Resolute First Air plane crash lawsuits filed in Iqaluit

[midwingcrisis]

Courthouse in yfb should be busy soon!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/sto ... wsuit.html


First Air sues DND over Resolute crash

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/sto ... t-air.html

[jet a1]

very very very happy to see this... i was worried that the military role in this accident would never see the light of day.

[CpnCrunch]

As I understand it, ATC is only responsible for terrain/obstacle clearance when they are giving vectors. Other than that, it is up to the PIC to avoid obstacles even if the aircraft is radar identified by ATC. From the information we have (which isn't a great deal), it seems that DND was not giving vectors to any aircraft, so while it would have been good for them to warn the plane about being off course they were not obliged to do this (and they may not have had the training/equipment/manpower necessary to do this anyway).

[Meatservo]

..if indeed they had a role. I would like to know exactly what happened before deciding how I feel about lawsuits. For instance, were the military actually in positive control of the airspace? Did the crew have reason to believe they were being vectored? Were they given an instruction that resulted in the aircraft being where it was in a position to contact terrain? We don't know yet. Was the airspace re-designated, and were the military personnel given the responsibility of issuing clearances and controlling civilian aircraft? If they were responsible for controlling, and failed to control, or if they gave an incorrect or incompetent clearance or instruction, that's one thing. I they just happened to be there and are being accused of not having done everything they could to prevent the accident, well I think that muddies the water a bit depending on where their duty lay with respect to having the radar manned and being in communication with the plane. The news on this subject has been extremely vague.

[Tim]

Reminds me of when air france tried to sue yyz for the overrun.

[Big Pistons Forever]

It also should be noted that the presence of CF first responders likely saved the lives of several of the survivors......

[ozone]

It also should be noted that the presence of CF first responders likely saved the lives of several of the survivors......

I agree....but it was pure luck the cf happened to be there or perhaps depending on the outcome of the investigation bad luck they were there

[bradley]

Since when does ATC "give pilots detailed information on their speed and location" on final approach? They were not being vectored, so how would DND be responsible for this?

Why is Canada becoming more and more like the US? Just sue the people who saved your lives, there's money to be had!

They are not even waiting for the final accident report to be released...what a sham.

[The Hammer]

There's no coincidence that this lawsuit was filed immediately after First Air was sued by the passengers. They have to try and direct the blame somewhere else.

Nobody waits for the accident report to come out. The slow pace of the legal process precludes waiting for the facts.

Lawsuits after airplane crashes is not new to Canada. We've been crashing airplanes/killing people for a long time and cash has changed hands ever since. Social media & the web just make it easier for the info to disseminate.

[ScudRunner]

I suspect that there is a limitation on how long after an accident a party can file against another, it might just be that they are shotgunning all parties contributing/involved or maybe involved in this accident to cover their ass in the future as this winds its way through the courts.

Just like the Colgan Buffalo NY crash BBD was sued

Mon, Feb 21, 2011
Family Targets Bombardier In Colgan Accident Lawsuit
Plane Manufacturer "Negligent And Careless" In Aircraft Design

The family of a Jacksonville Beach, FL woman fatally injured when a Bombardier Q400 being operated by Colgan Air as Continental Connection Flight 3407 went down in Buffalo has sued the manufacturer for alleged negligence in the aircraft design.

The Florida Times-Union reports that the parents of Ellyce Kausner filed the federal lawsuit this month. John and Marilyn Kausner claim that Bombardier was "negligent and careless" in the design of the Q400 by not including mechanical warning systems which were more efficient. A New York attorney representing the Kausners said that along with a better-designed low-speed warning system, the airplanes icing warning system was also inadequate.

Kausner lived in Jacksonville Beach, FL, and was traveling to visit family in New York when the accident occurred.

In its probable cause report, the NTSB found that the crash was largely the result of inattention on the part of the cockpit crew during approach, and that one of the crew was not properly trained in how the "stick pusher" works.

The attorney said the suit was filed this month so as to be not to exceed the two-year statute of limitations on the case.

Switching back onto this accident, there might be some evidence or a contributing factor involving the military's operations up there that we might not be aware of yet. Its a good thing we don't use jury's very often here in Canada and a judge will be better suited to sort through the facts of this case.

[godsrcrazy]

I suspect that there is a limitation on how long after an accident a party can file against another, it might just be that they are shotgunning all parties contributing/involved or maybe involved in this accident to cover their ass in the future as this winds its way through the courts.

Just like the Colgan Buffalo NY crash BBD was sued

Mon, Feb 21, 2011
Family Targets Bombardier In Colgan Accident Lawsuit
Plane Manufacturer "Negligent And Careless" In Aircraft Design

The family of a Jacksonville Beach, FL woman fatally injured when a Bombardier Q400 being operated by Colgan Air as Continental Connection Flight 3407 went down in Buffalo has sued the manufacturer for alleged negligence in the aircraft design.

