The OSH Pool Party is just 30 days away!

[Jay Honeck]

Sunday, July 25th, is our day to give back to the pilot community, in thanks
for another great year!

Fly into Iowa City (KIOW) en route to OSH '04, and enjoy:

- Free food!
- Free (real) beer!
- Free pop!
- Live music at poolside!

Stay 20 minutes or stay the night -- we'll be serving continuously
throughout the day and evening.

We've got three big runways, good instrument approaches, and plenty of free
overnight parking. Park on the ramp (or our FBO will park you inside for a
nominal fee), and we'll shuttle you over to the inn. We're located just on
the other side of RWY 25 from the ramp -- you can see your plane from your
balcony!

Last year we had folks fly in from as far away as California and New Zealand
for this little shindig, and we had a great time. Hope to see some of you
there this year!
--
Jay & Mary Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Matt Whiting]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> Sunday, July 25th, is our day to give back to the pilot community, in thanks
> for another great year!
>
> Fly into Iowa City (KIOW) en route to OSH '04, and enjoy:
>
> - Free food!
> - Free (real) beer!
> - Free pop!
> - Live music at poolside!
>
> Stay 20 minutes or stay the night -- we'll be serving continuously
> throughout the day and evening.

I hope none of the pilots combine your real beer offer with a 20 minute
stay! :-)


Matt

[Jay Honeck]

> I hope none of the pilots combine your real beer offer with a 20 minute
> stay! :-)

I trust no one is quite that stupid. At least not without a "designated
pilot" on board!

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Matt Whiting]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>I hope none of the pilots combine your real beer offer with a 20 minute
>>stay! :-)
>
>
> I trust no one is quite that stupid. At least not without a "designated
> pilot" on board!
>
> ;-)

Well, more than one AIRLINE crew has done something similar. Just keep
in mind that there is a very good chance your group would be held liable
is some numbskull did this and then crashed.

Sounds like a fun place to stop though. I hope you get a good crowd of
transients.


Matt

[EDR]

In article >, Matt Whiting
> wrote:

> Just keep in mind that there is a very good chance
> your group would be held liable is some numbskull did
> this and then crashed.

Larry???
Is that you???
Didn't you make this same arguement last year? Let it go man! It's a
dead horse!
Deja Vu all over again... :-))

[Ben Smith]

> Didn't you make this same arguement last year? Let it go man! It's a
> dead horse!

http://frogs.harvestgain.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10112/deadhorse.gif

[Coors Lite]

> Didn't you make this same arguement last year? Let it go man!
> It's a dead horse!

So your saying that good advice isn't worth repeating.

Personally in this day and age, if I was Jay and about to give out free
alcohol at a party, I would be keeping a very close eye on everyone who
was drinking.

I don't think another warning about alcohol is a dead horse.

[EDR]

In article >, Coors Lite
> wrote:

> > Didn't you make this same arguement last year? Let it go man!
> > It's a dead horse!
>
> So your saying that good advice isn't worth repeating.
> Personally in this day and age, if I was Jay and about to give out free
> alcohol at a party, I would be keeping a very close eye on everyone who
> was drinking.
> I don't think another warning about alcohol is a dead horse.

It is when it is brought up throughout the year, not just around OSH
time.
Jay has proven he is a responsible individual, as have his patrons
(it's a friends don't let friends thing). There are spouses and kids
around so it is not a college frat party event (most of us are too old
even attempt to repeat performances from our younger days).
I guess you could say that this is a "mature" audience in almost every
definition of the word.


(Interesting email address you signed in on.)

[Roger Halstead]

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 21:00:43 -0400, Matt Whiting
> wrote:

>Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>>>I hope none of the pilots combine your real beer offer with a 20 minute
>>>stay! :-)
>>
>>
>> I trust no one is quite that stupid. At least not without a "designated
>> pilot" on board!
>>

Yah gotta be kidding. No one sober would fly in with that many planes
in the pattern.

If it works out I may fly over even if I don't go to Oshkosh although
it is a bit out of the way. <:-))

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

>> ;-)
>
>Well, more than one AIRLINE crew has done something similar. Just keep
>in mind that there is a very good chance your group would be held liable
>is some numbskull did this and then crashed.
>
>Sounds like a fun place to stop though. I hope you get a good crowd of
>transients.
>
>
>Matt

[Sam]

Coors Lite > wrote in message >...
> > Didn't you make this same arguement last year? Let it go man!
> > It's a dead horse!
>
> So your saying that good advice isn't worth repeating.
>
> Personally in this day and age, if I was Jay and about to give out free
> alcohol at a party, I would be keeping a very close eye on everyone who
> was drinking.
>
> I don't think another warning about alcohol is a dead horse.

Yes, it is. It was brought up last year and took forever for the
thread to die. Usually I enjoy seeing an active thread, but this one
was stupid and I was glad to see it gone.

This isn't high school graduation. The people going to Jay's have
most likely been in this newsgroup awhile and I'm sure know enough
about aviation to avoid drinking and flying. Even if someone got
hammered at his party, flew off into the wild blue yonder, and crashed
into a tower 10 mins later I doubt he would be held liable, even in
today's world.

