Greed on display (plane crash related)

If there is any connection at all to the prior incident with the engine of that plane- And I know some people here have blindly stated that there is none, it is a coincidence (which is a weird stance to take before any investigation- there could easily be a connection, it could be the case that engine would have been able to handle the bird if it hadn’t been perviously slightly damaged.) But, if there is a possibility of a connection between the incidents, the airline should certainly be liable for further damages, if they were at all negligent in improperly testing the engine after the stall less than a week before. (And if it is just a coincidence, it seems to be a highly unlikely one- Neither me or anyone I’ve asked has ever experienced anything like the earlier engine stall described) For 2 such rare events to happen to the same plane, within a week, it seems that a more rational stance to take would be to assume one had a hand in the other, until it can be proven that it didn’t.

According to the aviation experts I’ve heard interviewed on the subject (including one who worked with Sully and has similar credentials) no jet engine currently made can handle having a goose fed through it. None. If a goose went through each engine (as seems likely), there was fuck all that could have been done to keep those engines running, even if they were fresh out of the box.

My understanding about the luggage is that once the crash investigation’s over, folks can get their luggage back, so they might not be out all that much, save some inconvience. Personally, I’ve never flown with $5K worth of stuff, and I don’t even really have $5K worth of stuff that I could take on a plane.

This is fucking ridiculous. Where is it written that people need to be compensated for every loss? Specifically, when that loss is the result of an unavoidable accident?

It doesn’t sound as if the pilot did anything incorrectly. Geese fly where planes fly. Occasionally they strike an engine and all hell breaks loose. If you’re lucky, the pilot has the skill to safely land and you get to live. At that point, material possessions seem a little unimportant.

Getting in a car is a risk. Crossing the street is a risk. Flying in a plane is a risk. There’s no guarantee that you’re going to be able to do these things successfully without harm. And while most of the time it’s possible to find someone negligent or responsible, sometimes it’s not.

I typically travel with clothes and my laptop, iPod, phone, that kind of stuff. My uni backs up my computer so I would not lose a lot there, but it would probably be close to $5K. (I’m assuming if you had carry on bags they’re mostly intact and can be returned after the investigation.) I think $5K is a generous, no-questions-asked compensation. (I’m assuming you can just ask for it and US Airways gives it to you.) It would be nice for them to help out in other ways, but in taking a potentially fatal accident and managing to successfully land the plane with no lives lost, I think they (through the pilot and crew) have done their job and then some. I imagine if you have PTSD your own insurance should help with treatment.

Would homeowner’s insurance cover any of the losses?

If the data in your laptop is worth more than $ 5,000, you sure should have a copy of its content handy.

Let alone if it contains several weeks or months worth of work.

Since when do we expect a payout for every single bad thing that happens to us? Shit happens. God doesn’t hand out out reimbursement checks for every bad day. Why do we expect US Air to? It’s nice of them to have given anything.

Makes you wonder. There are people out there right now watching their kids die from a lack of a five dollar malaria drug. People who have truly, deeply been shafted by life. But we bandy about words like “justice” when someone’s suit gets ruined.

Excellent point. Isn’t insuring your stuff your responsibility and not the airlines?

I agree, Id be fucking thrilled to be alive. I dont travel with anything irreplaceable, my laptop is expensive, but it can be replaced, as can my phone, ipod, clothing, glucometer and meds. I might go for therapy vis-a-vis any trauma from going crunchsploosh, but I cant see them being responsible for goose attack. Id be happy with getting my stuff replaced, and my medical bills dealt with, and maybe a replacement set of tickets and perhaps in case i was headed on a vacation already paid for like a cruise, that replaced.

Id have to work a nonpaid amount of time for that replacement cruise, but that is my issue, and nobody elses. Id have been a bit upset if it caused me to miss my parent/sibling/progeny’s deathbed scene, but that is about the only thing that would really upset me.

Not to hijack, but this is pretty unbelievable:

Aussie crash survivor’s writes tribute to hero US Airways pilot

(bolding mine)

And…

Does the City of New York own and operate the airport? If so, perhaps the passenger should sue the city for not getting rid of the geese.

Actually, I have heard (from extremely unreliable sources) that the city has made efforts to reduce the geese population, and were hampered in their efforts by animal-rights groups. Perhaps he should sue PETA?

I’m not really serious in either of the above paragraphs (although I suppose that anything detrimental to PETA must be considered a Good Thing). :smiley:

Why? Do you believe an airline becomes an insurer of baggage while it is in their possession no matter what causes its loss? Have you read the contract?

Samsonite?

What about them? They are gone. See, there was an* accident*. The airline is not responsible for that because it was accidental. If you don’t have backup copies of any important files that were on a lost laptop then that’s YOUR stupidity–not US Airways. See-- they didn’t fuck-up–YOU did (in this hypothetical). All THEY did was save your life (oh… and give you $5000 for immediate replacement needs with the possibility of more $$ where and if appropriate).

I think I need a piping hot cup of coffee from a McDonald’s drive-thru. I want to play LegalLotto too!!! Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

i believe that by the rules established at the Warsaw Convention airlines are only responsible for up to $500 for lost/damaged baggage on domestic U.S. flights.

(from here at the bottom of the page).

It’s printed on every ticket you buy (or comes up on your computer screen), and you agree to that arrangement by purchasing the ticket. $5000 is WAY beyond the pale!

Anytime you choose to get on a plane with let’s say $20,000 or so worth of American Privileged-People Toyz you need to know that you will only get $500 compensation if it is lost. It’s on you, bub. My suggestion? Don’t take that much valuable stuff on a plane trip unless you have extra insurance.

Quit whining! This is just the kind of greedy, “me-first!” shit that Obama keeps trying to tell us needs to stop if we’re to have any hope for our country.

No he doesn’t. See above.

Thank you! I don’t understand all the “well, if they were carrying more than $5000 worth of stuff, US Airways should pay out.” Um, no. The Contract of Carriage is pretty clear about baggage liability, even when the airline is negligent. I haven’t read US Airways’ specifically, but I’d put money on it being less than $5000. You want more? Buy luggage insurance. It’s available.

US Airways has more than provided for these people. Yeah, it sucks. I get it. But you know what? It sucks for US Airways, too. Given that it wasn’t their fault, I’d be happy to walk away with my life, a refund or alternate transportation to my destination, and whatever the Contract of Carriage provided for lost/damaged/destroyed luggage.

No, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey does. There was actually an article in one of the Idiot Rags this morning[sup]1[/sup] blaming the PAPD for not enforcing “no feeding the birds” rules against cabbies who park in special lots at LGA.

[sub]1. I just glance at the headlines, I swear.[/sub]

Even if that was the case, the airline is not responsible for the departure routing of the aircraft. The initial departure route is given by ATC. The pilots can refuse a clearance but only if they have a good reason to do so, and they wouldn’t be privy to statistics on bird strikes in the area.

I think we should license all birds and allow them to fly only when given permission by ATC. This willy-nilly flying on a whim without filing a flight plan is unsafe for man or bird. And furthermore…

That’s what I was thinking. Sounds like someone’s workplace needs to review their business continuity plan if more than $5,000 in files would be lost if one single computer went tits up.