Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

Settlement reached in Haney F-22 crash lawsuit

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/settlement-reached

Seems like the widow had a case after all.

F-16.net Sponsor

aceshigh wrote:

Settlement reached in Haney F-22 crash lawsuit

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/settlement-reached

Seems like the widow had a case after all.

A settlement does not necessarily mean she would have prevailed if the case had continued.

Quote:

A settlement does not necessarily mean she would have prevailed if the case had continued.

Indeed.

In fact, if her case was golden based on indisputable facts alone, the best course would be to pursue it to the end for the maximum settlement.
The primary path of her attorney was to create bad press havoc for LM at a time when it could hurt them the most, not to prove their case in a courtroom.
It sounds cynical but....welcome to the tort legal world.

Can anyone say, "American Rule"?

I really wish the American Rule could be revoked. I wonder if she would have sued if she would have to pay LM-Boeing's legal bill if she lost.

To further what exfltsafety and archeman said,

Often you can settle for 10%-25% of what legal fees would be to prove yourself right. Also, the media already is painting them as the big bad defense contractors picking on the little widow, a drawn out court case would just make it worse even if they win. A settlement in a civil case, does not mean LM-Boeing are admitting guilt, it means they decided it wasn't worth the cost/risk both financially and public image wise.

Sufa Viper

Full link http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... it-375445/

Quote:

The court case of the widow of US Air Force Captain Jeff Haney versus the contractors who built the F-22 Raptor and its life-support systems has been settled. Haney was killed in a tragic 16 November, 2010, crash in Alaska.

"The Haney Litigation has been resolved. The terms of the settlement are confidential. We have no further comment," says Lockheed Martin, the prime contractor which built the stealthy, supersonically cruising air superiority fighter.

More information of course at the link.

sufaviper wrote:

Often you can settle for 10%-25% of what legal fees would be to prove yourself right.

Dunno what its called in America, but the Australian term for it is a "commercial settlement". Its where the defending side will say to the plaintiff "you have no case at all and here's why, but here's $20,000 for you to shut up and go away to save everyone having to waste a lot of money"

You just never hear anyone say...

"Please, please let me fly these hot jets, but you can keep the flight pay, because I want my wife to be able to sue with good conscience if something happens to me."

Exactly.
I told my wife shortly after we were married that if this happened to me, I expected that she would see it for what it was: an unfortunate event, and one where she was not to sue.

The same thing happened 30 years ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afterburn_(film)
I'm sure the movie was lousy, but it was based on an event where an F-16 pilot died and the widow sued.

huggy wrote:

Exactly.
I told my wife shortly after we were married that if this happened to me, I expected that she would see it for what it was: an unfortunate event, and one where she was not to sue.

The same thing happened 30 years ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afterburn_(film)
I'm sure the movie was lousy, but it was based on an event where an F-16 pilot died and the widow sued.

Afterburn is indeed a good movie. Why do you say it's lousy? The filmaker at least has effort in making that movie though with smaller budget. If the aircraft has defective parts that cause the death of pilot, the manufacturer is liable to compensate the loss of income and loved ones to the victim's family. However compensation claimed must not be at exaggerated amount that the pilot could not possible earn even if he is promoted to Brigadier general early.

So what movie do you think good? Michael Bay's crap TF 1,2,3 with ET and retards Sam Witwicky & his mom that only drag down the autobots? You could still watch TF mainly because of the graphics, military and the robots. The old G1 TF, at least Mike and his father Sparkplug Witwicky are both engineers that could help fix the autobots.

Developing and operating fighter aircraft is an inherently dangerous business. Most go into it with full knowledge and consent and are willing to accept that risk. Nothing but the utmost respect and honor for those who do.

huggy wrote:

Exactly.
I told my wife shortly after we were married that if this happened to me, I expected that she would see it for what it was: an unfortunate event, and one where she was not to sue.

The same thing happened 30 years ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afterburn_(film)
I'm sure the movie was lousy, but it was based on an event where an F-16 pilot died and the widow sued.

I think the Harduvell crash happened in a different political climate, and from what I read, a big push for the lawsuit was making sure the problems were acknowledged and fixed, not "covered up". When Capt. Haney went down, there was a lot more media attention, a lot more attention from Congress, and I believe most of the factors in the crash have been mitigated.

When I was training to be a pilot, this was one of the case studies that sometimes its better to eject out when disoriented and descending fast, than try and fly out of it. The instructor related a mishap where 3 pilots crashed CFIT, because the flight lead got disoriented. My instructor was a retired test pilot, and wing commander, and he stated that he'd rather loose a jet from disorientation than get a pilot killed.

jayraptor wrote:

So what movie do you think good? Michael Bay's crap TF 1,2,3 with ET...

I have no idea what you are talking about. And I don't know who Michael Bay is.

huggy wrote:

jayraptor wrote:

So what movie do you think good? Michael Bay's crap TF 1,2,3 with ET...

I have no idea what you are talking about. And I don't know who Michael Bay is.

Director of the Transformers movies.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/dead-22-p ... d=18490248

The DoD Inspector General is critical of the AF AIB Report though the AF is standing by it's findings after conducting it's own review.

The author also trots out Pierre Sprey to spout his usual anti-Raptor venom. Hey Pierre, whatever happened to your toxic jet theory? Rolling Eyes

munny wrote:

sufaviper wrote:

Often you can settle for 10%-25% of what legal fees would be to prove yourself right.

Dunno what its called in America, but the Australian term for it is a "commercial settlement". Its where the defending side will say to the plaintiff "you have no case at all and here's why, but here's $20,000 for you to shut up and go away to save everyone having to waste a lot of money"

In the US everyone insists you're innocent until proven guilty. Twice in my life I've lost nearly everything I owned because I had to pay an attorney thousands and thousands of dollars to prove my innocence. No money no justice. Something has to be fixed. From where I'm sitting it sure looks like guilt until proven innocent. Two Cents

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

F-22 Pilot's widow sues