Another frivolous lawsuit

[Tony Cox]

Avweb is reporting another wrongful death lawsuit
after a Piper Malibu lost a wing in Florida when attempting
to fly between thunderstorm cells reaching to FL450.

The pilot was cautioned by his CFI 2 weeks prior to the
accident about his deficient decision making concerning weather
and stated that he "lacked a healthy respect" for the power
of thunderstorms.

Unfortunately, Piper, the manufacturer of the autopilot, the
turbine conversion manufacturer, and the people who worked
on the plane prior to flight are all now suffering for this "lack of
a healthy respect".

Interestingly, FS didn't provide a SIGMET advisory and the
bodies had some level of CO in their muscles.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20020619X00932&ntsbno=MIA02FA111&akey=1

--
Dr. Tony Cox
Citrus Controls Inc.
e-mail:
http://CitrusControls.com/

[John Bell]

http://www1.naplesnews.com/npdn/news/article/0,2071,NPDN_14940_2959291,00.ht
ml

[Peter R.]

Tony Cox ) wrote:

<snip>
> Interestingly, FS didn't provide a SIGMET advisory and the
> bodies had some level of CO in their muscles.

With onboard radar and a cruising altitude of FL260, one would think it
would be relatively easy to avoid penetrating a thunderstorm.


--
Peter














----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Tony Cox]

"John Bell" > wrote in message
om...
>
http://www1.naplesnews.com/npdn/news/article/0,2071,NPDN_14940_2959291,00.ht
> ml

They're suing for $75,000? That won't even cover the
lawyers lunch expenses!

[Jack]

On 6/17/04 11:34 AM, in article
, "Peter R."
> wrote:


> With onboard radar and a cruising altitude of FL260, one would think it
> would be relatively easy to avoid penetrating a thunderstorm.

It's just as easy with no radar and a service ceiling in the low teens: just
say, "No!"

He didn't believe that T-Storms, and even the dynamics in their general
vicinity, are killers. He learned. Too bad that knowledge had such a short
life.



Jack

[Peter R.]

Jack ) wrote:

>
> It's just as easy with no radar and a service ceiling in the low teens: just
> say, "No!"

That is certainly one safe option during tstorm season but there are others
that include flying, too.

According to the NTSB report, the pilot of this ill-fated flight received a
recommended westerly deviation route from Flight Watch one hundred miles
before the accident scene.

I have yet to fly in Florida, but as the thunderstorm capital of the US,
Florida has a large population of GA pilots who somehow receive utility
from their aircraft during the very active t-storm season.

--
Peter














----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Ken Ibold]

"Peter R." > wrote in message
...

> I have yet to fly in Florida, but as the thunderstorm capital of the US,
> Florida has a large population of GA pilots who somehow receive utility
> from their aircraft during the very active t-storm season.

Seldom are Florida cells embedded. Most of the time they are individual
cells or squall lines that are relatively easy to pick out. You can often
zig-zag around them at altitudes that are well below oxygen altitudes even.
That general tendency may induce some complacency that causes pilots to
underestimate the hazards on those occasions when the t-storms are more
widespread or are embedded.

[tony]

The OP mentioned the pilot and passengers had elevated carbon monoxide in their
blood. If it was of a significant concentration, there may be some "actionable"
issues related to the aircraft's condition. Too much HbCO would likely accect
judgement, although the OP also suggested the pilot had documented poor
judgement anyhow.

With respect to thunderstorms in FL, I have a distinct memory of overnighting
in Miami one Feb because there was a solid and continuing line of the things
crossing the middle of the state, and it was more than I wished to subject me
or my Mooney to.

I don't know how often that condition exists, but the radar pictures I was
seeing while flight planning made me change my plans.

[Teacherjh]

Today I decided to postpone a flight I was to take due to boomers in PA, OH,
NY, and CT. Sometimes these things clear up, sometimes they don't, and the
weather guessers don't always get it right. So we waited to see what would
happen.

Nothing conducive to flying did. Tomorrow will be a better day. This way, I
get to see tomorrow.

Jose




--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Michael 182]

"Tony Cox" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> Avweb is reporting another wrongful death lawsuit
> after a Piper Malibu lost a wing in Florida when attempting
> to fly between thunderstorm cells reaching to FL450.

