SWA Pax file suits; Swa, Boeing, Chicago and MDW Airport Named...

[jknight8907]

The reverser levers once past the unlocking detent actually just work as thrust levers...pull up and aft and you'll increase engine thrust which pushes more air out the reverser vanes deflecting much of the thrust forward. My private pilot friends who have not piloted jets are surprised when I tell them the engine don't actually 'reverse' their rotation to generate reverse thrust on landing!

Thanks for the very interesting summary. Silly question: Let's say the reverser doors have slid all the way aft, but the interlock pin did not release. Can the main thrust levers be advanced at this point and accomplish the same increase in power, or are they locked at the idle position? (I'm guessing that's a NO)

 

[rfresh]

Let's say the reverser doors have slid all the way aft, but the interlock pin did not release. Can the main thrust levers be advanced at this point and accomplish the same increase in power, or are they locked at the idle position? (I'm guessing that's a NO)

No. There is another interlocking pin on the main thrust levers. You can use only one or the other (either the reverser levers or the main thrust levers) but you cannot use both at the same time. Once the reverser levers are pulled up into that initial detent position, the main thrust levers are now locked out and cannot be moved at all.

If you 'stow' the reversers by pushing the reverser levers back down past that initial detent position, the reverser system folds back up and when the reverser doors are fully stowed only then is the main throttle pin released and you can once again move the main throttles forward for forward thrust.

 

[frqtflyer]

there is no amount of money that can replace a child. The only people that should be allowed to sue are those that can no longer support themselves and family.

 

[FN FAL]

there is no amount of money that can replace a child. The only people that should be allowed to sue are those that can no longer support themselves and family.

Ahhhh, those good old timey Christian values, where the individual has no rights, no voice, no power.

 

[filejw]

Frqtflyer,
Lawsuits are not just for the people harmed but also to protect the rest of us from corporate negligences.The penalty should be large enough as to make company think twice about making the same mistake again.Needs to effect the bottom line.

 

[frqtflyer]

All I was implying by the statement "no money can replace a child" is what good is it doing when a jury decides that a family deserves millions of dollars for an accident. Sure it might have been negligence on several peoples parts, but awarding someone millions of dollars for the death of someone isnt the only answer.

 

[frqtflyer]

Ahhhh, those good old timey Christian values, where the individual has no rights, no

FN FAL--I think you were looking for liberal...i am conservative and I fully support individual rights, but look at the amount of money being wasted because everyone in america is looking for the quick dollar and they feel the are entitled to collect because of an accident, someone elses negligence or even their own. All I meant was, what gives the right of the family to collect millions of dollars for something they cant replace...the money shouldnt be a comfort. Lawsuits can get way out of hand. I guess this is a "sue happy society" so what the hell!

 

[FN FAL]

FN FAL--I think you were looking for liberal...i am conservative and I fully support individual rights, but look at the amount of money being wasted because everyone in america is looking for the quick dollar and they feel the are entitled to collect because of an accident, someone elses negligence or even their own. All I meant was, what gives the right of the family to collect millions of dollars for something they cant replace...the money shouldnt be a comfort. Lawsuits can get way out of hand. I guess this is a "sue happy society" so what the hell!

If my next door neighbor spray paints his garage and the overspray lands on my new truck, I'm supposed to go over there with a shotgun in an attempt to make things right?

After all, you said...

...The only people that should be allowed to sue are those that can no longer support themselves and family.

 

[FN FAL]

If the sheriff decides he's not going to sign the required C.L.E.O. portion of ATF forms and says, "No machineguns in my county!"

You'd just take out a machete and lop off his head, right? After all, you said...

The only people that should be allowed to sue are those that can no longer support themselves and family.

No, you'd file a lawsuit requesting that the courts grant a "writ of mandamus" and you get the courts to make that sumbiscuit do his job and sign those papers. The sheriff is executive branch, not legislative branch...the sheriff cannot legislate from his office. The only way to get government officials to do their jobs sometimes, is to get the courts involved. Since it's not a criminal matter, but a civil matter, you'd use the civil courts to accomplish this, by suing.

 

[mar]

What does this remind me of?

The sheriff is executive branch, not legislative branch...the sheriff cannot legislate from his office. The only way to get government officials to do their jobs sometimes, is to get the courts involved. Since it's not a criminal matter, but a civil matter, you'd use the civil courts to accomplish this, by suing.

Right. No disagreement here.

But this just really struck a chord with me....sort of reminds me of someone else...but I just can't (G) put my (W) finger on it (B).....

Strange.

Oh well.