BA Heathrow flight crash landing...

[BigJL]

Reading a story about the crash landing of the BA jet in January, a couple of things struck me (sorry if this has already been done before by the way...)

Evening Standard said:

Although most of the passengers walked away from the accident with no injuries, some survivors are considering legal action against the airline.

Those traumatised by their experiences could claim up to £85,000 on a "no-fault" basis.

How are these people 'survivors'? Surely to be classed as a survivor means other people would have had to die? A lot of the interviews with people on the flight said that when it did crash and he said that it felt like a very, very bad and bumpy landing... they said they hadn't even realised how bad it was until they got evacuated. I'm sorry, but people suing the airline because they're traumatised??? C'mon...

I know people react to things in different ways, but how can you sue over something like this? Surely the fact that they landed with no injuries apart from one person with a broken leg means that saftey procedures were carried out correctly and there would be no basis to sue anyway?

J

[Schmeeky]

Surely they should be putting a bit of cash the pilot's way, for doing a damn fine job and getting them all through what must have been a decidedly dicey moment...

Typically British - have a whinge and a moan and then try to sue 'em... Miserable buggers.

[Tony*T3]

So if your driving alone in your car, and you have a horrific crash, but theres no one else in your car and the crash didnt involve anyone else, if you walked away 'without a scratch', would you not have 'survived' it?


You pay an airline money to transport you from point A to Point B in saftey and comfort. They fail to live up to their part of the contract by belly flopping the plane into the ground, and then throwing you out the emergency exits on a slide and getting you to "run away".

You obviously wouldnt find this traaumatic and reason for some compensation for breaking the original contract? You wouldnt have 'what if' nightmares and flash backs? You wouldnt be scared to fly again? Your family would blasly say 'get over it nothing much happened and we could have lived without you if it had all gone wrong" anway?

I think its all too easy to critise and pontificate when you havent experienced what others have. Personally I woud have thought being involved in a plane crash (even if at the time you didnt realise exactly the danger you were in) would be a pretty traumatic thing to happen to you. Yes it might well be all smiles and laughter at first, but the reality of the situation would probably soon set in.

[69 coupe]

I'd be looking for my air fare back, st! it didn't even make it on to the runway

[Silverbullet767]

Tony*T3 said:

So if your driving alone in your car, and you have a horrific crash, but theres no one else in your car and the crash didnt involve anyone else, if you walked away 'without a scratch', would you not have 'survived' it?


You pay an airline money to transport you from point A to Point B in saftey and comfort. They fail to live up to their part of the contract by belly flopping the plane into the ground, and then throwing you out the emergency exits on a slide and getting you to "run away".

You obviously wouldnt find this traaumatic and reason for some compensation for breaking the original contract? You wouldnt have 'what if' nightmares and flash backs? You wouldnt be scared to fly again? Your family would blasly say 'get over it nothing much happened and we could have lived without you if it had all gone wrong" anway?

I think its all too easy to critise and pontificate when you havent experienced what others have. Personally I woud have thought being involved in a plane crash (even if at the time you didnt realise exactly the danger you were in) would be a pretty traumatic thing to happen to you. Yes it might well be all smiles and laughter at first, but the reality of the situation would probably soon set in.

[pillockfrominsurancead]And thus, universal balance is restored[/pillockfrominsurancead]

[BoRED S2upid]

We are becoming more and more like America every day. A culture of sueing people / companies for everything and anything. Where theres a blame theres a claim. Sorry I don't like it.

[Parrot of Doom]

I've been on planes that have had some seriously uncomfortable landings, also planes flying over mountains that have been bouncing around the sky like a ball-string-bat toy.

st happens. Deal with it, or spend your life hiding under the bed.

Compensation, bkS.

[mechsympathy]

Tony*T3 said:

So if your driving alone in your car, and you have a horrific crash, but theres no one else in your car and the crash didnt involve anyone else, if you walked away 'without a scratch', would you not have 'survived' it?

Only in the same way I "survive" getting up in the morning. What's horrific about a crash where no one is hurt?

[esselte]

I think would have just been glad to have been able to walk away from it...

[Busamav]

I know of somebody who was on that flight.

A regular long haul traveller and that incident is causing him more than a few mind games

[trackcar]

Being the intelligent bloke I am, I can see both sides of this .. however how do you separate those genuinely traumatised fom those who just want some compensation for breach of contract from those who aren't bothered about either but just fancy making some money of the back of a bumpy landing?