If a lawsuit like this is thrown out of court as being without merit (or
whatever the legal term is) can the defendants then turn around and sue for
legal costs and damages to their reputation?

[Dan Luke]

"Jack" wrote:
> > With onboard radar and a cruising altitude of FL260,
> > one would think it would be relatively easy to avoid
> > penetrating a thunderstorm.
>
> It's just as easy with no radar and a service ceiling in the
> low teens: just say, "No!"

If you 'just say, "No!"' to flying any time the NEXRAD is blooming, you
won't use your airplane for travel very much near the Gulf Coast for
most of the year - unless you can finish all your flights before 10 AM.

CBs down here are like ants at a picnic: you're just going to have to
deal with them if you want to play. Getting up high enough is one way,
but that means flying at least a turbo or preferably a pressurized
turbine airplane. If you don't have that, you have to decide where you
can fly and still see the bad boys. On most summer days, towering CU
tops are >10,000 by noon, so if there are more than a few isolated
storms the best bet is to stay down below the bases. There, you can at
least see where the dark spots are. Of course the down side of this is
that you will have a hot, muggy, bumpy ride, but at least you won't
blunder into a trap because you couldn't see what was coming.

Some kind of weather detection gear is a must. I tried doing without up
until last year and it is simply too frustrating, unnerving and
dangerous. Fortunately, there are lots of solutions appearing for light
GA aircraft in addition to the old spherics stanbys. Yes, there are
still days when I can't get there because of thunderstorms (once, so far
this year), but it takes a solid line of rough stuff to stop me.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Jack]

On 6/18/04 3:07 PM, in article , "Dan
Luke" > wrote:


> "Jack" wrote:

>>> With onboard radar and a cruising altitude of FL260,
>>> one would think it would be relatively easy to avoid
>>> penetrating a thunderstorm.

>> It's just as easy with no radar and a service ceiling in the
>> low teens: just say, "No!"

> If you 'just say, "No!"' to flying any time the NEXRAD is blooming, you
> won't use your airplane for travel very much near the Gulf Coast for
> most of the year - unless you can finish all your flights before 10 AM.

That's "No!" to "penetrating a thunderstorm", if you'll take a closer look,
and is not the same as "No!" to flying.

Radar and FL 260 capability is no defense against thunderstorms, if you
don't know what to do with those resources. FL 260 won't put you over them,
and you need a good deal of ability to interpret what you see on the radar
in any case, and that doesn't come quick, easy, or cheap.

Day or night, with radar or without, stay VMC in areas with thunderstorms
and give them a wide berth.

Can you go over them if you have enough altitude capability? Sure you can,
but first define "enough" -- FL 350, FL 450, FL 550? Sometimes even FL 550
isn't enough. And since your altitude capability requires having all engines
running, if you lose one it is possible to get yourself in a position where,
due to weather and terrain, you can't get out of the box in which loss of
your high altitude capability puts you without penetrating weather you don't
want to be in. And that's just one scenario to consider. I'm sure folks here
on the NG can come up with others, esp., those with tens of thousands of
hours in their log books. We didn't accumulate those hours by treating
thunderstorms lightly. There are a number of ways to avoid the dangers of
thunderstorms, and only one of them is "not flying".



Jack

[Dan Luke]

"Jack" wrote:
> That's "No!" to "penetrating a thunderstorm", if you'll take a
> closer look, and is not the same as "No!" to flying.

Mmmm, well, forgive me if I misinterpreted your statement, but who
deliberately pentrates a thunderstorm? Weather research planes are the
only ones I can think of.

> Radar and FL 260 capability is no defense against
> thunderstorms,

No, but that kind of altitude capability gives one a lot better look at
things most days than I get, for instance.

> Day or night, with radar or without, stay VMC in areas with
thunderstorms
> and give them a wide berth.

In general, I agree with this but I make some careful exceptions. Since
I now have NEXRAD in the airplane, I will fly in IMC with thunderstorms
about if 1) I am not attempting to fly through a gap in a line of storms
2) I am sure I always have a wide avenue "out" in some direction.

> We didn't accumulate those hours by treating
> thunderstorms lightly.

If I gave the impression that I think thundersorms should be treated
lightly, I expressed myself poorly. Thunderstorms scare the s*** out of
me.