The Florida Times-Union reports that the parents of Ellyce Kausner filed the federal lawsuit this month. John and Marilyn Kausner claim that Bombardier was "negligent and careless" in the design of the Q400 by not including mechanical warning systems which were more efficient. A New York attorney representing the Kausners said that along with a better-designed low-speed warning system, the airplanes icing warning system was also inadequate.

Kausner lived in Jacksonville Beach, FL, and was traveling to visit family in New York when the accident occurred.

In its probable cause report, the NTSB found that the crash was largely the result of inattention on the part of the cockpit crew during approach, and that one of the crew was not properly trained in how the "stick pusher" works.

The attorney said the suit was filed this month so as to be not to exceed the two-year statute of limitations on the case.

Switching back onto this accident, there might be some evidence or a contributing factor involving the military's operations up there that we might not be aware of yet. Its a good thing we don't use jury's very often here in Canada and a judge will be better suited to sort through the facts of this case.

One would think if the CVR was working properly it will tell if they were being directed by DND.

[Liquid Charlie]

Regardless of right or wrong or any other argument you can think of this is a legal matter and advice and direction is coming from lawyers acting on behalf of First Air and other parties involved. Some capable legal mind(s) initiated this based on a whole lot of information we do not know about and also information that they are not privy to as well. Law suits can be dropped but not to file means you could get caught with your pants down.

Something like this is a sordid legal tangle and jumble of facts and obviously a lot of finger pointing. Also don't think that insurance under writers are not watching this whole drama - so like anything else it seems - (like the war on terror) it's all about the money - the sad truth is that the tragedy and the loss of friends and colleagues becomes diminished in the face of the legal bullshit and smokescreens - unfortunately this is how the legal system works as we have seen from recent trials.

[HuD 91gt]

Very glad to see this happening. I don't care who wins, but I was also afraid the military impact would not see the light of day. It was a gong show up there for a week prior, due to this so called "controlled airspace". Did it cause an accident, no. Contributing factor, it's possible.

[Old fella]

I would bet First Air is privy to some info that hasn't been released in the public domain as of yet, hense their claim against DND operations. I would somehow doubt First Air so early in the game would announce/launch action unless they(First Air) and their legal team have been convinced they have the necessary grounds. Interesting for sure.

[URC]

First Air ignored advice on crucial alarm system prior to Resolute crash

by Jack Danylchuk
EDGE online

An alarm system that might have prevented the First Air crash at Resolute Bay last August 20 was not installed, despite an opportunity and recommendation from senior company employees.

The incident that Transportation Safety Board (TSB) inspectors have classed as a Controlled Flight into Terrain (CFIT) took the lives of all four crew members and all but three of the 11 passengers on the charter flight from Yellowknife.

According to sources, the Boeing 737-210 C used on flight 6560 to Resolute Bay was the only plane in First Air’s fleet of Boeing 737s not equipped with a Terrain Avoidance Warning System (TAWS).

Before the plane’s last “heavy check” – a scheduled maintenance procedure in which the plane was thoroughly examined for defects – it was recommended TAWS be installed, but it was not, the sources said.

TAWS emits a warning when an aircraft flies too close to the ground and is credited by experts with reducing the incidence of CFIT – one of the major causes of airline fatalities. Last December, the federal government proposed a new regulation that would require all aircraft carrying six or more passengers to be equipped with TAWS.

CFIT occurs when an airworthy aircraft, under the control of the flight crew, is flown unintentionally into terrain, obstacles or water, usually with no prior awareness by the crew.

Jennifer Alldred, a spokesperson for First Air, said in an email the company would not discuss the TAWS question while the TSB continues its investigation.

A lawyer for Scott Bateman, who resigned as president of First Air last December, told Nunatsiaq News the departure from the company Bateman led for four years had nothing to do with the fatal crash, but did not reply to an emailed question about the failure to install TAWS in all First Air planes.

Flight’s final minutes

When drawn on paper, using information compiled by EDGE, the final minutes of First Air flight 6560 present a baffling picture.

The weather was sketchy last August 20 as the flight crew approached Resolute Bay, and switched from GPS, which had managed the flight from Yellowknife, to the instrument landing system that could take the plane to within 200 feet of the ground.

But instead of turning toward Resolute Bay, flight 6560 flew past a GPS waypoint 10 miles out from the runway and only then banked toward its final destination.

Cockpit instruments would have indicated to the crew they were off course after the plane passed the 10-mile marker, yet almost four minutes elapsed before the jet crashed into a hillside a mile east of the runway.

A preliminary report released by TSB inspectors in January said the landing gear was down and locked and the final checklist complete when the crew tried to abort the landing two seconds before impact.

A technical examination of the aircraft revealed no problems and analysis of the flight data recorder indicated the engines were operating and developing considerable power at the time of the accident, the inspectors said.

There was no evidence on the cockpit voice recorder of any disagreement between Capt. Blair Rutherford and First Officer David Hare, either. Together, they flew flight 6560 into the ground at almost 200 miles per hour.

