Posts by user "Chu Chu" [Posts: 6 Total up-votes: 3 Page: 1 of 1]ΒΆ

Chu Chu
February 17, 2025, 22:45:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11830289
Of course, if a plaintiff can prove the Blackhawk crew was negligent, deciding whether to fly into a CRJ isn't a discretionary function.

Subjects Blackhawk (H-60)  CRJ

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Chu Chu
February 18, 2025, 01:04:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11830382
Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50
I realize that you are trying to be clever, but are you insinuating that the UH-60 crew intentionally hit the CRJ?
I wasn't insinuating that -- or really trying to be clever, either. I should have said this more directly, but the legal defenses that might be available with respect to the FAA's actions almost certainly won't apply to the Blackhawk crew. And the Government won't pay twice for the same accident in any event. So if the Blackhawk crew was negligent, which I have to say seems likely, the FAA's possible defenses are pretty much irrelevant.

Subjects Blackhawk (H-60)  CRJ  FAA

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Chu Chu
March 23, 2025, 23:11:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11852988
I somewhat doubtful it's an either/or. Designing an approach where one in a thousand landings attempts ended in a crash would be a travesty. It's been a long time since I went to law school, but I'm pretty sure the crew that got wrong what 999 others got right would still be considered negligent.

Subjects: None

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Chu Chu
March 24, 2025, 11:33:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11853211
I\x92m not an expert either \x97 at least not in anything useful. But you\x92re quite right that it\x92s possible this crew wasn\x92t negligent given the particular circumstances they faced.

My point was intended to be more general; an unsafe system doesn\x92t relieve a crew from exercising reasonable care (to throw in a legal sounding phrase that just might be right).

Subjects: None

2 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Chu Chu
October 18, 2025, 16:00:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11972121
IGs generally do (current circumstances excepted) have lump sum annual appropriations to cover all their activities. But they quite possibly lack significant aviation expertise, and their regular funding might not stretch to hiring much in.

Subjects: None

1 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Chu Chu
December 18, 2025, 13:29:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 12007497
It looks like the Answer admits that the controllers failed to give a required notification, but not that this was a cause of the accident. I\x92m not sure there was any other realistic choice.

Subjects: None

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.