AA Crew involved in JFK near miss refuses to talk to NTSB

[PostmasterGeneral]

The AA crew must comply with the subpoena and testify before NTSB. However, they can remain silent as they are protected against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

That is their right.

As a fellow pilot, an amateur pilot, am I expected to admire, endorse and support this as exemplary conduct of a professional?

I already asked you this, but you didn’t respond. Why do you care so much about whether or not these guys talk? Let it go, there are much more important things in life to be concerned with.

[bcflyer]

I’m guessing the NTSB has a very, very good reason to take this kind of step.

Unlike many it seems on this thread, the NTSB has a heck of a lot more cred with me than some airline crew that screwed up royally and then covered it up by “accidentally” erasing the CVR. They didn’t forget. You don’t forget to preserve data in that scenario.

More to this story, I’ll bet, that ain’t good. Thinking — who was high, or who was bombed?

Oh Rookie. That has NEVER happened in history.

I’m no airline pilot, but have flown into a number of US class B airports — never crossed a runway without a clearance. I don’t get defending them for one second.

Hang em high.

The bizarre part to me is those pissing on the WJ crew in YLW for handling a difficult emergency safely and well, and defending this AA crew.

I doubt they erased it. It would record over during their flight.

But I think the manufacturer of the CVR may have techniques to retrieve it.

A TSB guy told me how this was done when a CVR was erased in an incident in Canada quite a few years ago.

Why did they choose to take off?

Still haven’t answered my question. What would you have done?

[rookiepilot]

I doubt they erased it. It would record over during their flight.

But I think the manufacturer of the CVR may have techniques to retrieve it.

A TSB guy told me how this was done when a CVR was erased in an incident in Canada quite a few years ago.

Why did they choose to take off?

Still haven’t answered my question. What would you have done?

You first.

[cdnavater]

As a Canadian, if you faced the kind of lawsuits that the US system allows, the kind where if someone burns themself with hot coffee can get millions because they were not warned the coffee is hot,

Yes we all know the US is incredibly litigious but you may not want to use this lawsuit as an example of frivolous lawsuits. This one was legit. The coffee was so hot she needed a skin graft.

The plaintiff, Stella Liebeck (1912–2004),a 79-year-old woman, suffered third-degree burns in her pelvic region when she accidentally spilled coffee in her lap after purchasing it from a McDonald's restaurant. She was hospitalized for eight days while undergoing skin grafting, followed by two years of medical treatment. Liebeck sought to settle with McDonald's for $20,000 to cover her medical expenses. When McDonald's refused, Liebeck's attorney filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico, accusing McDonald's of gross negligence.

I know full well coffee can put you in the hospital, I spent a little over two months when I was a toddler in an icu with third degree burns over 40% of my body. Nobody was sued because we are in Canada, probably a different outcome south of the border.
Coffee is hot and if you’re 79 years old, you should know this. If she made her own coffee at home and sat down in her recliner, spilled her coffee the end result would be the same. McDonald’s coffee is no hotter than anyone else’s, take responsibility for your own clumsiness.
This shouldn’t have been a lawsuit in the first place nor should the restaurant be responsible for an idiot who spilled their coffee.
Now, I haven’t read the details, did the drive through employee dump it in her lap, that could change my view on it but that would be about it.
Point was, the US sues for everything and hope it sticks, I’ve read some ridiculous verdicts and awards. Some jackass in row 12 will say he has ptsd and can never fly again and would be awarded 300 million dollars.

[digits_]

McDonald’s coffee is no hotter than anyone else’s

Actually, it was. That was one of the main points of the lawsuit

During the case, Liebeck's attorneys discovered that McDonald's required franchisees to hold coffee at 180–190 °F (82–88 °C). Liebeck's attorneys argued that coffee should never be served hotter than 140 °F (60 °C), and that a number of other establishments served coffee at a substantially lower temperature than McDonald's. The attorneys presented evidence that coffee they had tested all over the city was served at a temperature at least 20 °F (11 °C) lower than McDonald's coffee.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v ... estaurants

Now, I haven’t read the details

That's obvious.

[Chaxterium]

Now, I haven’t read the details

Clearly.

I have read the details. Which is precisely why I said that this is not an example of a frivolous lawsuit. I used to think the same as you.....

...until I read the details.

[rookiepilot]

Some jackass in row 12 will say he has ptsd and can never fly again and would be awarded 300 million dollars.

