Safetycheck
Retired and PO
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 175
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
Flight Options Accident?
- Thread starter RJL
- Start date
- Watchers 20
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
Safetycheck
Retired and PO
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 175
Jetz
God bless America
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2002
- Posts
- 514
Reiteration
The article in Aviation International News about the Flight Options accident (s) seems to be just a re-iteration of the NTSB report. It did not seem to provide any new information about the accidents.
The article does seem to show, however, some sort of bias by Aviation International News against Flight Options... I did not take notice of any articles about the NetJets accident in Leakey TX....having said that, last month they did have a blurb in there about that accident...without many detailed facts.
Interesting!
The article in Aviation International News about the Flight Options accident (s) seems to be just a re-iteration of the NTSB report. It did not seem to provide any new information about the accidents.
The article does seem to show, however, some sort of bias by Aviation International News against Flight Options... I did not take notice of any articles about the NetJets accident in Leakey TX....having said that, last month they did have a blurb in there about that accident...without many detailed facts.
Interesting!
Toploader
472 Cubes
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2001
- Posts
- 51
Jetz:
AIN gets their info straight from the NTSB. If you have read both reports, you'll notice that the report on 397QS is very short and does not have a whole lot of info. This is a typical NTSB preliminary report. On the other hand, the FlOps preliminary report goes into much greater detail, so there is more of a story to write in AIN.
There seems to be no rhyme or reason to what a preliminary NTSB report should look like. Just read several of them and you'll see a wide variation in how much info is there and how it is displayed.
Why on earth would the NTSB and AIN be biased against FlOps? Or toward NJA for that matter?
Thankfully nobody was hurt badly in either accident. "There but for the grace of God go I".
Toploader
AIN gets their info straight from the NTSB. If you have read both reports, you'll notice that the report on 397QS is very short and does not have a whole lot of info. This is a typical NTSB preliminary report. On the other hand, the FlOps preliminary report goes into much greater detail, so there is more of a story to write in AIN.
There seems to be no rhyme or reason to what a preliminary NTSB report should look like. Just read several of them and you'll see a wide variation in how much info is there and how it is displayed.
Why on earth would the NTSB and AIN be biased against FlOps? Or toward NJA for that matter?
Thankfully nobody was hurt badly in either accident. "There but for the grace of God go I".
Toploader
Turbinehead
One Dot High
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2002
- Posts
- 174
Clearly the NTSB is not bias
I think he was saying not that the NTSB is biased...obviously....but that the magazine Aviation International tends to show somewhat of a bias.
No, the NTSB report on the Net Jets accident is not shorter because of anything OTHER than the fact that the Netjets guys didnt sit there and sing like canaries in front of the investigators.
On the other hand, the Flight Options crew was doing just that... singing like canaries. I think they would have done well to use common sense and keep the lip zipped until they got some legal advice. Not only did these guys show their lack of experience by making rookie mistakes, but then they made the even bigger error of making comments that incriminated them for all of the world to see from now until eternity on the internet.
They will never do that again.
Poor guys.
I think he was saying not that the NTSB is biased...obviously....but that the magazine Aviation International tends to show somewhat of a bias.
No, the NTSB report on the Net Jets accident is not shorter because of anything OTHER than the fact that the Netjets guys didnt sit there and sing like canaries in front of the investigators.
On the other hand, the Flight Options crew was doing just that... singing like canaries. I think they would have done well to use common sense and keep the lip zipped until they got some legal advice. Not only did these guys show their lack of experience by making rookie mistakes, but then they made the even bigger error of making comments that incriminated them for all of the world to see from now until eternity on the internet.
They will never do that again.
Poor guys.
Safetycheck
Retired and PO
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 175
Liability / Negligence
Discussing with my "cronies" this Flight Options accident, we were debating the possibility that the owners of this particular airframe could sue the pilots for negligence. Think about it...they want to recover the value of the airframe, and the pax will probably want to sue for mental anguish, pain and suffering, etc.
Not to mention what the company probably wants to do to those poor guys who made this error.
What kind of insurance is available to fractional pilots to cover them in the event that all of the 1/16th owners, (or whatever fraction is sold on that airframe) want to go after the pilots to be made whole?
