Posts Tagged ‘airplane crash lawyer’

Unexplained Plane Crash Puts the Focus on Aviation Safety

Thursday, July 28th, 2011

This week, Chicagoland was rocked by yet another light aviation accident, this time claiming the lives of three people.  A single-engine Piper PA 46 plane was taking off from the Rantoul Airport when it crashed. The pilot and both passengers were killed, although it is not yet clear whether it was the crash or the subsequent fire which claimed their lives.

The FAA has begun an investigation, as has the National Transportation Safety Board. The FAA regulates airplane manufacturing and maintenance, as well as in-flight operations, and will investigate the accident from this perspective. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is responsible for  investigating aviation accidents and recommending changes, and will be looking into the accident with this view in mind. The Champaign County Coroner’s office is likewise conducting its own investigation.

Until those investigations are complete, we will not know the true cause of last week’s crash. Many have been quick to blame the severe weather moving through the area at the time of the crash, and that may indeed prove to be the explanation. But our Chicago airplane crash attorneys are not so quick to dismiss the many possible causes of a light aviation crash.

Many aviation accidents are caused by pilot error. But they are just as frequently caused by defects in the plane itself, or negligent maintenance. Although, due to the fact that the plane was destroyed by flames after the accident, it will be difficult to reconstruct what occurred in this case, detailed and difficult forensics are often a part of aviation accident cases.

It remains to be seen whether the weather, or some other cause, was to blame in this latest accident. If defective equipment or improper maintenance were factors in the crash, then the families of the victims may have a legal claim for some of the damages suffered. A top airplane accident attorney can help the victims of this, and any, crash to sort out their options.

For a free consultation with an experienced Chicago plane crash lawyer at Passen Law Group, call us at (312) 527-4500.

share save 171 16 Unexplained Plane Crash Puts the Focus on Aviation Safety

New FAA Recommendations for Children’s Air Travel

Thursday, June 16th, 2011

child airplane safety 300x265 New FAA Recommendations for Childrens Air TravelThe Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has recently announced updated recommendations for airplane travel for infants and small children. The new guidelines change the agency’s guidance for how to ensure the safety of these littlest travelers. Also joining is support of the new recommendations is the Association of Flight Attendants (AFA). Our Chicago airplane crash attorneys believe the new guidelines are an important step in protecting children from serious injury.

Late last month the FAA, via administrator Randy Babbitt, held a press conference to announce the new recommendations. These recommendations are targeted not only to parents and other caregivers, but to the airline industry itself. The recommendations deal exclusively with children weighing forty or fewer pounds, leaving children above that size are withing the adult safety guidelines.

The FAA states that its new guidelines are based upon the belief that securing infants and children under forty pounds in an approved safety seat, properly attached to the child’s own airplane seat, will greatly increase the safety of these passengers.

Under current FAA policy, children under the age of two do not require a safety seat, or even a seat. These smallest passengers can fly for free as a “lap child,” a child whose assigned seat is simply the lap of an adult. Thus, while the adult uses a seat belt and is safely restrained, these littlest Americans are not.

The FAA’s changed recommendations come in response to changing standards from other institutions. In March of 2011, the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the American Academy of Pediatricians (AAP) worked together to change their own guidelines for automobile safety for children to minimize children seriously injured in car accidents. The changed guidelines altered many of the previous recommendations, setting new standards for age, weight, and safety-seat direction.

The FAA has chosen to make its new recommendations optional, not mandatory. This means that airlines will have the choice whether to adhere to the current policy, or move to the new one. With travelers already balking at the current price of airline travel, it is unlikely that many airlines will choose to alienate family travelers by requiring the purchase of additional seats for children — even though it is safer for the child.

The FAA’s decision not to enforce the new recommendations springs directly from this cost issue. The FAA maintains (and our Chicago car accident attorneys agree) that airplane travel is a safer option than motor vehicle travel, both for children and adults, than highway travel in the family automobile. The FAA also maintains that flying, even as a lap child with no approved safety seat or harness, is considerably safer than auto travel.

For a free consultation with an experienced Chicago airplane accident attorney at Passen Law Group, call us at (312) 527-4500.

share save 171 16 New FAA Recommendations for Childrens Air Travel

Proposed New Regulations Target Pilot Fatigue

Tuesday, September 14th, 2010

pilot fatigue 300x199 Proposed New Regulations Target Pilot FatigueThe Chicago accident attorneys of Passen Law Group have often expressed concern over the problem of pilot fatigue.  Now, the FAA has completed a fifteen-month effort to overhaul the regulations governing pilot hours, with the goal of reducing pilot fatigue and increasing safety.  The overhaul is long overdue:  many of the pilot regulations date back to the 1940s, and the last time any of them was updated was about two decades ago.  The public now has sixty days to review and comment on the proposed regulations before they are finalized and made law.