This is an example of the idiocy of this site.

2 professional pilots: (what happened? Drunk, high or both— I take bets on everything. This is a close race)

Suddenly they aren’t the jackass’s. Its the poor sap in row 12 who’s to blame, the customer who is totally unaware his pilot is trying to kill them.

Yup. Blame the customer! It’s his fault for booking his fare at too low a price!

[Aviatard]

Now, I haven’t read the details,

Then now would be a good time to:
1. Stop having opinions on this and
2. Telling other people about your opinions

[cdnavater]

Now, I haven’t read the details,

Then now would be a good time to:
1. Stop having opinions on this and
2. Telling other people about your opinions

Or, you could keep your opinion to yourself

[cdnavater]

McDonald’s coffee is no hotter than anyone else’s

Actually, it was. That was one of the main points of the lawsuit

During the case, Liebeck's attorneys discovered that McDonald's required franchisees to hold coffee at 180–190 °F (82–88 °C). Liebeck's attorneys argued that coffee should never be served hotter than 140 °F (60 °C), and that a number of other establishments served coffee at a substantially lower temperature than McDonald's. The attorneys presented evidence that coffee they had tested all over the city was served at a temperature at least 20 °F (11 °C) lower than McDonald's coffee.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v ... estaurants

Now, I haven’t read the details

That's obvious.

Nope, I’m not seeing what you’re seeing, coffee is hot, period. A jury decided that McDonald’s was at fault because the label describing it as hot was too small, holy @#$!.
Other coffee around the city was 20 degrees lower but still at the threshold that will cause third degree burns, Starbucks serves theirs at 175-185, it’s still ridiculous, she chose to put a cup of hot coffee between her lap and spilled it, I don’t understand why anyone supports this shit.

[cdnavater]

McDonald’s coffee is no hotter than anyone else’s

Actually, it was. That was one of the main points of the lawsuit

During the case, Liebeck's attorneys discovered that McDonald's required franchisees to hold coffee at 180–190 °F (82–88 °C). Liebeck's attorneys argued that coffee should never be served hotter than 140 °F (60 °C), and that a number of other establishments served coffee at a substantially lower temperature than McDonald's. The attorneys presented evidence that coffee they had tested all over the city was served at a temperature at least 20 °F (11 °C) lower than McDonald's coffee.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v ... estaurants

Now, I haven’t read the details

That's obvious.

Nope, I’m not seeing what you’re seeing, coffee is hot, period. A jury decided that McDonald’s was at fault because the label describing it as hot was too small, holy @#$!.
Other coffee around the city was 20 degrees lower but still at the threshold that will cause third degree burns, Starbucks serves theirs at 175-185, it’s still ridiculous, she chose to put a cup of hot coffee between her lap and spilled it, I don’t understand why anyone supports this shit.

https://www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/5098-T ... Scalds.pdf

Most adults will suffer third-degree burns if exposed to 150 degree water for two seconds.

[digits_]

McDonald’s coffee is no hotter than anyone else’s

Actually, it was. That was one of the main points of the lawsuit

During the case, Liebeck's attorneys discovered that McDonald's required franchisees to hold coffee at 180–190 °F (82–88 °C). Liebeck's attorneys argued that coffee should never be served hotter than 140 °F (60 °C), and that a number of other establishments served coffee at a substantially lower temperature than McDonald's. The attorneys presented evidence that coffee they had tested all over the city was served at a temperature at least 20 °F (11 °C) lower than McDonald's coffee.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v ... estaurants

Now, I haven’t read the details

That's obvious.

Nope, I’m not seeing what you’re seeing, coffee is hot, period. A jury decided that McDonald’s was at fault because the label describing it as hot was too small, holy @#$!.
Other coffee around the city was 20 degrees lower but still at the threshold that will cause third degree burns, Starbucks serves theirs at 175-185, it’s still ridiculous, she chose to put a cup of hot coffee between her lap and spilled it, I don’t understand why anyone supports this shit.

So you're using the argument that mc Donald's coffee is as hot as anyone elses yourself, until proven wrong and then it doesn't matter anymore?

Wikipedia gives a good summary as to what factors were at play. It's not just 'here ya go, 3 million because you dropped your coffee '. There is more to it.

[cdnavater]

Actually, it was. That was one of the main points of the lawsuit



Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v ... estaurants



That's obvious.