[Tony*T3]

BoRED S2upid said:

We are becoming more and more like America every day. A culture of sueing people / companies for everything and anything. Where theres a blame theres a claim. Sorry I don't like it.

If you dont hurt a company sufficiently hard for failing to uphold its contractural obligations then where is the incentive for them to improve their service and saftey levels? You pay them to take you safely and securly from one place to another, not to throw you into the ground short of the runway. Some of your fare also goes to their corporate insurance funds anyway.

This should be even more important in terms of global multinationals that are faceless - with no single 'owner' that takes a morale responsibility.

Put it another way. If BA lost your luggage on your next flight you'd expect some compensation and a bloody good appology, wouldnt you? Yet you're saying if they belly flop the landing and you just happen to survive, you'd happily say 'oh well, this stuff happens, stiff upper lip old boy and please pass my thanks to the senior management who enabled this to happen in the first place by letting their standards slip to such a level...."?

I think that once you got over the initial 'survivor euphoria' you'd be pretty fekin upset, and that there would be a substantial pshycological impact.

[esselte]

Tony*T3 said:

BoRED S2upid said:

We are becoming more and more like America every day. A culture of sueing people / companies for everything and anything. Where theres a blame theres a claim. Sorry I don't like it.

If you dont hurt a company sufficiently hard for failing to uphold its contractural obligations then where is the incentive for them to improve their service and saftey levels? You pay them to take you safely and securly from one place to another, not to throw you into the ground short of the runway. Some of your fare also goes to their corporate insurance funds anyway.

This should be even more important in terms of global multinationals that are faceless - with no single 'owner' that takes a morale responsibility.

Put it another way. If BA lost your luggage on your next flight you'd expect some compensation and a bloody good appology, wouldnt you? Yet you're saying if they belly flop the landing and you just happen to survive, you'd happily say 'oh well, this stuff happens, stiff upper lip old boy and please pass my thanks to the senior management who enabled this to happen in the first place by letting their standards slip to such a level...."?

I think that once you got over the initial 'survivor euphoria' you'd be pretty fekin upset, and that there would be a substantial pshycological impact.

Do we know the cause of the crash landing yet?

[fish]

I think the big difference is if they lose your luggage they are incompetant and poorley managed, if in the case of the Heathrow landing it was an accident and the VERY competent aircrew saved lives.

[sa_20v]

I was traumatised by the news coverage, so I'm therefore suing the airline, the BBC, the CAA, Boeing and Samsung (who made my television). I will then be suing my girlfriend for making me watch it...

But on a serious note, why sue anyone? Money is probably the last thing you will ever need to overcome such a trauma. And suing already cash strapped airlines will only lead to a squeeze on salaries, and possibly less able pilots...so next time the plane will plough into a housing estate unabated!

[james_tigerwoods]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I'm sure engine manufacturers and airlines don't design craft with flying on 3 engines instead of 4 in mind - I suspect that they design redundancy and failsafe to mitigate these circumstances.

Me, I'm pleased that aircraft CAN be flown in a redundant fashion like this - Having been in a twin engine turboprop that had an engine failure, I'm impressed that there was no messing about or panic and a safe landing. No trauma, no messing, no BS.

[esselte]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

The profit was for last year......There's no shortage of competition for air passengers so BA must be doing something right...

Edited by esselte on Wednesday 21st May 13:45

[GreenDog]

Busamav said:

I know of somebody who was on that flight.

A regular long haul traveller and that incident is causing him more than a few mind games

But is that the airlines fault ? Yes there was an incident which at the time many of the passengers by their own admission didn't even realise was happening, they thought it was just a bumpy landing. The airline surely upheld their end of the bargain by safely getting the passengers onto the ground despite serious technical difficulties. If some months later a passenger starts playing mind games with themself are BA responsible when the majority of passengers will have had no ill effects and are probably just glad to have got down in one piece ? It smacks of the American-esque litigation culture where people will sue if fat in their general direction.

[Oakey]

Busamav said:

I know of somebody who was on that flight.

A regular long haul traveller and that incident is causing him more than a few mind games

I like how your comment has been neatly overlooked.

[james_tigerwoods]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I think that 4 engined craft are designed to safely fly (and abort) on 2 engines - plus they will have an abort flight path somewhere. I guess there are as much capability considerations to be made I suppose.