Small planes are notorious for being more dangerous than their larger commercial counterparts. In fact, you have probably heard many stories of famous people who have died in small plane crashes. So, why is it that small planes seem more dangerous than larger ones, and are they actually more dangerous? Should you fly in a small plane in New York or are you risking your life by getting on board?
Throughout the years, there have been many news stories in New York about celebrities that have died in small plane crashes. It is actually rather alarming at just how often it happens. There have been quite a few well-known people, often who were in the prime of their lives and careers, who have lost their lives this way. Here's a look at a few of them.
Hypothetically, if you are an airplane operator that has managed to survive the crash of your small plane on a New York runway, or are associated with the crashed plane in some fashion, you may wonder if you are permitted to disturb the plane wreckage in any fashion. The National Transportation Safety Board lays out some simple guidelines for operators to follow in case of an airplane accident.
There’s an old adage that applies to airplane crashes, “any landing you can walk away from is a good one.” That popular saying was certainly on display when an 80-year-old pilot attempted to land a Cessna single engine plane at an airport in Connecticut last month.
Many plane crashes that occur across New York and the United States involve small planes, and your odds of getting in a serious plane crash are higher when you travel in a small, private aircraft than a large commercial carrier. Many small plane crashes involve similar factors, and recognizing what is causing most of these crashes can help pilots, manufacturers and others with interests in the aviation industry work to enhance industry safety. At Kreindler & Kreindler LLP, we have a firm understanding of what is causing many modern aviation accidents, and we have helped many clients seek recourse after suffering injury or losing a loved in a plane crash.
At Kreindler & Kreindler, LLP, we understand that helicopter travel is a way of life for many New York residents. Whether you rely on a company helicopter, one that is privately owned, or one that is commercially available, your life and safety depend on the machine itself and the skill of its pilot.
In our last post, we began looking a recent USA Today report highlighting the some of the problems with the National Transportation Safety Board's approach to investigation of general aviation accidents. These problems include not devoting enough resources to these investigations, relying on manufacturers to identify problems with component parts, and heavy emphasis on the cause of the crash, as opposed to the cause of injury or death.
We’ve previously written on this blog about the general process the National Transportation Safety Board uses and the relationship between NTSB aircraft accident investigations and aircraft accident litigation. As we noted, NTSB probable cause findings and recommendations are not admissible in court, but the agency’s factual reports generally are admissible. It is important, therefore, that these factual reports are accurate.
Previously, we noted that those who suffer loss in small aircraft accidents should pay close attention to the investigative work that occurs after the accident. The National Transportation Safety Board is one of the primary agencies responsible for investigating aircraft accidents. When the NTSB investigates an accident, it looks to determine the probable cause(s) and to make safety recommendations to prevent similar accidents from occurring in the future.
In our last post, we began looking at the ongoing litigation against a Florida-based small aircraft manufacturer accused of defectively designing stabilator wings and causing numerous accidents as a result. As we noted, the manufacturer denies the allegations of defective design, and points to the federal government’s blaming the accidents on other factors in official reports as evidence that defective design is not the problem.