United Airlines flight hits severe turbulence - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

HuskyMan · #1 07-21-2010, 09:41 AM

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/30-injured-united-airlines-severe-turbulence/story?id=11214091

TX76513 · #2 07-21-2010, 11:16 AM

Hence the reason the seat belt sign was on.

HuskyMan · #3 07-21-2010, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TX76513

Hence the reason the seat belt sign was on.

I always wear my seat belt for the entire duration of a flight. knowing of turbulence, I've never understood people who take off their belts and waltz around the cabin like they were on the ground. there are documented cases where someone's neck was broken when they hit the cabin ceiling.

time to buckle up, kids!

TX76513 · #4 07-21-2010, 11:38 AM

Agree - it doesn't bother me to have it on and much better than cracking your head on the overhead compartment. Unexpected turbulence is just that Unexpected

WVOtoGO · #5 07-21-2010, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HuskyMan

I always wear my seat belt for the entire duration of a flight.

Smart man, you.

Cheers -
Shelby

davidmash · #6 07-21-2010, 09:08 PM

aviation law

Thirteen people on an American Airlines flight sued the airline because on one particular trip in 1995 they went through a rough patch of air turbulence. Instead of thanking the pilot for getting them through some bad weather and possibly saving their lives, they get out and sue the pilot and his company because they had the audacity (and bad luck) to fly through an unfortunate, though completely normal, weather occurrence.

Mind you, they suffered no injuries whatsoever. They sued for psychological trauma.

They demanded $2.25 million. That's an outrageous amount of money for five minutes of turbulence. But what?s far more outrageous is that they won! They got an average of about $175,000 a person or $7,500 per second of trauma.

One of the people who sued and won was Steven Spielberg's sister. Spielberg's niece also won the same amount, but a judge later overruled her claim, because she wasn't old enough to know how traumatized she was, i.e. unlike the adults she didn't understand what the big deal was about a scary five minutes. She also didn't realize there was no big deal; they just wanted the money.

WVOtoGO · #7 07-21-2010, 10:53 PM

God forbid anything like that happens here.
If it ever did, our aviation careers would be over because we’d be in jail.

- Shelby

HuskyMan · #8 07-22-2010, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidmash

aviation law

Thirteen people on an American Airlines flight sued the airline because on one particular trip in 1995 they went through a rough patch of air turbulence. Instead of thanking the pilot for getting them through some bad weather and possibly saving their lives, they get out and sue the pilot and his company because they had the audacity (and bad luck) to fly through an unfortunate, though completely normal, weather occurrence.

Mind you, they suffered no injuries whatsoever. They sued for psychological trauma.

They demanded $2.25 million. That's an outrageous amount of money for five minutes of turbulence. But what?s far more outrageous is that they won! They got an average of about $175,000 a person or $7,500 per second of trauma.

One of the people who sued and won was Steven Spielberg's sister. Spielberg's niece also won the same amount, but a judge later overruled her claim, because she wasn't old enough to know how traumatized she was, i.e. unlike the adults she didn't understand what the big deal was about a scary five minutes. She also didn't realize there was no big deal; they just wanted the money.

isn't the legal system great? the 'free lunch' crowd gets $$$$$ because they suffered 'psychological trauma'. unfortunately, the airlines have already calculated the cost of bull s*** law suits like this into the cost of doing business. which means one thing: the rest of us are paying through the nose for airline tickets so that the 'free lunch crowd' is able to sue for 'psychological trauma' damages.

thinking about this a bit, shouldn't the traveling public launch a group law suit against the 'free lunch' crowd because we now pay higher airline ticket prices due to their bull s**** law suits? aren't we suffering price gouging due to their actions?

davidmash · #9 07-22-2010, 11:35 AM

I seriously doubt the cost of the law suits affects ticket prices that much. Given the amount of revenue tat airlines bring in I doubt it amounts to much more than a few pennies if that.

BTW, have you looked at the price of tickets lately and compared them to the cost of driving that same route? Flying is still one of the best deals in town IMO.

But yes I do agree that the frivolous law suits are getting out of hand. Turbulence is not always avoidable. I know the coffee lady had been brought up quite a bit and I get the fact that the coffee was hot. But why the hell was she not held accountable for putting a hot liquid between her legs instead of in a spill proof insulated cup? To me that seems like common sense.

