Family of Lion Air co-pilot sues Boeing in Chicago over fatal crash

[rooster59]

Family of Lion Air co-pilot sues Boeing in Chicago over fatal crash

 

FILE PHOTO: An Indonesian National Transportation Safety Commission (KNKT) official carries debris from the crashed Lion Air flight JT610 at Tanjung Priok port in Jakarta, Indonesia, November 4, 2018. REUTERS/Beawiharta/File Photo

 

CHICAGO (Reuters) - The family of the Indonesian co-pilot of a Lion Air flight that crashed in October, killing all 189 on board, has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Boeing Co <BA.N> in Chicago, adding to litigation piling up against the manufacturer in its hometown.

 

The lawsuit, filed on Friday in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, alleges that a Lion Air-operated Boeing 737 MAX 8 was unreasonably dangerous because its sensors provided inconsistent information to both the pilots and the aircraft.

Boeing declined to comment on pending litigation.

 

Lion Air Flight 610 crashed into the Java Sea after take-off from Jakarta on Oct. 29.

 

The complaint was filed on behalf of pilot Harvino's widow and three children, who are all from Jakarta. It also alleges that the instruction manuals provided by Boeing with the two-month-old plane were insufficient, leading to the death of the pilots, crew and passengers. 

 

In a statement, law firm Gardiner Koch Weisberg & Wrona said Harvino and Flight 610 Captain Bhayve Suneja were both experienced pilots, having logged more than 5,000 and 6,000 flight hours prior to the disaster.  

 

At least two other lawsuits have been filed against Boeing in Chicago by the Lion Air victims.

 

A preliminary report by Indonesian investigators focused on airline maintenance and training and the response of a Boeing anti-stall system to a recently replaced sensor but did not give a cause for the crash.

 

One of the investigators, Nurcahyo Utomo, told reporters it was too early to determine whether or not a new version of the anti-stall system, which was not explained to pilots in manuals, was a contributing factor.

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-12-29

[neeray]

I recall reading that the pilots were aware of this problem, having experienced it the day prior.

But they chose to fly anyway! Should my recollection be correct, Boeing will no doubt use this in their defence.

[KittenKong]

Hmm. When I buy a new car I make sure that I know what all the knobs and buttons do before I set off on a road trip.

[sandrabbit]

2 hours ago, neeray said:

I recall reading that the pilots were aware of this problem, having experienced it the day prior.

But they chose to fly anyway! Should my recollection be correct, Boeing will no doubt use this in their defence.

many airlines and pilots in the US are complaining that the new operational procedures for the anti stall system were not explained to them.

[billd766]

2 hours ago, neeray said:

I recall reading that the pilots were aware of this problem, having experienced it the day prior.

But they chose to fly anyway! Should my recollection be correct, Boeing will no doubt use this in their defence.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion_Air_Flight_610

 

The aircraft was used on a flight from Ngurah Rai International Airport, Bali to Soekarno-Hatta International Airport, Jakarta the night before the crash. Passengers on that flight recounted that the aircraft had suffered an engine problem and were told not to board it as engineers tried to fix the problem. While the aircraft was en route to Jakarta, it had problems maintaining a constant altitude, with passengers stating that it was like "a roller-coaster ride".[97] The chief executive officer of Lion Air, Edward Sirait, said the aircraft had a "technical issue" on Sunday night, but this had been addressed in accordance with maintenance manuals issued by the manufacturer. Engineers had declared that the aircraft was ready for takeoff on the morning of the accident.

 

From my 25 years in the RAF we would never put an aircraft on the line that was faulty. If it wasn't fixed it wasn't available.

 

Every time a snag is reported it goes in the aircraft logbook and it is either repaired and the basic details are are also in the logbook or the aircraft has limitations if it is away from its base and no spares are available. (such as safe to fly with crew only to return to base for more intensive servicing).

 

The ground crew will attempt the repairs using the manufacturers manuals and the own skills but if there have been modifications to the systems it is the manufacturers responsibility to ensure that updated manuals are issued to the operators, and the operators responsibility to pass them on to engineering and then to the ground crews (who may need extra training depending on how complex the updates are.

 

The problem that the airlines face is that aircraft faulty on the ground cannot be used on the schedule and a replacement aircraft has to be provided. There are rarely aircraft sitting around doing nothing as that costs money and profit so in quite a few cases the decision is passed on to the pilot who has to decide if it is safe for him to fly or not. He will speak to the line managers and see what work was done and if the aircraft is flyable (with or without restrictions/limitations).