I guarantee that when we first saw this thread, we were all thinking
"I hope some dumbass doesn't drink beer and then fly". Then of course
most of us dismissed the thought knowing that:
1)The people in this group are probably not that dumb.
2)The people in this group and at Jay's party would likely beat the
sh&t out of anyone trying to do it. Of course, YOU had to be "that
guy" to bring it up. Yes, it is extremely annoying. We are not
stupid people. Keep these warning posts for the reality tv newsgroups
or something.

[Andrew Gideon]

Sam wrote:

> Even if someone got
> hammered at his party, flew off into the wild blue yonder, and crashed
> into a tower 10 mins later I doubt he would be held liable, even in
> today's world.

Hmm. Having just read an ePilot message about some family being awarded
money in court from the manufacturer of a vacuum pump that didn't fail, and
therefore had nothing to do with the crash, I fail to share your optimism
that sanity reigns.

I'd not be shocked to learn that the company that builds the wiring used in
the generators that power the area in which the party is held liable...even
if the party was held by candle light.

- Andrew

[Matt Whiting]

Coors Lite wrote:

>>Didn't you make this same arguement last year? Let it go man!
>>It's a dead horse!
>
>
> So your saying that good advice isn't worth repeating.
>
> Personally in this day and age, if I was Jay and about to give out free
> alcohol at a party, I would be keeping a very close eye on everyone who
> was drinking.
>
> I don't think another warning about alcohol is a dead horse.

And I wouldn't advertise it on the internet! But that is just me... :-)

Matt

[Rich S.]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Coors Lite wrote:
> >
> > I don't think another warning about alcohol is a dead horse.
>
> And I wouldn't advertise it on the internet! But that is just me... :-)

You (and the other concerned folks) should really stay home so as not to
expose yourself to the possibility of litigation.

You might also consider that, having placed yourself in the position of
offering legal and moral advice to those who may attend, you have already
involved yourself in whatever subsequent litigation could occur.

Take two 8 oz. paper cups of peach muzzleloader (my personal favorite) and
don't call in the morning.

Rich "I'm not my brother's keeper" S.

[jls]

"Andrew Gideon" > wrote in message
online.com...
> Sam wrote:
>
> > Even if someone got
> > hammered at his party, flew off into the wild blue yonder, and crashed
> > into a tower 10 mins later I doubt he would be held liable, even in
> > today's world.
>
> Hmm. Having just read an ePilot message about some family being awarded
> money in court from the manufacturer of a vacuum pump that didn't fail,
and
> therefore had nothing to do with the crash, I fail to share your optimism
> that sanity reigns.
>
> I'd not be shocked to learn that the company that builds the wiring used
in
> the generators that power the area in which the party is held
liable...even
> if the party was held by candle light.
>
> - Andrew

Your second example is of course a crude troll. Also see _Palsgraf vs.
Long Island Railroad._ The first example is too unless you furnish facts
and a citation to the source of those facts so they can be verified, rather
than your (probably clouded) recollection. I have never seen a judgment
awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of negligence
or defective design proximately causing the injury. Maybe you can show me
my first. I won't hold my breath waiting.

As for furnishing alcohol to someone likely to cause injury to himself or
others, the dramshop laws and cases are dispositive. As much as I like the
party-giver and join in complimenting him for his contributions in this and
other newsgroups, it is risky to serve alcohol to anyone you know or have
reason to know is about to operate dangerous machinery because of the
dramshop cases and the dramshop laws. Whether the entertainment is done
for pay or not is irrelevant.

8 hours from bottle to throttle, remember? And 24 are recommended. OTOH,
the question is one of reasonableness. If someone drinks a beer and then
flies, does host who served the beer subject himself to liability? I don't
think so.

[Jim Fisher]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
Just keep
> in mind that there is a very good chance your group would be held liable
> is some numbskull did this and then crashed.
>

Bullsquat.

--
Jim Fisher

[ChuckSlusarczyk]

In article >, Rich S. says...


>You might also consider that, having placed yourself in the position of
>offering legal and moral advice to those who may attend, you have already
>involved yourself in whatever subsequent litigation could occur.
>
>Take two 8 oz. paper cups of peach muzzleloader (my personal favorite) and
>don't call in the morning.
>
>Rich "I'm not my brother's keeper" S.


Geez I was trying to keep quiet on this morality crises and you had to go and
mention Muzzleloader. I was able to avoid litigation at Pville when Unka Bob
died from an overdose of Muzzleloader. Fortunately for me and I suppose everyone
else present and shortly after his memorial service, Unka Bob rose from the dead
and saved us all .Alleluja. Good thing he did too because who was gonna fly his
plane home the next day??
I will have Peach Muzzleloader at Oshkosh again this year for those adults who
are not flying ,walking,standing ,speaking or in any way engaged in any activity
that might be construed as to needing moral advice before sipping .
I now return to lurk mode to prepare for Oshkosh.