The legal system in the US seems to have morphed into something that is no longer concerned with justice but with who has the better argument and the more expensive lawyer or the deeper pockets. Justice seems to be an afterthought.

HuskyMan · #10 07-22-2010, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidmash

I seriously doubt the cost of the law suits affects ticket prices that much. Given the amount of revenue tat airlines bring in I doubt it amounts to much more than a few pennies if that.

BTW, have you looked at the price of tickets lately and compared them to the cost of driving that same route? Flying is still one of the best deals in town IMO.

But yes I do agree that the frivolous law suits are getting out of hand. Turbulence is not always avoidable. I know the coffee lady had been brought up quite a bit and I get the fact that the coffee was hot. But why the hell was she not held accountable for putting a hot liquid between her legs instead of in a spill proof insulated cup? To me that seems like common sense.

The legal system in the US seems to have morphed into something that is no longer concerned with justice but with who has the better argument and the more expensive lawyer or the deeper pockets. Justice seems to be an afterthought.

somebody somewhere is paying for frivolous law suits. even if it is a few cents per ticket, my price just increased due to a few morons deciding they wanted to get rich off the system. whether it is two cents, two bucks, or twenty bucks it doesn't matter. I'm forced into paying extra freight so that the low lifes get a free lunch.

On the other hand, we are seeing companies fight back via legal notices, liability waivers, etc. I recently spoke with a towing company that informed me they have been forced to require people to sign a liability waiver because people were falsely accusing them of damaging their cars. the 'free lunch' crowd is winning, the rest of us are losing.

in the end, we all pay.

elchivito · #11 07-23-2010, 02:46 PM

Just another reason to stay on the ground where the lord intended us to be. I'll fly under duress and with a great deal of whiskey and Xanax when leaving the country, otherwise it's ground transport for me. The only thing that keeps giant multi-ton aircraft from falling out of the sky is the collective will of the people on board WISHING it to not crash.
I've had many fools tell me "you know, you can get treatment for your fear of flying". My fear of flying is perfectly rational thank you very much and doesn't need treatment.

WVOtoGO · #12 07-23-2010, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elchivito

Just another reason to stay on the ground where the lord intended us to be. I'll fly under duress and with a great deal of whiskey and Xanax when leaving the country, otherwise it's ground transport for me. The only thing that keeps giant multi-ton aircraft from falling out of the sky is the collective will of the people on board WISHING it to not crash.
I've had many fools tell me "you know, you can get treatment for your fear of flying". My fear of flying is perfectly rational thank you very much and doesn't need treatment.

To each his own, I guess.
I prefer the skys. Where it's much safer.

As for your comment I bolded:

If you don’t mind me using aviation language here: Whiskey Tango Foxtrot ??

-Shelby

MTUpower · #13 07-23-2010, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVOtoGO

To each his own, I guess.
I prefer the skys. Where it's much safer.

As for your comment I bolded:

If you don’t mind me using aviation language here: Whiskey Tango Foxtrot ??

-Shelby

..... and the man behind door three says "the lights are on but no one's home" YES! YES! We have a winner!

#14 07-23-2010, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVOtoGO

To each his own, I guess.
I prefer the skys. Where it's much safer.

As for your comment I bolded:

If you don’t mind me using aviation language here: Whiskey Tango Foxtrot ??

-Shelby

I would probably prefer flying if they let me drive. As a confirmed control freak, I prefer to be on the ground where I'm in control of the vehicle. I don't even like being in a car with someone else driving.

HuskyMan · #15 07-23-2010, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVOtoGO

To each his own, I guess.
I prefer the skys. Where it's much safer.

As for your comment I bolded:

If you don’t mind me using aviation language here: Whiskey Tango Foxtrot ??

-Shelby

I have to agree, last week a friend was rear ended by a semi tractor truck on an interstate highway and came within a hairs breath of losing his life. tailgating 80,000 pound semi tractor trucks aren't a problem for airplanes. and, at least pilots have to pass a rigorous certification exam.

it's gotten to the point that I believe that travel on the nation's interstate highways may be a lot more risky than flying. cars and trucks regularly violate the speed limits while the driver is yakking on a cell phone or texting.

scary.