Nope, I’m not seeing what you’re seeing, coffee is hot, period. A jury decided that McDonald’s was at fault because the label describing it as hot was too small, holy @#$!.
Other coffee around the city was 20 degrees lower but still at the threshold that will cause third degree burns, Starbucks serves theirs at 175-185, it’s still ridiculous, she chose to put a cup of hot coffee between her lap and spilled it, I don’t understand why anyone supports this shit.

So you're using the argument that mc Donald's coffee is as hot as anyone elses yourself, until proven wrong and then it doesn't matter anymore?

Wikipedia gives a good summary as to what factors were at play. It's not just 'here ya go, 3 million because you dropped your coffee '. There is more to it.

Nope, I’m using the argument, don’t be a fucken idiot and put hot coffee between your legs in case you spill it, coffee is hot.
Even if the McDonald’s coffee was 40 degrees less than their average, 150 still gives third degree burns in 2 seconds, so unless she could whip off her sweats in less than two seconds the end result is the same, maybe to a slightly lesser degree.
Should every idiot who doesn’t realize coffee is really hot and burns themselves be entitled to compensation?
What temperature do you want your coffee to be served at, a nice lukewarm so nobody ever gets hurt again.
I get why McDonald’s stood their ground. If they didn’t draw the line, I’d say maybe they stop serving coffee or serve it with a liability waiver, you want this coffee sign here.

[photofly]

As a Canadian, if you faced the kind of lawsuits that the US system allows, the kind where if someone burns themself with hot coffee can get millions...

The judgement was for $640k; both sides appealed and the final settlement was not disclosed. Nobody got millions.

[albertdesalvo]

Nobody got millions.

How do you know that, if the settlement was not disclosed? This thread has definitely jumped the shark.

[photofly]

Nobody got millions.

How do you know that, if the settlement was not disclosed? This thread has definitely jumped the shark.

Because there was no realistic prospect that the award would be enlarged on appeal, and because the plaintiff had already offered to settle for less than half of that.

McDonald’s admitted at trial that consumers were unaware of the extent of the risk of serious burns from spilled coffee served at McDonald’s then-required temperature. It also admitted it did not warn customers of the nature and extent of this risk and could offer no explanation as to why it did not.

It's definitely obvious to some people that the coffee was served hot enough to scald to such a significant extent, but not to everyone. It probably wasn't obvious to the 79 year-old person who scalded herself.

I'm not sure you can call it a frivolous lawsuit if the judgement goes for the plaintiff.

[photofly]

The AA crew must comply with the subpoena and testify before NTSB. However, they can remain silent as they are protected against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

That is their right.

As a fellow pilot, an amateur pilot, am I expected to admire, endorse and support this as exemplary conduct of a professional?

To be fair, I have never once head an airline pilot hold themselves out to be a figure of respect, or a paragon of exemplary conduct to be admired by amateurs. Mostly because most airline pilots don't acknowledge amateurs as pilots at all

[cdnavater]

The AA crew must comply with the subpoena and testify before NTSB. However, they can remain silent as they are protected against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

That is their right.

As a fellow pilot, an amateur pilot, am I expected to admire, endorse and support this as exemplary conduct of a professional?

To be fair, I have never once head an airline pilot hold themselves out to be a figure of respect, or a paragon of exemplary conduct to be admired by amateurs. Mostly because most airline pilots don't acknowledge amateurs as pilots at all

That is true!

[cdnavater]

Nobody got millions.

How do you know that, if the settlement was not disclosed? This thread has definitely jumped the shark.

Because there was no realistic prospect that the award would be enlarged on appeal, and because the plaintiff had already offered to settle for less than half of that.

McDonald’s admitted at trial that consumers were unaware of the extent of the risk of serious burns from spilled coffee served at McDonald’s then-required temperature. It also admitted it did not warn customers of the nature and extent of this risk and could offer no explanation as to why it did not.

It's definitely obvious to some people that the coffee was served hot enough to scald to such a significant extent, but not to everyone. It probably wasn't obvious to the 79 year-old person who scalded herself.

I'm not sure you can call it a frivolous lawsuit if the judgement goes for the plaintiff.

I really don’t care why or if I am warned about the possibility of coffee being scalding hot, a reasonable person would know this and a 79 year old should certainly have known better. She possibly might not have imagined to the extent it could burn but it would burn regardless of temperature and putting it where she did was ridiculously risky to that possibility.
Apparently a jury did not agree, that is the problem, it’s up to a jury to decide and if it gets to that point, you’re in the hands of humans with emotions and feelings, and may not fully see that it was her fault, not 20% her fault, completely!
What temperature do you like your coffee at?