The FAA states that the proposed new regulations are based upon the latest scientific research, which has increased our understanding of how fatigue can impact performance.  The goal is to combat pilot fatigue, which can lead to errors and airplane crashes.  Unfortunately, while some good would be done by the proposed new regulations, in many areas they do not go far enough, and in at least one area, they represent a step backwards.

The first key area of the new pilot rules would reduce the overall number of hours pilots can work in a twenty-four-hour period.  This includes both actual cockpit time and preparation time – time that the pilot is required to be at work, even if not flying.  Under the new rules, pilots would be limited to thirteen hours of work in any twenty-four-hour period.  Shockingly, this is three hours fewer than what is allowed by the current regulations (they permit sixteen hours of pilot work in a twenty-four-hour period).  Our Chicago accident attorneys fully support this change.

This general rule would be altered for pilots who fly at night.  These pilots would be limited to fewer hours, holding them to as few as nine hours.  This is particularly significant for charter and cargo carriers, who would also be subject to the new rules.  Cargo carriers, including package delivery airlines, are run using a considerable amount of night flying.  Charter airlines, which carry virtually all U.S. troops, as well as a significant percentage of U.S. military cargo, likewise use significant nighttime flights.  Although these carriers urged the FAA to maintain an existing exemption from the rules, FAA  Administrator Randy Babbitt made the commonsense statement that U.S. troops deserve safe, well-rested pilots, too.

Pilots flying during the day, however, could spend more hours “behind the wheel” than they could under the old rules.  Pilots who report to work between the hours of 7 a.m. and 1 p.m. could be scheduled for as many as ten hours of actual flying time.  This is two more hours that the current regulations permit for daytime pilots.  Jeff Skiles, the First Officer praised for his professionalism when his plane was downed in the Hudson River last year, summed up the common-sense response to this proposal:  “The insidious problem of pilot fatigue cannot be fought by increasing the amount of time pilots fly in the cockpit.” Our Chicago personal injury lawyers echo Mr. Skiles’ sentiments.

Another facet of the new rules governs the rest period required for pilots between shifts.  The new FAA rules would increase the required rest period from 8 to 9 hours.  While our transportation accident lawyers applaud the increase, this is one area where the new rules do not go far enough.  That is because the rest period “begins” as soon as the pilot leaves the plane.  Thus, a nine hour “rest period” can still result in only a very few hours of sleep between ten to thirteen hour shifts.  If you believe that the proposed rest period is adequate, consider whether you would want a pilot flying your plane after a thirteen-hour shift and three or four hours of sleep.

Although the proposed FAA rules are certainly a step in the right direction, there are also several gaping holes in their reach.  First, the rules do nothing to address the problem of “commuter pilots.”  Pilots often live in one city, but are based in another – for instance, the pilot and first officer involved in a recent fatal accident were based in Newark, New Jersey, but lived in Tampa, Florida and Seattle, Washington, respectively.  Thus, due to the short rest periods required, neither had slept in a bed the night before the fatal accident.

While the FAA has informally stated that commuting time should not be a part of rest periods, the new rules do not actually contain this restriction.  This is probably in response to pressure from the airlines and pilots’ unions, both of which oppose restrictions on commuter pilots.  Despite the opposition from the unions, many pilots believe that their commuting colleagues, in combination with the limited rest periods available, present a significant safety risk.

The other large hole in the new proposed regulations is the failure to recognize the difference between regional airlines and major, nationwide companies.  Regional airline pilots do far more takeoffs and landings (the most taxing and stressful activities) within a given time period than pilots for larger airlines, and more of their airtime is spent around airports and thus in traffic.  Experts believe that this type of flying is far more strenuous and fatiguing than long flights cross-country or even over the ocean.  Indeed, this is borne out by the evidence:  the past six fatal crashes in the U.S. have all involved regional airlines.  In four of those, pilot fatigue was identified as a contributing factor, although our Chicago personal injury attorneys believe that it was likely an unidentified factor in the other two.

Perhaps the FAA’s failure to take the major steps needed is likely a response to industry pressures, and the simple dollars-and-cents reality of such reforms.  Even with the limited steps being taken, the FAA estimate (which is likely conservative) puts the cost to airlines of complying with the new regulations at $1.3 billion over the course of the next 10 years.  But which cost is greater: the cost of complying with the regulations needed to keep passengers safe, or the costs of all kinds associated with a fatal plane crash?  The attorneys of Passen Law Group urge the FAA to toughen up the proposed regulations and take the steps necessary to keep American passengers safe from pilot fatigue.

For a free consultation with an experienced Chicago accident lawyer at Passen Law Group, call us at (312) 527-4500.

share save 171 16 Proposed New Regulations Target Pilot Fatigue