester Counter Administrator who commented on the investigation.

Radding had 40 years of flight experience, and, like Barber, was described as very meticulous with his airplane. The front seat passenger in Radding's plane, James Randolph Hargenrader, was also a licensed pilot. National Transportation and Safety Bureau officials were expected on the scene late Wednesday. There had been no public speculation by officials as to the cause of the crash by late Wednesday afternoon. Radding was reputed to be an excellent pilot, and "volunteered to fly mercy air ambulance trips and introduced young people to flying".

One is left to wonder in an accident like this, where there are experienced pilots and (for now) a seemingly maintained aircraft, how does something like this happen. The trouble with airplane crashes, is the fuel generally causes tremendous damage to the remaining parts, and essentially wipes out evidence of what went wrong. Meanwhile, the family members who are left, are devastated by the accident, and all the questions remaining. It seems a difficult decision to make, but allowing the FAA do do the only investigation on the aircraft may result in more questions than answers, which is why experts are retained to perform an "oversight" of the inspection, particularly in the hours and days immediately following the crash, which is when most of the information is gleamed.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Family’s weekend trip ends in tragedy when Piper Aircraft goes down in the Everglades

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 08:24:53 GMT

Bruce Barber was meticulous when it came to flying.

His business partner, Eric Elliott, described him to the Miami Herald “`It's all about risk management,'' he said. ``You're always preparing for something to go wrong. You want to get everything where it's supposed to be in case you lose power'' and need to land. Mr. Elliott continued: Mr. Barber was ``always ahead of the activity. Every possible piece of gear you could have on a plane, he had,'' including three GPS systems and a storm scope.

Family friend Danny Ponce said of Mr. Barber: “He was a very safe pilot -- very cautious. If there was going to be bad weather, we left earlier or we didn't go. In the last six months, he got a new radar system. He was very fussy about that plane.''

So what went wrong on Sunday, Sept. 20, when the Piper PA-32R Saratoga plunged into the Everglades in Broward County killing Mr. Barber, his wife Karen Chubbuck Barber, son Payton, and family friend Phillip Marsh of Coral Springs?

A Federal Aviation Administration official said Mr. Barber reported engine trouble and called in a “mayday” before communication cut out. But the National Transportation Safety Board (NTS B) may take months to figure out what exactly went wrong.

If there was a manufacturer defect or if there was pilot error on account of Mr. Barber, there may be damages to be gained or a lesson to be learned. But now the moment belongs to mourning a philanthropic, model family and the future of 10-year-old Chloe Barber, the daughter who didn’t make the trip with her parents and brother.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Sound Advice- check the weather report before boarding a plane

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 10:41:35 GMT

As much as we assign blame for airplane crashes on human and mechanical error, Mother Nature often is a large part of the equation.

While Congress rightfully is seeking to improve the way pilots are trained, one of the best ways to avoid an accident may be to check the forecast.

Case in point: An ATR-72 turboprop plane carrying 68 passengers and four crew members slid off the runway on Tuesday at Koh Samui airport in Thailand. The aircraft slammed into an old air traffic control tower, killing Captain Chartchai Punsuwan while his co-pilot remains in a critical condition in hospital. Five passengers suffered serious injuries and two others sustained minor injuries. According to early reports, the plane was attempting to land in a storm, and heavy rain and strong winds may have played a role in the accident.

It’s just one of a string of recent weather-related airplane emergencies. Two people were hurt when a Detroit-bound Delta Air Lines plane ran into severe turbulence and was forced to land in Kentucky.

And at least 28 passengers aboard Continental Flight 128 were injured as the plane flew from Rio de Janeiro to Houston. The flight made an emergency landing in Miami.

Between 1994 and 2003, there were 4,167 weather-related accidents, according to a report by the Federal Aviation Administration’s National Aviation Safety Data Analysis Center (NASDAC). Of those accidents, 1,717 show no record of a weather briefing.

In South Florida, we are accustomed to checking the hurricane map days in advance to see if we need to make preparations for a storm. And anybody with Internet access can get a 5-day weather report. So we know that airlines have the weather information.

The question to be asked is what are the standards for deciding when to try to land and take-off? And are those safety standards being routinely followed or are exceptions made? Given the strong safety records of airlines and the incredibly miniscule chance that an individual will be involved in an airplane accident, are the numbers being played to the detriment of the few? Let’s hope not but just to be certain, check the weather reports before your choose to fly.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Airline layoffs and cut backs- is there any relationship to the recent plane crashes?

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:25:00 GMT

The economy is in freefall, and once again the airlines are in trouble. Of course, in recent times, with a few exceptions, the airlines and the airline industry are often in trouble. Last year, the industry had problems due to high oil prices. In 2007, the industry feared it was in trouble because of labor relations difficulties. There have been troubles because of short changing long time airline employees and pension holders. None of this has made the airlines more popular among the public.