Who do I sue if I’m at home and burn my self because I’m an idiot?

https://coffeechronicler.com/what-is-th ... ng-coffee/

“What temperature should you brew coffee at? Your brewer ought to keep up a water temperature between 195 to 205 degrees Fahrenheit for ideal extraction. Colder water will bring about level, under-extracted coffee, while water that is too hot will likewise cause lost quality in the flavor of the coffee”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbes-per ... 18a3376bac

Temperature Consistency

Per the SCA, optimal coffee extraction occurs when the temperature of the water is between 185 and 205 degrees Fahrenheit. Cotter agreed: “A brewer with a good, consistent heating element will properly heat the water throughout the brewing process to around 200 degrees Fahrenheit, then hold it there throughout the brew.” He adds that “many cheap brewers just boil the water and then dump it on the grounds,” which “scorches the grounds and leads to a burnt, bitter taste.” Using a simple ThermaPen probe thermometer, I measured the center of the filter bed while the coffee was brewing, as well as the temperature of the coffee when the liquid reached the carafe

[albertdesalvo]

a 79 year old should certainly have known better

79 year olds have been known to lose some mental acuity. Of course, a good lawyer can restore same quickly if needed.

[digits_]

How do you know that, if the settlement was not disclosed? This thread has definitely jumped the shark.

Because there was no realistic prospect that the award would be enlarged on appeal, and because the plaintiff had already offered to settle for less than half of that.

McDonald’s admitted at trial that consumers were unaware of the extent of the risk of serious burns from spilled coffee served at McDonald’s then-required temperature. It also admitted it did not warn customers of the nature and extent of this risk and could offer no explanation as to why it did not.

It's definitely obvious to some people that the coffee was served hot enough to scald to such a significant extent, but not to everyone. It probably wasn't obvious to the 79 year-old person who scalded herself.

I'm not sure you can call it a frivolous lawsuit if the judgement goes for the plaintiff.

I really don’t care why or if I am warned about the possibility of coffee being scalding hot, a reasonable person would know this and a 79 year old should certainly have known better. She possibly might not have imagined to the extent it could burn but it would burn regardless of temperature and putting it where she did was ridiculously risky to that possibility.
Apparently a jury did not agree, that is the problem, it’s up to a jury to decide and if it gets to that point, you’re in the hands of humans with emotions and feelings, and may not fully see that it was her fault, not 20% her fault, completely!
What temperature do you like your coffee at?

Who do I sue if I’m at home and burn my self because I’m an idiot?

https://coffeechronicler.com/what-is-th ... ng-coffee/

“What temperature should you brew coffee at? Your brewer ought to keep up a water temperature between 195 to 205 degrees Fahrenheit for ideal extraction. Colder water will bring about level, under-extracted coffee, while water that is too hot will likewise cause lost quality in the flavor of the coffee”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbes-per ... 18a3376bac

Temperature Consistency

Per the SCA, optimal coffee extraction occurs when the temperature of the water is between 185 and 205 degrees Fahrenheit. Cotter agreed: “A brewer with a good, consistent heating element will properly heat the water throughout the brewing process to around 200 degrees Fahrenheit, then hold it there throughout the brew.” He adds that “many cheap brewers just boil the water and then dump it on the grounds,” which “scorches the grounds and leads to a burnt, bitter taste.” Using a simple ThermaPen probe thermometer, I measured the center of the filter bed while the coffee was brewing, as well as the temperature of the coffee when the liquid reached the carafe

One could argue that the temperature during the brewing process is irrelevant to the temperature you're serving the coffee at.

What's the point of serving someone coffee that would burn your mouth if you attempt to drink it?

[photofly]

What's the point of serving someone coffee that would burn your mouth if you attempt to drink it?

You can add some cold milk without it cooling too much.

[cdnavater]

What's the point of serving someone coffee that would burn your mouth if you attempt to drink it?

You can add some cold milk without it cooling too much.

Yep, if your coffee was 120 and you add some milk, it’ll barely be lukewarm.

[goldeneagle]

You can add some cold milk without it cooling too much.

And then it's not coffee any more, it's become undrinkable slop.

[Cough Syrup]

Anyone tried the new Chicken Big Mac yet? Looks pretty good