> There are a number of ways to avoid the dangers of thunderstorms,
> and only one of them is "not flying".

Yep.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[A Lieberman]

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 15:07:29 -0500, Dan Luke wrote:

> CBs down here are like ants at a picnic: you're just going to have to
> deal with them if you want to play. Getting up high enough is one way,
> but that means flying at least a turbo or preferably a pressurized
> turbine airplane. If you don't have that, you have to decide where you
> can fly and still see the bad boys. On most summer days, towering CU
> tops are >10,000 by noon, so if there are more than a few isolated
> storms the best bet is to stay down below the bases. There, you can at
> least see where the dark spots are. Of course the down side of this is
> that you will have a hot, muggy, bumpy ride, but at least you won't
> blunder into a trap because you couldn't see what was coming.

Dan

You are so right in staying below the bases! There have been several trips
I have made from MBO (Madison MS) to L31 (Covington LA) where I almost got
myself in trouble.

It's amazing how quickly the towering CU's build! Even before 9:00 a.m., I
encountered tops over 6000.

My last trip, I left MBO at 6:00 a.m. to drop off something my sister left
behind, and 30 miles north of L31 tops were already 4000 at 7:15 a.m. Left
at 7:45 and staying in the clear, climbed to 7,500 and tops were starting
to build to my altitude. I went that high figuring to remain in the cool
air and smoother ride. Needless to say, the clear air below me was
starting to close up quickly ahead of me, and I didn't want to pick my way
through "small holes". This weather was not forecasted (ok, they said 10
percent chance of thunderstorms).

Just as you describe above, I descended (very quickly I might add!) down to
2000 (tallest object on sectional was 1100) and was able to see rain shafts
developing under the towering CU's.

Even though I remained VFR the entire time, my biggest fear was descending
through the IFR altitudes, and I was afraid of IFR traffic popping out of
the clouds, thus my reason to very quickly descend.

I zig zagged my way home staying in the sunny areas at all time as I was
afraid the rain shafts would produce undesirable downdrafts. I also keep a
very wide berth of any rainshaft in the summer time, as I just assume that
it's a thunderstorm. May be overly cautious, but I rather go 15 minutes
out of my way, then to find myself in a pickle.

> GA aircraft in addition to the old spherics stanbys. Yes, there are
> still days when I can't get there because of thunderstorms (once, so far
> this year), but it takes a solid line of rough stuff to stop me.

I don't know if I would be so calviar about this.... I have seen TCU's go
from the scattered variety to a solid line in a 1/2 hour's period of time
down here.

I don't know what the definition of 10 percent chance of thunderstorms, but
I was under the impression, if the forecast is for 10 percent, that is 10
percent of coverage, not a 1 in 10 chance of a thunderstorm. So, if you
happened to have a thunderstorm over your head, you just so happen to be
under the 10 percent of coverage.

Allen

[Dan Luke]

"A Lieberman" wrote:
> It's amazing how quickly the towering CU's build! Even before
> 9:00 a.m., I encountered tops over 6000.
>
> My last trip, I left MBO at 6:00 a.m. to drop off something my
> sister left behind, and 30 miles north of L31 tops were already
> 4000 at 7:15 a.m. Left at 7:45 and staying in the clear, climbed
> to 7,500 and tops were starting to build to my altitude.

Sucks, don't it? Being a pilot way down South will make you hate
summertime.

> > ...but it takes a solid line of rough stuff to stop me.
>
> I don't know if I would be so calviar about this.... I have
> seen TCU's go from the scattered variety to a solid line in
> a 1/2 hour's period of time down here.

Well, with the NEXRAD picture I've got now, I don't think I'm being
cavalier about it if I fly through a 25-mile hole in a line of medium
storms. The thing is to know the development trend. The looping NEXRAD
display gives me that, so I know before I get there if the storms are
closing ranks. Still, I grant you that I am pushing it harder and
closer than I used to.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Paul Sengupta]

"A Lieberman" > wrote in message
...
> I zig zagged my way home staying in the sunny areas at all time as I was
> afraid the rain shafts would produce undesirable downdrafts. I also keep
a
> very wide berth of any rainshaft in the summer time, as I just assume that
> it's a thunderstorm. May be overly cautious, but I rather go 15 minutes
> out of my way, then to find myself in a pickle.

It's easier on the paint too.

Paul