As with any number of large corporations, labor costs are one of the airline industries biggest expenses and when trouble comes, layoffs are sometimes necessary. With the industry in perpetual crisis, the airlines have indeed laid off many workers.

This process is coming at a time when many airlines are under fire for inadequate maintenance, poor pilot training, and failing to correct the problem of pilot fatigue. It then becomes reasonable to ask what effects these continued layoffs may have on the ability of the airlines to provide safe travel services for their customers.

Layoffs may take any number of forms. Employees may be let go for performance related reasons, they may be encouraged to take early retirement, or the company may simply lop off the least senior employees. Some of this process may be controlled by union contracts, some may not. In any event, at many airlines it appears that employees to be laid-off are selected either on purely fiscal terms, by encouraging those who make the most to take early retirement, or they are selected purely in seniority terms.

The process whereby any company makes hiring and firing decisions is just not very transparent. This makes it difficult to know if some in the industry are sacrificing pilot experience and skill in exchange for lower wage costs. However, if safety is the paramount concern, encouraging long terms pilots to retire and retaining younger pilots solely on the basis of seniority without regard for skill seems a poor method for providing safer skies. Are airlines choosing to retain and reward skilled pilots or to replace them with less skilled pilots who can be paid less? There is not evidence of this that I know of, but it's a question that needs to be examined to ensure this is not happening.

The airlines are common carriers. This means, in legal terms, that they have a duty to provide the highest level of safety possible. In the event of future aviation tragedies, such as the recent commuter flight in Buffalo, we may be sure that regulators and the bereaved families of the victims will be looking very closely at every aspect of an airline’s operation. Training and retention decisions should be no more immune to these examinations than any other aspect of doing business.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Another Airbus Crash- Travelers becoming concerned about airline safety records and airline travel

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:01:18 GMT

Yemen flight IY 626 was en route from Yemen to Comoros when it encountered what was described as some “tough weather”. The Airbus A310, holding 153 people, was preparing to land when the plane flew into 71 mile an hour winds. The plane was only 11 miles from its destination when it crashed into the Indian Ocean, killing all those onboard.

An HIS Jane’s expert, Chris Yates, stated that “weather may indeed have been the primary cause of the crash of this Yemeni Air A310-300.” The Airbus jet that ultimately crashed into the Indian Ocean was being monitored by EU authorities, according to Dominique Bussereau, France’s transportation minister. Bussereau told French reporters that inspectors had noted several faults on the Yemenia Airways jet, and was being more closely monitored in preparation to be heard by the European Union Security Committee. Yates told CNN that “It’s more than likely to be a weather-related incident. Having said that you cannot rule out a maintenance issue”

This is the second crash involving an Airbus jet in only a month. Air France Airbus A330 crashed while on route to Paris from Rio de Janeiro on June 1^st. All of the passengers have been presumed dead and the cause of the crash is still under investigation. United States accident investigators have been researching recent airspeed and altitude indicator failures aboard the Airbus jet airplanes. Although two flights this past month have reported problems in their instrumentation, they have been able to land safely with no injuries. These issues have raised concern as to the composite materials used in the construction of the Airbus jets, with questions of its strength and ability to withstand stress.

A recent statement made by a certified aircraft maintenance professional in Florida said that “airbus products are the flimsiest and most poorly designed as far as airframe structure is concerned by an almost obsession to utilize composite materials.”

The aviation community, and the world as a whole, waits to see what the investigation will bring as to the fate of the Airbus jets. As those around the world pay their respects to those lost in such tragedies beyond their control, we look forward to a safer plane flight tomorrow.

Meanwhile, as a first in several decades, travelers are investigating airline safety records and considering that airline travel is not the only means to get around. To get a pulse of how the world is reacting, not just those involved "in the industry", take a glimpse on Twitter and Facebook. You will find the messages about Michael Jackson and Farrah Fawcett have been replaced with "I hope my flight isn't an Airbus" and "I think we will drive instead of fly". Between the flurry of high profile deaths, and the reporting of back to back major commercial airline crashes, questions of one's own mortality seem inevitable. Still, as a sign of hope and life, a five year old was found today among the wreckage. He is alive and doing fine. A miracle of enormous significance in these troubling times.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Airline Companies: Beware of Public Perception. The Public is Watching, Waiting, All Eyes are on You. It’s No Time to Make a Mistake.

Robert Parks — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:38:07 GMT

As I scan the latest news articles and Google alerts, there seems to an influx of stories focused on air travel safety. Could it be the media playing on the devastating Air France Flight 447 – only 50 bodies found, minimal debris recovered and still the French submarine searches for the Black Box beacon signals, which will expire within the week leaving the truth under the ocean.

One story that caught my eye was posted on eTurboNews Federal Aviation Administration administrator Randy Babbit, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, and reps from the airline business met in Washington, D.C. to discuss finding ways for airlines to voluntarily make flying safer.