See ya
Chuck (Muzzleloader ??)S

[Jay Honeck]

> As much as I like the
> party-giver and join in complimenting him for his contributions in this
and
> other newsgroups, it is risky to serve alcohol to anyone you know or have
> reason to know is about to operate dangerous machinery because of the
> dramshop cases and the dramshop laws. Whether the entertainment is done
> for pay or not is irrelevant.

I appreciate the sentiment, but, alas, I don't care to live in a world where
I can't serve my friends beer at pool side.

I also refuse to live in a world where I cannot trust my fellow pilots with
my $30K, full sized van. And no, I don't make them produce a drivers
license, and sign a waiver, nor do I check to make sure that they have
insurance. I toss 'em the keys, give 'em a map, and bid them adieu,
liability be damned.

If you have flown in to my hotel, that's proof enough to me that you are an
honorable, decent person. No one has proven me wrong yet.

People live up to your expectations.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Take two 8 oz. paper cups of peach muzzleloader (my personal favorite) and
> don't call in the morning.
>
> Rich "I'm not my brother's keeper" S.

Rich, I'm buying the first round!

;-)

You comin' to OSH?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Richard Lamb]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> > As much as I like the
> > party-giver and join in complimenting him for his contributions in this
> and
> > other newsgroups, it is risky to serve alcohol to anyone you know or have
> > reason to know is about to operate dangerous machinery because of the
> > dramshop cases and the dramshop laws. Whether the entertainment is done
> > for pay or not is irrelevant.
>
> I appreciate the sentiment, but, alas, I don't care to live in a world where
> I can't serve my friends beer at pool side.
>
> I also refuse to live in a world where I cannot trust my fellow pilots with
> my $30K, full sized van. And no, I don't make them produce a drivers
> license, and sign a waiver, nor do I check to make sure that they have
> insurance. I toss 'em the keys, give 'em a map, and bid them adieu,
> liability be damned.
>
> If you have flown in to my hotel, that's proof enough to me that you are an
> honorable, decent person. No one has proven me wrong yet.
>
> People live up to your expectations.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"


Oh man. Jay, can I move to your world?
Mine is starting to suck with all the law suits happy people around
here.

Richard Lamb

[Jay Honeck]

> Oh man. Jay, can I move to your world?
> Mine is starting to suck with all the law suits happy people around
> here.

Come to Iowa, Richard.

America still exists here.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> I will have Peach Muzzleloader at Oshkosh again this year for those adults
who
> are not flying ,walking,standing ,speaking or in any way engaged in any
activity
> that might be construed as to needing moral advice before sipping .
> I now return to lurk mode to prepare for Oshkosh.

Chuck, you are hereby elected honorary and chief muzzleloader for our annual
Rec.Aviation North Forty party, to be held on (I think) Wednesday night
during the show at our campsite. (For those who don't know, simply give the
EAA North Forty camping folks our "N" number, and they'll tell you precisely
where to go...)

Last year we had quite a little turnout for this soiree (see the pix at
http://alexisparkinn.com/rogue's_gallery_i_-_p.htm#OSHKOSH -- ya gotta
scroll down a bit), with plenty of people bringing most excellent beer --
but none of this legendary peach muzzleloader I keep hearing about!

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Richard Lamb]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> > Oh man. Jay, can I move to your world?
> > Mine is starting to suck with all the law suits happy people around
> > here.
>
> Come to Iowa, Richard.
>
> America still exists here.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Well thank you, Jay.

If I ever get out of this mess, I might just do that.

You can take the boy out of Texas,
but you can't take Texas out of the boy.

And if you could, there wouldn't be much left...

Richard

http://home.earthlink.net/~n6228l/

[Rich S.]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:i_5Dc.182216$Ly.114@attbi_s01...
>
> Rich, I'm buying the first round!
>
> ;-)
>
> You comin' to OSH?

Wow! After reading Chuck's promise to have PMZLDR available, I am sorely
tempted. There are two great friends who are within weeks of finishing their
Emeraudes, and I want to be able to see them fly in to Oshkosh. They will
not be there until next year, so I'm going to take a rain check. The Good
Lord willing, I will join you all in 2005 and hope to meet more a lot of the
people whose words I have been reading.

I will hoist a cup at the proper moment and toast the fortunate ones who are
slowly drowning in the pasture. :-)

Rich S.

[UltraJohn]

jls wrote:

>
> and a citation to the source of those facts so they can be verified,
> rather
> than your (probably clouded) recollection. I have never seen a judgment
> awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of negligence
> or defective design proximately causing the injury. Maybe you can show
> me
> my first. I won't hold my breath waiting.


From AOPA e-mail news




JUDGE DENIES CARNAHAN REQUEST FOR NEW TRIAL
A Kansas City judge has refused to grant a new trial to the family of
the late Missouri Gov. Mel Carnahan seeking punitive damages against
the Parker Hannifin Company. In a ruling, Circuit Court Judge
Charles Atwell said evidence supporting punitive damages was so weak
he was reluctant to give it to a jury. An investigation into the crash
of a twin-engine Cessna aircraft that killed Carnahan, his son Randy,
and aide Chris Sifford on October 16, 2000, found vacuum pumps made
by Parker Hannifin were working well enough for vacuum-driven instruments
to give proper indications. The Carnahan family alleged, however,
that Parker Hannifin earlier had refused to recall vacuum pumps it
manufactured to save money. However, evidence also indicated the
company reported pump failures to the FAA and also warned customers
that pumps could fail and urged the use of backup pumps. The family
sued for $100 million but a jury awarded $4 million from Parker Hannifin,
an amount that was later reduced to $2.4 million. Sifford's family
settled separately with Parker Hannifin, which no longer manufactures
the pumps, for $905,000, according to press reports. To learn more about
the lawsuit, read a previous column from "AOPA Pilot"
( http://www.aopa.org/epilot/redir.cfm?adid=4583 ).

[Ed]

You're kind of a bummer Matt. I'm surprised that you fly at all.

Ed

[Darrel Toepfer]

Richard Lamb wrote:

> You can take the boy out of Texas,
> but you can't take Texas out of the boy.
>
> And if you could, there wouldn't be much left...

Thats like a whole other country...

[Larry Dighera]

On 25 Jun 2004 13:05:04 -0700, (Sam) wrote:

>The people in this group and at Jay's party would likely beat the
>sh&t out of anyone trying to do it.

Ah, you bring nearly the same dearth of statesmanship and eloquence to
this newsgroup as that Vice President Dick Cheney recently brought to
the floor of the Senate. :-(

[Bob Noel]

In article >, Larry Dighera
> wrote:

> On 25 Jun 2004 13:05:04 -0700, (Sam) wrote:
>
> >The people in this group and at Jay's party would likely beat the
> >sh&t out of anyone trying to do it.
>
> Ah, you bring nearly the same dearth of statesmanship and eloquence to
> this newsgroup as that Vice President Dick Cheney recently brought to
> the floor of the Senate. :-(

sometime you just have to beat some sense into people...

--
Bob Noel

[pacplyer]

Richard Lamb > wrote in message >...
> Jay Honeck wrote:
> >
> > > As much as I like the
> > > party-giver and join in complimenting him for his contributions in this
> and
> > > other newsgroups, it is risky to serve alcohol to anyone you know or have
> > > reason to know is about to operate dangerous machinery because of the
> > > dramshop cases and the dramshop laws. Whether the entertainment is done
> > > for pay or not is irrelevant.
> >
> > I appreciate the sentiment, but, alas, I don't care to live in a world where
> > I can't serve my friends beer at pool side.
> >
> > I also refuse to live in a world where I cannot trust my fellow pilots with
> > my $30K, full sized van. And no, I don't make them produce a drivers
> > license, and sign a waiver, nor do I check to make sure that they have
> > insurance. I toss 'em the keys, give 'em a map, and bid them adieu,
> > liability be damned.
> >
> > If you have flown in to my hotel, that's proof enough to me that you are an
> > honorable, decent person. No one has proven me wrong yet.
> >
> > People live up to your expectations.
> > --
> > Jay Honeck
> > Iowa City, IA
> > Pathfinder N56993
> > www.AlexisParkInn.com
> > "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
> Oh man. Jay, can I move to your world?
> Mine is starting to suck with all the law suits happy people around
> here.
>
> Richard Lamb


Jay's the kind of great guy that got me into aviation in the first
place. Matt however is the kind of guy I wouldn't lend a bicycle to.
He'd go put new tires on it and bring it back, giving me the bill and
lecturing me on how dangerous it was for him. Jay, just put up a sign
at poolside that says: Warning: Patrons are not permitted to fly for
24 hours after consuming free alcoholic beverages. Caution:
consumption of lava rocks after falling down can cause extreme
discomfort and distress during future bowel movements....Notice: You
are not required to buy B.S. from poolside turd-merchants in the
airport hotel. The management does not condone their activities at
all.

Danger!.. Danger!... Danger Will Robinson!

pac "fall artist assassin" plyer

[Cecil Chapman]

Hope you take lots of pictures you can post somewhere! Wish I could be
there. I'm shooting for Oshkosh (sp?) next year. This year my wife and I
will be going to the AOPA Expo in Long Beach (with a Friday night party on
the Queen Mary). I DO have to check out Airventure next year. Every pilot
I've every spoken to tells me it is THE place to be. I've heard some great
stories about camping next to your plane with lots of other pilots doing the
same thing - sounds like 'heaven' to me <grin>. Next year, I'll have to
make the pilgrimage!

Take care and have fun Jay!

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL
Student-IASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

[G.R. Patterson III]

jls wrote:
>
> I have never seen a judgment
> awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of negligence
> or defective design proximately causing the injury.

You haven't been paying attention to the Parker-Hanefin case, I take it?

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.

[Sam]

Larry Dighera > wrote in message >...
> On 25 Jun 2004 13:05:04 -0700, (Sam) wrote:
>
> >The people in this group and at Jay's party would likely beat the
> >sh&t out of anyone trying to do it.
>
> Ah, you bring nearly the same dearth of statesmanship and eloquence to
> this newsgroup as that Vice President Dick Cheney recently brought to
> the floor of the Senate. :-(

Yeah, yeah, I know... Hardly an "eloquent" solution. Think about it
though Larry, I know you've been around here a long time, what would
happen if some guy (or girl, whatever) got all sloshed at Jay's hotel.
You think those people like J. Fisher and Capt Doug would be like
"hey, have a great flight!"? I think those guys would seriously put a
quick end to any intoxicated plans (mild as they may be!). Then
again, I haven't met too many people here, so I'm just kinda
guessing...

Sam

[Jay Honeck]

> I've heard some great
> stories about camping next to your plane with lots of other pilots doing
the
> same thing - sounds like 'heaven' to me <grin>.

"This ain't heaven...it's Oshkosh"

OSH is the closest thing to heaven on earth I've found. I start dreaming
about it in February, and start getting anxious in May.

By now, I'm just crawling out of my skin, having a hard time waiting that
one more month!

Remember that feeling before Christmas, when you were a kid? That
absolutely, can't-stand-the-wait feeling?

That's Oshkosh!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[jls]

"Bryan Martin" > wrote in message
...
> in article , jls at
> wrote on 6/25/04 9:34 PM:
>
> > I have never seen a judgment
> > awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of
negligence
> > or defective design proximately causing the injury.
>
> You need to get your nose out of those law books and take a look at the
real
> world, you're living in a fantasy world.

Ah, my partisan friend, you need to furnish evidence it -- a case going to
the jury without evidence of negligence -- has happened, otherwise be
thought of as shooting from the hip with a $2 pistol.

I haven't read much law since taking the bar in the 70's, haven't needed to
all that much, but I've learned people's "facts" often lack substance and
substantiation, and will twist the facts to suit their purpose. It's always
good then to consider what one has at stake when one takes a position, and
you rarely if ever have a pilot or CFI or aircraft owner or engineer or
owner of an FBO taking the side of a plaintiff like the Carnahan widow.

In the Carnahan case there was indeed testimony that the Parker-Hannifin
gyro failed, that P-H gyros had performance problems on other occasions in
other aircraft, and therefore P-H had notice of a defect or defects needing
to be cured. At any rate P-H settled, constituting an admission of
liability. The other character in this thread saying there was no such
evidence is hanging his hat on AOPA's take of the evidence. You could
hardly say THEY are objective at AOPA in these controversies ---- about as
objective as Michael Moore is about George Bush.

I just read another whiner complaining that the jury disregarded the NTSB
report in the Carnahan case, but he is naive because ordinarily those
reports, just like a highway patrolman's report of an auto accident, are and
always have been inadmissible as evidence before a jury. I'd be willing
the bet the jury never saw the NTSB report, so that guy is writing something
deceptive, something to mislead the reader, in order to justify his position
against the lawsuit.

Then you hear, Oh, we're going to be priced out of the sky by these
lawsuits. They're so frivolous, and so costly and we'll never be able to
buy another gyro ever again, and oh the sky is falling and oh these trial
lawyers are ruining the world, sucking the very lifeblood out of general
aviation. Well buuuullll ****. The widow Carnahan was looking for 100
million and she got 4. Big deal.

[jls]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> jls wrote:
> >
> > I have never seen a judgment
> > awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of
negligence
> > or defective design proximately causing the injury.
>
> You haven't been paying attention to the Parker-Hanefin case, I take it?
>
> George Patterson
> None of us is as dumb as all of us.

If I were going to merchandise a mechanical gyro, George, I'd use 2004
technology, not ancient stuff from out of the 50's. You been hearing too
much spin from the Parker-Hannifin crowd, too much propaganda from their
friends, too much of the take from the GA crowd who think that everytime
there is a judgment it has left a great oozing lesion on their pocketbooks
and has taken GA to the brink of devastation. Besides, after getting a
paltry 4 million dollar judgment against it, instead of the BIG money the
Carnahans were going for, P-H said it was vindicated. So be happy.

[nauga]

jls wrote...

> If I were going to merchandise a mechanical gyro, George, I'd use 2004
> technology, not ancient stuff from out of the 50's.

The Parker-Hannifin case was in regards to the vacuum pumps,
not the gyros. Evidence and analysis indicates that both
pumps were functional at impact, and were not a factor in
the crash. They didn't settle, as you suggested elsewhere,
but the Carnahan crowd was awarded far less than what they
were asking.

Dave 'and she asked for my vote' Hyde

[Matt Whiting]

jls wrote:

> "Bryan Martin" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>in article , jls at
wrote on 6/25/04 9:34 PM:
>>
>>
>>>I have never seen a judgment
>>>awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of
>
> negligence
>
>>>or defective design proximately causing the injury.
>>
>>You need to get your nose out of those law books and take a look at the
>
> real
>
>>world, you're living in a fantasy world.
>
>
> Ah, my partisan friend, you need to furnish evidence it -- a case going to
> the jury without evidence of negligence -- has happened, otherwise be
> thought of as shooting from the hip with a $2 pistol.
>
> I haven't read much law since taking the bar in the 70's, haven't needed to
> all that much, but I've learned people's "facts" often lack substance and
> substantiation, and will twist the facts to suit their purpose. It's always
> good then to consider what one has at stake when one takes a position, and
> you rarely if ever have a pilot or CFI or aircraft owner or engineer or
> owner of an FBO taking the side of a plaintiff like the Carnahan widow.
>
> In the Carnahan case there was indeed testimony that the Parker-Hannifin
> gyro failed, that P-H gyros had performance problems on other occasions in
> other aircraft, and therefore P-H had notice of a defect or defects needing
> to be cured. At any rate P-H settled, constituting an admission of
> liability. The other character in this thread saying there was no such
> evidence is hanging his hat on AOPA's take of the evidence. You could
> hardly say THEY are objective at AOPA in these controversies ---- about as
> objective as Michael Moore is about George Bush.

Unfortunately, many, maybe even most, companies settle even if they
don't think they are liable. They make a business decision that weighs
the cost of defense against the cost of a settlement, and then choose
the least expensive option. There have been many studies since the
silicone breast implant case was brought and settled and every study so
far shows no indication of a connection between the health problems the
women suffered and their silicone implants. The reason that Dow-Corning
settled is that the projected cost of defending lawsuits in virtually
every state in the union was simply mind boggling. And, they actually
won most of the initial suits prior to the class action being formed.
The issue wasn't liability, it was cost of defense.


Matt

[Matt Whiting]

jls wrote:

> "G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>
>>jls wrote:
>>
>>>I have never seen a judgment
>>>awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of
>
> negligence
>
>>>or defective design proximately causing the injury.
>>
>>You haven't been paying attention to the Parker-Hanefin case, I take it?
>>
>>George Patterson
>> None of us is as dumb as all of us.
>
>
> If I were going to merchandise a mechanical gyro, George, I'd use 2004
> technology, not ancient stuff from out of the 50's. You been hearing too
> much spin from the Parker-Hannifin crowd, too much propaganda from their
> friends, too much of the take from the GA crowd who think that everytime
> there is a judgment it has left a great oozing lesion on their pocketbooks
> and has taken GA to the brink of devastation. Besides, after getting a
> paltry 4 million dollar judgment against it, instead of the BIG money the
> Carnahans were going for, P-H said it was vindicated. So be happy.

I'd be curious to know what P-H's volume is and how much this will be
per unit they ship. Given that the volumes are generally quite low in
GA as compared to say the automotive world, I'll bet this $4MM is a lot
more significant than you think. We're not talking about companies that
sell millions of units a year.


Matt

[Cy Galley]

----- Original Message -----
From: " jls" >
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.piloting
Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2004 10:14 PM
Subject: Re: The OSH Pool Party is just 30 days away!


>
> aviation. Well buuuullll ****. The widow Carnahan was looking for 100
> million and she got 4. Big deal.
>
Well, if 4 million is not a big deal as you infer, Please send me 400,000
which should be chump change!

[jls]

"Cy Galley" > wrote in message
news:%SADc.100823$2i5.78190@attbi_s52...
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: " jls" >
> Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.piloting
> Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2004 10:14 PM
> Subject: Re: The OSH Pool Party is just 30 days away!
>
>
> >
> > aviation. Well buuuullll ****. The widow Carnahan was looking for 100
> > million and she got 4. Big deal.
> >
> Well, if 4 million is not a big deal as you infer, Please send me 400,000
> which should be chump change!

How do you want it, cash, cheque, draft, or money order?

[Bushy]

> Well, if 4 million is not a big deal as you infer, Please send me 400,000
> which should be chump change!
>

I'd be happy to send it to you. Please forward your bank account details to
my Nigerian email account so I can send it.......

Peter

[G.R. Patterson III]

jls wrote:
>
> The widow Carnahan was looking for 100
> million and she got 4.

Reduced to 2.6 mill.

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.

[G.R. Patterson III]

jls wrote:
>
> "G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > jls wrote:
> > >
> > > I have never seen a judgment
> > > awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of
> negligence
> > > or defective design proximately causing the injury.
> >
> > You haven't been paying attention to the Parker-Hanefin case, I take it?
> >
> > George Patterson
> > None of us is as dumb as all of us.
>
> If I were going to merchandise a mechanical gyro, George, I'd use 2004
> technology, not ancient stuff from out of the 50's.

What gyros? Gyros didn't figure in this case.

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Bryan Martin" > wrote in message
...
> >
> Parker-Hannifin didn't make the gyro that failed in this case. As far as I
> know Parker-Hannifin doesn't make any gyros. Parker-Hannifin made the
vacuum
> pumps that run the gyros and the pumps didn't fail. Before you run down
> someone else, get your own damn facts strait. Typical of a lawyer, twist
the
> fact to suit your own argument and re-define terms until they are
> unrecognizable to anyone else.

That explains Congress...both sides of the aisle and both houses.

