Sharks are coming out already

wnbubbleboy

Veteran
Aug 21, 2002
944
22
By God Indiana
May Be Indicative of Carrier-Specific Problem, Says Nation's Leading Aviation
Law Firm

NEW YORK, Dec. 9 /PRNewswire/ -- The fatal landing of Southwest Airlines
(SWA) Flight 1248 at Chicago's Midway Airport in a snowstorm last night is
strikingly similar to at least one other runway overrun accident involving
Southwest, and may be indicative of a carrier-wide operational problem,
according to attorneys and pilots with the aviation law firm Kreindler &
Kreindler LLP (http://www.kreindler.com). The previous incident occurred at
Bob Hope Airport in Burbank, CA, on March 5, 2000, injuring several people on
the ground.
"While the investigation is ongoing and the specific cause in the Midway
accident is not yet determined, it was the direct responsibility of the
Southwest flight crew to safely land the 737 aircraft or make the decision
that a safe landing could not be accomplished," said Daniel O. Rose, a partner
at Kreindler who is also a highly trained pilot. "The crew, as do all crews,
had the option to either abort the approach or divert the plane and passengers
safely to another airport. Does this suggest a pattern in SWA's flight
operations?
"In the Burbank crash of a 737-300, injured parties successfully claimed
that SWA fosters a culture of expediency, cost savings and an aggressive 'get
the plane down' approach that, in combination, compromised passenger safety,"
said Mr. Rose, who was involved in the Burbank litigation. "In that incident,
it was determined that the SWA flight crew failed to abort an unstable
approach. The aircraft approached too high, too fast and too steep. The
flight crew was warned by the onboard warning system, yet proceeded with a
dangerously out of limits approach and failed to abort the landing when it was
clear they were unable to stop on the runway."
Mr. Rose indicated that, as a cost-savings method, SWA had also decided to
disconnect an automatic braking system, which would have stopped the aircraft
on the runway in Burbank. As at Midway, the Burbank aircraft ran off the
runway, broke through the airport barriers, 20 feet tall steel blast fences,
and ran onto Hollywood Way, a busy multi-lane road, crashing into a car and
injuring its occupants. Kreindler was the lead attorney in the case on behalf
of the 20 families involved in the Burbank crash.
"No less important is the fact that an especially high level of caution is
required whenever severe weather that could compromise a safe landing is
obvious and when runway conditions deteriorate," said Marc S. Moller, an
aviation attorney and partner at Kreindler & Kreindler. "Weather doesn't
cause accidents; people do. The fact that other aircraft safely landed last
night before Flight 1248 and that the runway condition was reported as 'fair'
would seem to suggest that there was something different about this plane's
approach and landing. The 737-700 involved in the Midway crash should have
had the auto brake system installed and, if used, that should have stopped the
aircraft, given a normal and stable approach by the flight crew. Yesterday's
crash is not the first in bad weather that should never have happened."
Originating from Baltimore-Washington International Airport last night,
the landing of SWA's Boeing 737 killed at least one child on the ground and
seriously injured several others as the plane overran the runway and plowed
onto Central just south of 55th Street adjacent to Midway Airport.

About Kreindler & Kreindler LLP
Founded in 1950, Kreindler & Kreindler LLP (http://www.kreindler.com) is
nationally recognized as the first and most prominent aviation law firm in the
nation. With offices in New York and Los Angeles, the firm has been the
leading plaintiff legal counsel on hundreds of aviation cases, including major
ones such as the September 11 terrorist attacks, Pan Am Lockerbie Flight 103,
Korean Airlines Flight 007, and American Airlines Flight 587, and many cases
of small private and commercial crashes. The leading legal textbook in the
aviation field, "Aviation Accident Law," and a standard legal treatise, "New
York Law of Torts," were authored by members of the firm. The firm has
handled many cases stemming from weather-related accidents, including World
Airways Flight 30, Boston, MA (runway overrun due to ice); USAir 405, New
York, NY (icing on takeoff); and Continental 1713, Denver, CO (icing on
takeoff).

Marc S. Moller: Kreindler law partner who has represented thousands of
victims of commercial and general aviation disasters, and litigated accidents
involving single-engine, multi-engine, helicopter, corporate jet and military
equipment for more than 25 years. He is presently the Plaintiffs' Liaison
Counsel for all passenger and ground victim tort litigation arising from the
September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and is an internationally recognized
expert in aircraft litigation.
Daniel O. Rose: Kreindler law partner specializing in litigating airline,
general aviation and military crash cases, as well as other complex products
liability and negligence cases. Mr. Rose served in the United States Navy as
a carrier-based attack pilot including service in Operation Desert Shield. He
is a multi-engine commercial and instrument rated pilot.
 
It never takes long for the ambulance chasers to emerge - some of them probably starting making phone calls soliciting business last night.

Jim
 
It never takes long for the ambulance chasers to emerge - some of them probably starting making phone calls soliciting business last night.

Jim
As I recall, When Delta 191 crashed in Dallas back in 1985, a lawyer posing as a priest was in the hotel with victims families, handing out cards for his law firm. And they wonder why lawyers get bad reputations.
 
Personal injury attorneys must be all a flutter about this situation. Feeding on the misfortune of others looking to line there pockets with blood money.

The J. Lyman 'Bruiser' Stones (Rainmaker reference) are out there fuleing their caddy's heading to Chicago like Contrators to a hurricane site.
 
IANYAL, but let's face the facts: we're dealing with an airline that has a history of slider jets whose pilots decided to land on a short contaminated runway, the result being a 737 running over a highly sympathetic plaintiff.
 
> And they wonder why lawyers get bad reputations.


100 passenger buss carrying 97 layers to a convention site is hit by a train killing all aboard. Headlines the next day: Tragedy strikes! 3 seats empty!