CFIT is considered a form of spatial disorientation, where the pilot(s) do not correctly perceive their position and orientation with respect to the Earth’s surface. Pilot error is the single biggest factor in CFIT incidents, according to an extensive Wikipedia entry on the subject. Among the typical scenarios described in the entry:

“The pilot encountered weather conditions that were worse than forecast and, in an attempt to maintain or regain visual contact with the ground in an area of very low cloud, descended below minimum safe altitude and the aircraft struck the ground.

“Contributing to this accident was the pilot’s over-reliance on GPS while attempting to maintain Visual Meteorological Conditions and a resultant lack of adequate situational awareness of terrain.”

Aircraft manufacturer Boeing counts CFIT as a leading cause of airplane accidents involving the loss of life.

Some pilots, convinced advanced electronic navigation systems coupled with flight management system computers, or over-reliance on them, are partially responsible for these accidents, have called CFIT accidents “computerized flight into terrain.”

To prevent CFIT crashes, manufacturers and safety regulators developed TAWS, which has mandatory pilot procedures and actions following any caution or warning event.

http://www.edgeyk.ca/

[pdw]

Some pilots, convinced advanced electronic navigation systems coupled with flight management system computers, or over-reliance on them, are partially responsible for these accidents, have called CFIT accidents “computerized flight into terrain.”

"Controlled Flight Into Terrain" terminology:

1) BFIT: Botched Flight (Into Terrain) where control seems to be lost and then is followed by uncontolled descent "Into" the "Terrain". Not "Controlled" means not a "CFIT" ... according to the "wikipedia" reference)

2) CFIT: " CFIT occurs when an airworthy aircraft, under the control of the flight crew, is flown unintentionally into terrain, obstacles or water, usually with no prior awareness by the crew. " (quote URC above... Jack Danylchuk EDGE article)

How about DFIT (Directed Flight Into Terrain) ? ... taken from the quote above about "Computerized Flight Into Terrain"

Many icing accidents got the label of "CFIT" where a good number were more like a "BFIT" and now potentially mislead any reader referencing a particular synopsis where this term is invoked in error.

[whipline]

So the aircraft flew through the localized, never regained it and descended with the glidpath? And that's the militarys fault? How come they haven't released the cvr recording? Was either crew calling for a go around prior to 2 seconds before the crash? Very strange.

[55+]

My understanding TSB doesn't release actual CVR transcripts in any reports be they initial or final like the US NTSB does,they(TSB) may reference info from the CVR.

[URC]

There was no evidence on the cockpit voice recorder of any disagreement between Capt. Blair Rutherford and First Officer David Hare, either. Together, they flew flight 6560 into the ground at almost 200 miles per hour.

I wonder what the source of this statement was ? I don't believe the TSB has officially released anything regarding converations on the CVR ? TSB or ALPA leak ?

The same article was momentarily posted on the Nunatsiaq News website, then quickly pulled.

http://www.nunatsiaqonline.ca/stories/a ... olute_cra/

Copyright issues ?

[Meatservo]

"Jack Danylchuk" should be tied to a cow's tail and shit to death. That little piece was a perfect example of the irresponsible, poorly-thought-out red-herring nonsense that always sprouts up in the wake of an investigation.

What we have here is some amateur self-appointed "newshound" who heard some shit around town and decided it was "breaking news".

Read the article critically and it contains no new information.

Let's be clear (as if it were necessary here): Lacking TAWS is NOT what "went wrong" in this accident.

... and quoting "a source" and then regurgitating exclusively from Wikipedia is pretty bullshit reporting. THAT is likely why it was pulled, not copyright issues.

[pdw]

"CFIT" happens often enough where later the TAWS is heard squawking in the background noise on the CVR tape.

(The definition of CFIT as used there in "the article" ... turns out is quoted right from the TSB preliminary report)

[Dh8Classic]

Let's be clear (as if it were necessary here): Lacking TAWS is NOT what "went wrong" in this accident.

Won't be the primary cause but could very well end up being a contributing factor. Had the recommendation to make the aircraft like every other one in the fleet(ie. Taws) but decided not to in order to save money.

Subsequently in the aftermath of a disaster, it is now more difficult to get mining charters.

Could turn out to be a classic example of how a decision to save money on a safety item had major consequences.

[Meatservo]

I suppose it might be a contributing factor, but then you could go one step further and blame Transport Canada for contributing to the accident by failing to make the equipment mandatory.

Sorry to sound flippant, but deciding not to fill the Lusitania with ping-pong balls was a contributing factor to its sinking, too. How far down the road do you want to go in trying to find someone to blame for this accident? It's the same old story, someone thinks they can figure out a way to retroactively save the plane, and everyone vilifies the "evil" guys who thought it would be OK to fly without TAWS. Well, in reality everyone thought it would be OK to fly without it. This is a red herring.

[pdw]

TAWS is quiet til needed and you'd get used to counting on its safety because it's there. Alternately then navigating the non-equipped aircraft left in the fleet risks still anticipating the TAWS' security when awareness of it being not available can be temporarily lost/forgotten in the busy CRM environment (the difficult approach). "Red herring" though, when this distracts from discovering the real issue why the airliner aligned so very far over from the runway's centre-line.

[avsafe]

HuD 91gt

Check your PM's