Discussing with my "cronies" this Flight Options accident, we were debating the possibility that the owners of this particular airframe could sue the pilots for negligence. Think about it...they want to recover the value of the airframe, and the pax will probably want to sue for mental anguish, pain and suffering, etc.
Not to mention what the company probably wants to do to those poor guys who made this error.
What kind of insurance is available to fractional pilots to cover them in the event that all of the 1/16th owners, (or whatever fraction is sold on that airframe) want to go after the pilots to be made whole?
flydog
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2001
- Posts
- 542
I have never heard of an airline or any other type of commercial pilot being personally sued for their actions during a crash. Maybe it has happened but insurance companies and airlines have a lot deeper pockets than working stiff pilots. Most guys that I know that are flying at the fractionals dont exactly have a house in Aspen and a Mercedes in the garage.
I also think its time to let this one go SafetyCheck. I dont know what your agenda is with Flight Options but this isnt the first time someone screwed up and god knows there have been far bigger screwups that killed an awful lot of people in the history of aviation.
If this topic interests you and want to save the world from any further aviation accidents why dont you check out job opportunities at the NTSB. That might satisfy your morbid curiosity in aviation tragedies.
I also think its time to let this one go SafetyCheck. I dont know what your agenda is with Flight Options but this isnt the first time someone screwed up and god knows there have been far bigger screwups that killed an awful lot of people in the history of aviation.
If this topic interests you and want to save the world from any further aviation accidents why dont you check out job opportunities at the NTSB. That might satisfy your morbid curiosity in aviation tragedies.
Safetycheck
Retired and PO
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 175
Get with it
Flydog, I would hardly characterize the healthy discussion of a Pilot's potential liability in lawsuits brought by fractional owners as a "morbid curiosity in aviation tragedies."
I dont know why you and other potential Flight Options people (you are not a FO employee, correct Flydoggie?) are so defensive that you cannot partake in a discussion. It baffles me and others I know who peruse this forum.
We believe this is a valid point of discussion for those considering a career in this relatively new field of aviation...one that is certainly still in the growth phase and where many aspects such as pilot liability to many owners is still untested to my knowledge.
An intelligent response would be appreciated. Keep your passions and emotions in check, little boy.
Flydog, I would hardly characterize the healthy discussion of a Pilot's potential liability in lawsuits brought by fractional owners as a "morbid curiosity in aviation tragedies."
I dont know why you and other potential Flight Options people (you are not a FO employee, correct Flydoggie?) are so defensive that you cannot partake in a discussion. It baffles me and others I know who peruse this forum.
We believe this is a valid point of discussion for those considering a career in this relatively new field of aviation...one that is certainly still in the growth phase and where many aspects such as pilot liability to many owners is still untested to my knowledge.
An intelligent response would be appreciated. Keep your passions and emotions in check, little boy.
Toploader
472 Cubes
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2001
- Posts
- 51
Safetycheck....
It sounds like you're trying to take advantage of a somewhat "captive" audience here and force discussions that aren't really interesting to most.
There have meen several articles written referring to individual pilot/owner liability in the event of a crash of a frac plane.
Suggest you check them out at http://www.avweb.com
Look in the legal section.
BTW, do you work for a fractional?
It sounds like you're trying to take advantage of a somewhat "captive" audience here and force discussions that aren't really interesting to most.
There have meen several articles written referring to individual pilot/owner liability in the event of a crash of a frac plane.
Suggest you check them out at http://www.avweb.com
Look in the legal section.
BTW, do you work for a fractional?
Turbinehead
One Dot High
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2002
- Posts
- 174
Toploader
472 Cubes
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2001
- Posts
- 51
Turbinehead, since you never have made a mistake in the air, you must be getting them all out of your system on this forum. Let it go.
You are surprised and amazed by the simplest concepts. This crew simply made a mistake.
Please don't post on this topic again unless you have new and relevant info.
Toploader
You are surprised and amazed by the simplest concepts. This crew simply made a mistake.
Please don't post on this topic again unless you have new and relevant info.
Toploader
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