 

Cancelling the flight costs money and too many cancellations make passengers use other airlines. Pilots cancelling too many flights on their own say so sometimes means the loss of the pilots job as he will be released back into the mainstream of aviation.

 

It is all about money, profits, aircraft downtime, pilots mandated flying hours, ground crew ability, parking fees, maintenance fees etc all dumped onto the pilots shoulders as the person with the final say.

 

IMHO it would have been safer to fly with the auto pilot disengaged but I am not a pilot and I was not there when the decision was made.

Edited December 29, 2018 by billd766

[KhunBENQ]

15 minutes ago, sandrabbit said:

many airlines and pilots in the US are complaining that the new operational procedures for the anti stall system were not explained to them.

Boeing:

Obviously not explained the system where it should have been.

The pilots knew very well how to handle a 737 but not aware that Boeing added this system for the 737 MAX.

Other questions to answer: why does the system only use the data of one out of two sensors and so not detect the inconsistency?

Why was this sensor broken in a four month old plane?

(the type of sensor is not know to be error prone)

 

Lion Air: latest findings say that the nightly repair was not properly done. Sensor calibration faulty.

This is the Boeing defense.

 

That will be lengthy expensive trial.

Edited December 29, 2018 by KhunBENQ

[KhunBENQ]

2 hours ago, neeray said:

I recall reading that the pilots were aware of this problem, having experienced it the day prior.

But they chose to fly anyway! Should my recollection be correct, Boeing will no doubt use this in their defence.

A prior flight experienced serious problems. Flight like a rollercoaster.

Of course the problem was reported and Lion Air says that a repair was done overnight.

Here something must have gone wrong.

Why didn't they question the reason for this rollercoaster ride?

(which system worked here)

What went wrong at the sensor repair?

A safety conscious airline would probably have pinned the plane to the ground until thorough investigation?

Edited December 29, 2018 by KhunBENQ

[natway09]

The plane should never have even got to Jakarta

After take off from Bali the Pilot had enough reason to return, land & make a full report about the plane being unfit to fly.

Oh, the almighty dollar !!!

[thedemon]

Reading about this as a layman it seems that so far Boeing have behaved rather arrogantly when it would appear that they really do have a case to answer.

 

[madmen]

3 hours ago, KittenKong said:

 

Kk I'm not replying to you. But I can't remove your post for some reason 

 

Boeing right or wrong are a Goliath with a team of top shelf lawyers on retainer 24/7

 

They can drag this out for years 

[IAMHERE]

The Plane had known problems and they were not fixed; the pilots didn't bother to brush up on what to do if the problem reoccurs. The pilots were just as much at fault as the repair crew as the plane. 

I still wonder why the cockpit recorder was so hard to find, I think the people in charge didn't want it found.

[yannee4u]

Problem was reported and was been rectified by technical team before take off means Boing expert technical team shold ask for the report from them for the detaile clarification to know the actual technical issue.

[2tall]

Some background on Lion Air.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/22/world/asia/lion-air-crash-safety-failures.html

[Sir Swagman]

15 hours ago, KittenKong said:

Hmm. When I buy a new car I make sure that I know what all the knobs and buttons do before I set off on a road trip.

You may have to leave Thailand immediately. This sort of behaviour doesn’t fit in at all......

[billd766]

19 hours ago, IAMHERE said:

The Plane had known problems and they were not fixed; the pilots didn't bother to brush up on what to do if the problem reoccurs. The pilots were just as much at fault as the repair crew as the plane. 

I still wonder why the cockpit recorder was so hard to find, I think the people in charge didn't want it found.

How do you know that the problem was not fixed? Have you ever worked on any aircraft systems?

 

Several times I have tried for hours to fix an avionics fault and could not find the fault, We eventually found it after flight tests when the was vibration and movement which cannot be replicated on the ground.

 

You claim that the pilots could not be bothered to brush up on what to do if the fault returns. Obviously you must be in touch with the spirit world to know that, unless of course it is only your unsubstantiated opinion.

 

If it is just your opinion against the word of aviation experts, I would take the word of people who know what they are talking about over that of a keyboard warrior.

[NotYourBusiness]

As a licensed A&P mechanic, the posts above are valid. The plane was not airworthy. Now, another point is that pilots are pretty good at flying the plane manually IF they can disengage the malfunctioning flight control system. This is the crucial point: did the pilots have sufficient training to know to disengage the system upon a malfunction? And the pilots are saying no they didn't have sufficient training. Tragically, it was two switches located in the center console which would have saved the aircraft. They didn't know to do this and fought the system into the sea.

 

Excellent interactive simulation of the flight is here:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/26/world/asia/lion-air-crash-12-minutes.html