What are they proposing? It was suggested that the airlines create a manifesto to reassure travelers that “airlines are doing all they can to ensure pilots are beyond prepared to fly passengers to their destinations, and to help more senior pilots mentor those with less experience.”

Babbitt told airline companies today he expects them to do complete background checks on pilots before hiring them to fly passengers -- including getting permission from pilots to access all of their training records.

And the news continues. This weekend I noticed an article in Bloomberg.com about a new satellite system that will provide more detailed weather information for pilots. According to the story, this system has been under development for four years by the FAA and other counterparts around the globe – the satellite-based upgrade will provide real time climate images and data to the cockpit so the pilots can see a storm miles before they reach it.

In the U.S., the proposed technology is called NextGen, for Next Generation Air Transportation System, and is estimated to cost the government as much as $22 billion to develop, according to the FAA. The Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast link, being built by a team led by ITT Corp., is slated to be operational by 2013, according to the FAA Web site. ITT, based in White Plains, New York, is a manufacturer of engineering products and communications systems.

An upgrade to aircraft technology is a hot topic, but so are the pilots that fly the friendly skies. Take the unfortunate mid-flight death of 60-year old pilot Craig Lenell. The Continental Airlines Flight 61 was traveling from Brussels to Newark, NJ when Mr. Lenell suffered a heart attack - the co-pilots took control of the flight with no awareness from the passengers.

This could now lead to questions regarding the qualification of older pilots flying commercial aircraft, but let’s not forget pilot Chesley B. Sullenburger III, 57, who landed the plane in the Hudson River saving the lives of all passengers. Regardless, should there be a limit on the age for pilots flying commercial aircraft? According to the pilot’s wife, Mr. Lenell was in perfect health and had no prior history of heart conditions and never missed his twice-a-year physicals.

Millions of people put their trust in the airlines they choose everyday. Accidents happen. Mistakes are made. But public perception is the key and unfortunately there is no price that will bring back a loved one killed in an air disaster. When the cause is a manufacturing defect, a known danger, a situation that is avoidable, that is when people start to get mad. Too early to feel certain that this is what happened on Air France Flight 447, but I’ve been doing aviation work for 45 years, and folks, the writing is on the wall already.

Finally, the latest in airline crash news: Air France is offering a first advance on compensation for families that lost loved ones – 17,500 euro. For those who don’t have a calculator for a brain, like me, that equals just under $24,000 USD. I wonder if they ask for a release with that. What is your guess?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Robert Parks

Computers Don’t Make Better Decisions Than Humans: New Discoveries From Air France Wreckage As Body Parts Are Found

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:58:04 GMT

It has been approximately two weeks since Air France Flight 447 from Rio de Janeiro to Paris crashed into the Atlantic Ocean, and there are still more questions then answers as the search continues for the one device that could illuminate the truth of what happened that fateful night: the cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder.

According to The Christian Science Monitor, which gives a detailed update of Flight 447 and Airbus, the examination of the 49 bodies found indicate that the plane broke into pieces, probably splitting in the middle, while airborne.

Body parts are now being found and examined. They tell their own story. According to the an Associate Press Report posted two hours ago, "autopsies revealed fractures in the legs, hips and arms of Air France disaster victims. Experts said those injuries — and the large pieces of wreckage pulled from the Atlantic — strongly suggest the plane broke up in the air."

Many are still critical of the aircraft itself. It has been reported that Air France has replaced the airspeed censors – known as Pilot tubes – on its entire fleet of Airbus A330 and A340 aircraft; the A330 is considered the most automated plane in the air today. Because the airspeed censors may have been iced over due to the weather, causing erratic airspeed readings to the plane’s computers, this has drawn quite a bit of attention. Whether or not this caused the crash is still unconfirmed. Probably the greatest controversy among experts is the idea that this plane, a relatively “newer” model among carriers, is more electronically dependent than a plane ought to be. This particular model actually blocks the pilots out if electrical switch is down or hit, essentially taking over. There is no recourse for pilots onboard – in essence no manual override. The scare is computers don’t have the judgment of humans, obviously, but in a situation such as this, having the cognizant ability to make decisions based on instinct, rather than a model that is comprised of statistical data is beneficial.

According to Airbus’ CEO Tom Enders, who was defending the aircraft earlier this week: "The AIRBUS record is very, very impressive," he said. "(They have) more than 16 million flight hours, more than 3 million flights and this is so far one of the safest commercial aircraft built. We are supporting the investigation as much as we can and we very much hope that the recorders will be found soon, so that we find out what really happened," Enders said.

Despite the theories and new evidence of body parts found, until the Brazilian military ships, the French submarine, and the two Dutch ships locate that desolate ping beacon miles under the ocean, the fate of Airbus Flight 447 may remain a mystery.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte