...And Here, Darn it, Are The Heartbreakers

It is both the most "fun," and most difficult task, facing the ANN staff at the end of every year -- determining who, or what, did the most to promote the cause of aviation in the past 365 days... while also chastising those people or entities that did all they could to undermine the many successes the aerospace community has managed to accomplish.

Alas, 2007 saw more than its fair share of downers, aviation-wise. Sure, "stuff" happens... but a few folks, issues, or entities seemed to go out of their way to create problems for the world of aviation.

So... it is ANN's annual obligation to recognize a solid dozen of our Aero-Heartbreakers for 2007... in something of an informal order, starting from 12th to the 1st. Let us know what you think of our selections... whom YOU would have liked be included, or omitted, from such a list. In the meantime, we hope those who had something to do with this year's selections think a little more positively about the welfare of this industry, so that future lists become harder and harder to catalog. Be it ignorance, arrogance or just plain incompetence, these were the folks or topics that made our lot a whole lot more difficult and immeasurably injured the aviation world in the past year.

Shame on those issues, folks or topics that made our lot so much tougher in 2007...

From the Heartbreaker's List #7: Lawyers, Lawyers, Lawyers...

Tort reform was supposed to provide the aviation world with a sigh of relief -- and we're still waiting. What today's lawyers can no-longer sue for, means little when there is so much more open territory left to harvest... and when the rules for today's suits work so much in their favor.

The legal system is firmly out of control... No matter what you do, these days, it seems that there is always someone ready to sue you for it -- and in the process, they seem to have the legal wherewithal to do whatever they need to do to smear you in the process of getting ready to clean your clock.

Recently, the Arlington EAA Fly-In reeled under the weight of an immense and questionable legal judgement after a visiting pilot erred on takeoff and killed himself in a takeoff accident during a 1999 fly-in. A Snohomish County Superior Court jury awarded $10.5 million to the family of a pilot who died in the accident at the Northwest EAA Fly-In in Arlington, WA... and said that both the national Experimental Aircraft Association, as well as the regional EAA chapter, are responsible for a large percentage of the damages. First responders attempted to extinguish the post-crash fire with portable equipment, and some of the witnesses tried to pull the pilot out of the aircraft. Within 60 seconds after the accident, a volunteer fire truck arrived at the scene, and fought the fire. Within 90 seconds after their arrival, according to the NTSB, the fire was extinguished. During its investigation, the NTSB determined that the pilot, who earned his private license less than a year before the accident, had owned the aircraft for less than two weeks. The Board determined the pilot's lack of experience in the aircraft contributed to the accident, while citing the pilot's excessive climb rate, which lead to his failure to maintain an airspeed above stalling speed, as the probable cause. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reported Robert Hedrick, one of the attorneys representing the pilot's estate in the lawsuit, said bystanders waited more than five minutes for firefighters to arrive... an apparent contradiction to the NTSB's findings (and ANN's own observations as witnesses to the crash). As a result, EAA has had to make major changes in the Fly-In support they offer to regional fly-ins and aviation is made all the poorer (if not less safe, for the lack of opportunity for learning, that many fly-ins offer).

Just a few year's back, industry leader Parker-Hannifin was successfully sued (though the judgment was strongly diminished as P-H fought the ridiculous verdict) for vacuum pump failures that did NOT take place, according to the NTSB's conclusions into what was one of the most intense investigations in the last decade (the case involved a major political leader and his son in a Cessna 335). Parker-Hannifin was originally on the hook for an exorbitant sum... later argued down to what was effectively "their" part of a 4 million award that should never have been granted in the first place... but there comes a time when you have to cut your losses and P-H (grateful to not have been nailed for the original $100 million the lawyers wanted) finally paid... though they are now out of the vacuum pump business.

What's almost as disturbing as the suits themsleves, is the "PR Dance" that precedes them... where lawyers seem able to say anything they want in order to garner sympathy and plant suggestions in the minds of the jury pool. First of all, if it is our belief that if ANN went ahead and published the same kind of allegations that lawyers (promoting lawsuits) put forth, we could be sued for slander/libel. Firms and lawyers with a suit in the works seem to be able and willing to jump to the most "absolute" conclusions long before the facts are made known... and even thereafter. This is true even in the face of NTSB and other expert evidence that contradicts the purposes of the suit. A case in point... despite the fact that all the evidence that the NTSB has gathered so far points to pilot error, there is a firm suing Cirrus Design (in the tragic Cory Lidle crash) for an amount that could reach 100 million dollars... DESPITE the expert facts known to be uncovered by the NTSB... which under todays legal environment, CAN NOT BE ADMITTED into evidence to defend Cirrus! In the meantime, the attornies are asserting that there is something wrong with the control system of the aircraft in question... despite any real known evidence to support their attack on this revolutionary company... one that has done more to bring modern safety features to today's GA aircraft than any other.

Of additional and recent note, there is a firm that has stated in no uncertain terms, that one of the reasons that a Cessna Caravan (the statistically dependable backbone of much of today's air freight networks) crashed some months ago (carrying 10 skydivers, without IFR clearance, in icing conditions), was because Cessna falsified their icing tests. They gloss over the fact that the aircraft was being operated illegally and without clearance in conditions that apparently led to the accident that killed everyone on board. Their lawsuit contains some pretty startling allegations... and aims. The firm alleges that "The Cessna 208 B is primarily used as a freight carrier from small cities, and while it typically operates well in good weather, it should never have been certified to fly into icing conditions." Their site also says that, "What we have discovered in that litigation is that Cessna faked the data to get the plane certified to fly in icing conditions."

Man... If I published that without demonstrable proof, the lawyers would (justifiably) be on me in a heartbeat. 

The firm publicizes their aim, that, "When this litigation is over the Cessna 208 B will no longer be certified to fly in icing conditions," while also (shamelessly, we think) pitching other families bereaved in this tragedy, to call and retain them." So... this law firm wants to "decertify" what the most expert certification apparatus in the aerospace world, the FAA, has already certified... is that arrogance or what?

Folks; the legal system is out of control, and the costs of this kind of nonsense not only will penalize us all a great deal, but it stands to make aviation MORE dangerous by increasing costs on the part of those trying to produce and develop safe products, and inhibit improvements to current products for fear that superseded designs will then be seen as deficient. I could go on... as there are dozens, even hundreds, of known abuses to document... but you can easily see that there are BIG problems out there from the limited samples listed above. It's an utter mess. And a dangerous one, in our opinion.

FMI: You tell us, are lawyers going to KILL Aviation?