MB
 
IANYAL, but let's face the facts: we're dealing with an airline that has a history of slider jets whose pilots decided to land on a short contaminated runway, the result being a 737 running over a highly sympathetic plaintiff.

And when you become one, you would be absolutly slaughtered (at least based on your quoted statement) by whatever counsel WN and their insurance carriers retain.

They have (And still have) the safest safety record of any airline that has operated during LUV's corporate lifetime. Other jets landed on that same runway prior to the LUV flight's approach.

But enjoy the rhetoric. It'll make the objections that much more amusing for the guys across the aisle.
 
IANYAL, but let's face the facts: we're dealing with an airline that has a history of slider jets whose pilots decided to land on a short contaminated runway, the result being a 737 running over a highly sympathetic plaintiff.

If a few incidents -at most- of planes sliding off the runway is a "fact" of an airline lacking safety, what, then, how would you rate the following?:

AA - 587 fatalities (+68 for BEagle)
AS - 88
DL - 134
NW - 154
UA - 288
US - 156
WN - 1

Based on your logic...I'd take WN over any other US carrier hands down!! Don't let jealousy, envy, or hatred get in your way of facts.
 
1 fatality is too much. no need to drag pointless fatality data. Airline travel is the safest for of travel. Accidents will happen and when they do they tend to have a large number of deaths or injuries. Why dont we put this issue to bed and pray for those who have suffered.
 
1 fatality is too much. no need to drag pointless fatality data. Airline travel is the safest for of travel. Accidents will happen and when they do they tend to have a large number of deaths or injuries. Why dont we put this issue to bed and pray for those who have suffered.

I agree completely that any fatality is too much and I have already expressed my sympathies to all involved in this incident as it truly is a tragedy. I have to disagree, however, that I was wrong to call out Avek for trying to capitalize on a tragedy by posting utter trash. If I were overjoyed that there were fatalities, I would have been wrong, but I was merely pointing out that WN does not have a major issue with safety and Avek and all others on this board that have been trying to capitalize on a tragedy just need to go away. It's sickening to me that there is such a mentality out there.
 
Let's not forget the airports culpability in this. The airport knows the conditions of the airport surface better than anyone. Once the conditions no longer allow for "a single thing to go wrong" the flight should have been diverted. The end of the runway should have had a method of arresting a jet in this situation. I don't think you can bleame the airline or crew as much as you can blame the airport manager.

And the boy's family certainly do deserve restitution for their pain and suffering.
 
If a few incidents -at most- of planes sliding off the runway is a "fact" of an airline lacking safety, what, then, how would you rate the following?

Nothing like spewing inaccurate facts to spin a weak & classless line argument...

DL lost more than 134 in one accident alone (DL191 @ DFW, 136 fatalities ). They had at least three other fatal incidents (BOS, DFW, PNS) which resulted in another 120 fatalities.
 
Nothing like spewing inaccurate facts to spin a weak & classless line argument...

DL lost more than 134 in one accident alone (DL191 @ DFW, 136 fatalities ). They had at least three other fatal incidents (BOS, DFW, PNS) which resulted in another 120 fatalities.

Oh grow up already. Here is the damned link if you must peruse. I manufactured nothing so pull the stick out and get on with your life. Besides...you are argueing just for the sake of argueing b/c I merely posted to prove a point that WN's ONE fatality does not make them an inferior carrier when it comes to safety. It wasn't a difficult point to pick up on.

Airline Fatalities

Now...as operaations metioned...this is a really dumb issue to discuss in the wake of recent events. I merely posted an equally ridiculous counter-argument for a ridiculous post by Avek given the circumstances but it was 100% from the facts. Stop trying to find a conspiracy b/c there ain't one here. That's all I'm going say about this crap...I'm not going to argue semantics when a poor boy has lost his life.
 
Oh grow up already. Here is the damned link if you must peruse. I manufactured nothing so pull the stick out and get on with your life. Besides...you are argueing just for the sake of argueing b/c I merely posted to prove a point that WN's ONE fatality does not make them an inferior carrier when it comes to safety. It wasn't a difficult point to pick up on.

Just because you haven't mastered "Googling To Make Yourself Look Smart" or were trying to one-up Avek doesn't mean get you off quite that easily, Ch.11.9 --- you're inaccurate example quite clearly was making an insinuation that statistics can be used to prove how safe/unsafe a particular airline is.

There are airlines who have zero fatalities that I wouldn't consider letting even you fly on, and not because of their statistics on some aviation enthusiast's webpage, but because of their approach to cutting costs at any price, their lack of training, or downright scary aircraft.

Your attempt to show WN as still being safe was predominantly built on a list of accidents which had nothing to do with unsafe practices, but instead were caused by a particular chain of events at the wrong time. Examples: the cargo door design failure on UA811, an undetected turbine disc crack on UA232, an unrecoverable/undetectable wind shear condition with DL191, or any one of the 737 rudder accidents.

An airline's safety record is only as predictable as their last recorded landing. Bragging about it is pointless.
 
If a few incidents -at most- of planes sliding off the runway is a "fact" of an airline lacking safety, what, then, how would you rate the following?:

AA - 587 fatalities (+68 for BEagle)
AS - 88
DL - 134
NW - 154
UA - 288
US - 156
WN - 1

Based on your logic...I'd take WN over any other US carrier hands down!! Don't let jealousy, envy, or hatred get in your way of facts.

I agree that AA has a dismal safety record at best the last 10 years.Where did you get the 587 fatalities and what time period does this cover?AA has been in business since the late 1920's and has flown millions of flight hours.Do these numbers include Sept 11,2001 which were INTENTIONAL?Total numbers do not always tell the rest of the story.
There is no doubt that SWA has the BEST safety record of any major carrier flying today.