[jls]

"Bryan Martin" > wrote in message
...
> in article , jls at
> wrote on 6/26/04 11:14 PM:
>
> >
> > "Bryan Martin" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> in article , jls at
> >> wrote on 6/25/04 9:34 PM:
> >>
> >>> I have never seen a judgment
> >>> awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of
> > negligence
> >>> or defective design proximately causing the injury.
> >>
> >> You need to get your nose out of those law books and take a look at the
> > real
> >> world, you're living in a fantasy world.
> >
> > Ah, my partisan friend, you need to furnish evidence it -- a case going
to
> > the jury without evidence of negligence -- has happened, otherwise be
> > thought of as shooting from the hip with a $2 pistol.
> >
> > I haven't read much law since taking the bar in the 70's, haven't needed
to
> > all that much, but I've learned people's "facts" often lack substance
and
> > substantiation, and will twist the facts to suit their purpose. It's
always
> > good then to consider what one has at stake when one takes a position,
and
> > you rarely if ever have a pilot or CFI or aircraft owner or engineer or
> > owner of an FBO taking the side of a plaintiff like the Carnahan widow.
> >
> > In the Carnahan case there was indeed testimony that the Parker-Hannifin
> > gyro failed, that P-H gyros had performance problems on other occasions
in
> > other aircraft, and therefore P-H had notice of a defect or defects
needing
> > to be cured. At any rate P-H settled, constituting an admission of
> > liability. The other character in this thread saying there was no
such
> > evidence is hanging his hat on AOPA's take of the evidence. You could
> > hardly say THEY are objective at AOPA in these controversies ---- about
as
> > objective as Michael Moore is about George Bush.
> >
> > I just read another whiner complaining that the jury disregarded the
NTSB
> > report in the Carnahan case, but he is naive because ordinarily those
> > reports, just like a highway patrolman's report of an auto accident, are
and
> > always have been inadmissible as evidence before a jury. I'd be
willing
> > the bet the jury never saw the NTSB report, so that guy is writing
something
> > deceptive, something to mislead the reader, in order to justify his
position
> > against the lawsuit.
> >
> > Then you hear, Oh, we're going to be priced out of the sky by these
> > lawsuits. They're so frivolous, and so costly and we'll never be able
to
> > buy another gyro ever again, and oh the sky is falling and oh these
trial
> > lawyers are ruining the world, sucking the very lifeblood out of general
> > aviation. Well buuuullll ****. The widow Carnahan was looking for 100
> > million and she got 4. Big deal.
> >
> >
> Parker-Hannifin didn't make the gyro that failed in this case. As far as I
> know Parker-Hannifin doesn't make any gyros. Parker-Hannifin made the
vacuum
> pumps that run the gyros and the pumps didn't fail. Before you run down
> someone else, get your own damn facts strait. Typical of a lawyer, twist
the
> fact to suit your own argument and re-define terms until they are
> unrecognizable to anyone else.

Apparently YOU haven't been confused, except as to the spelling of the word
"straight." Don't be nitpicking now or I'll have to nitpick back at you.
>

If I twisted the facts I didn't do it intentionally. Read this and the
accompanying material. I'm speaking of the gyros as the vacuum system, and
you will note that the article implicates gyroscope obsolescence:

http://www.iasa.com.au/folders/Publications/Legal_Issues/carnahancrash.html

The point is that the jury found that the vacuum system failed or was
inadequate for its designed purpose and if there is anyone who can
accurately say there was no negligence by P-H, utterly no testimony of it,
he should provide proof thereof, not the speculation which has characterized
this sub-thread. Now please note that the NTSB found that the primary
attitude indicator was probably not functioning properly at the time of the
crash. Here, read for yourself:
"The NTSB accident report indicated there may indeed have been problems with
the primary attitude display, but said that secondary instruments were
probably functioning at the time of the crash."

The judge let the case against P-H go to the jury which awarded 4 million.
If you don't like him, impeach him. P-H withdrew their appeal and settled,
then settled with another estate not a party to the Carnahan lawsuit.
[This should answer Nauga's nattering too.]

[jls]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> jls wrote:
> >
> > "G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > >
> > > jls wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I have never seen a judgment
> > > > awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of
> > negligence
> > > > or defective design proximately causing the injury.
> > >
> > > You haven't been paying attention to the Parker-Hanefin case, I take
it?
> > >
> > > George Patterson
> > > None of us is as dumb as all of us.
> >
> > If I were going to merchandise a mechanical gyro, George, I'd use 2004
> > technology, not ancient stuff from out of the 50's.
>
> What gyros? Gyros didn't figure in this case.
>
> George Patterson
> None of us is as dumb as all of us.

Fair enough on this vaguely relevant point and on the irrelevant point that
the jury verdict was reduced but read the material I provided for Bryan in
another post. I don't claim to be intimately familiar with the facts or
law of the Carnahan lawsuit, just made the so far irrefutable (and
unrefuted) point that a lawsuit doesn't get sent to the jury by a judge who
has not heard and made a note during the lawsuit of credible testimony and
evidence of negligence.

[Richard Lamb]

Bryan Martin wrote:
>
> Parker-Hannifin didn't make the gyro that failed in this case. As far as I
> know Parker-Hannifin doesn't make any gyros. Parker-Hannifin made the vacuum
> pumps that run the gyros and the pumps didn't fail. Before you run down
> someone else, get your own damn facts strait. Typical of a lawyer, twist the
> fact to suit your own argument and re-define terms until they are
> unrecognizable to anyone else.

And rely on the objectivity of twelve morons who couldn't find a
flimsy excuse to get out of jury duty....

[nauga]

jls wrote...

> I'm speaking of the gyros as the vacuum system, and
> you will note that the article implicates gyroscope obsolescence:

But the suit was against the vacuum pump manufacturer,
not the gyro manufacturer. The NTSB concluded that a single
attitude gyro failed, and that the vacuum system was functional.

> Here, read for yourself:
> "The NTSB accident report indicated there may indeed have been problems
with
> the primary attitude display, but said that secondary instruments were
> probably functioning at the time of the crash."

Right back atcha:
"...one of the vacuum gage system failure indicator buttons
exhibited evidence of having been in almost the fully retracted
position (the other indicator button was found in the partially
retracted position), which indicates that adequate vacuum existed
for the airplane's instruments to operate."

Dave 'forensic engineering' Hyde

[Jim Weir]

Don't you folks know that anything that is more than a couple of lines unsnipped
gets bypassed? Why in the hell can't you snip?

Jim


Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[Jim Weir]

Peach? You gonna bring PEACH? I was going to bring apricot. Let's see who can
stand the longest with a swap between us.

Jim


{;-)






->I will have Peach Muzzleloader at Oshkosh again this year for those adults who
->are not flying ,walking,standing ,speaking or in any way engaged in any
activity

Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[SKYKING195]

>the jury found that the vacuum system failed or was
>inadequate for its designed purpose

Yeah, and a jury found OJ Simpson not guilty also. So much for the fairness and
intelligence of juries!

Mitch

Luscombe 8A
Cessna 195

[G.R. Patterson III]

jls wrote:
>
> I don't claim to be intimately familiar with the facts or
> law of the Carnahan lawsuit, just made the so far irrefutable (and
> unrefuted) point that a lawsuit doesn't get sent to the jury by a judge who
> has not heard and made a note during the lawsuit of credible testimony and
> evidence of negligence.

Must be nice to live in a world in which judges are infallible and never allow
friendship or ignorance to affect their decisions.

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> jls wrote:
> >
> > I don't claim to be intimately familiar with the facts or
> > law of the Carnahan lawsuit, just made the so far irrefutable (and
> > unrefuted) point that a lawsuit doesn't get sent to the jury by a judge
who
> > has not heard and made a note during the lawsuit of credible testimony
and
> > evidence of negligence.
>
> Must be nice to live in a world in which judges are infallible and never
allow
> friendship or ignorance to affect their decisions.
>
Or...dare I say?...corrupt?

[bryan chaisone]

Another year of no-go for me, Jay. Not economically viable again...
Boo hoo hooo... Maybe I'll be able to next year. If so, I'll bring
rice wine to throw into the mix.

Wish you all the best. Have fun, enjoy and screw the neh sayers.

Bryan "The Monk" Chaisone




"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<gJpDc.102145$Hg2.90262@attbi_s04>...
> > I've heard some great
> > stories about camping next to your plane with lots of other pilots doing
> the
> > same thing - sounds like 'heaven' to me <grin>.
>
> "This ain't heaven...it's Oshkosh"
>
> OSH is the closest thing to heaven on earth I've found. I start dreaming
> about it in February, and start getting anxious in May.
>
> By now, I'm just crawling out of my skin, having a hard time waiting that
> one more month!
>
> Remember that feeling before Christmas, when you were a kid? That
> absolutely, can't-stand-the-wait feeling?
>
> That's Oshkosh!
>
> :-)

[ChuckSlusarczyk]

In article >, Jim Weir says...
>
>Peach? You gonna bring PEACH? I was going to bring apricot. Let's see who can
>stand the longest with a swap between us.

Fact is Jim I'm bringing Peach ,Apricot AND Blackberry. I think Blackberry was
the rise from the dead drink that turned Unka Bob into a living legend.


Chuck( Muzzle Loader...the liquid dignity remover) S

[Rich S.]

"ChuckSlusarczyk" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Jim Weir says...
> >
> >Peach? You gonna bring PEACH? I was going to bring apricot. Let's see
who can
> >stand the longest with a swap between us.
>
> Fact is Jim I'm bringing Peach ,Apricot AND Blackberry. I think Blackberry
was
> the rise from the dead drink that turned Unka Bob into a living legend.
>
>
> Chuck( Muzzle Loader...the liquid dignity remover) S

Yeah, Chuck. That's the stuff - Blackberry. That's the flavor my wife liked
enough to down two Pepsi cups full.

Rich "Don't give her any more, I'm too old" S.

[Bushy]

"Don't give her any more, I'm too old"

rotflmao!

Peter