stlgph
Topic Author
Posts: 8929
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 7:47 pm

"Sept. 4 (Bloomberg) -- AMR Corp.’s American Airlines and United Continental Holdings Inc. must face a federal trial over negligence claims tied to the hijackings of jetliners on Sept. 11, 2001, used in the terrorist attacks that killed about 3,000 people in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania."

http://www.sfgate.com/business/bloom...s-Must-Face-Trial-Over-3838760.php


********

Well, can't see this looking attractive to a potential AMR merger partner.
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
strfyr51
Posts: 2082
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 7:51 pm

So WHO is Sueing Massport for the lousy security?? American and Unirted did what they were Legally required to do. I'd sure like to see that suit stick! That;s BS!!
 
Maverick623
Posts: 4632
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:13 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 7:52 pm

Quoting stlgph (Thread starter):

Well, can't see this looking attractive to a potential AMR merger partner.

Why? There's no chance in hell of the airlines being found liable for anything.
"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
 
VC10DC10
Posts: 605
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 9:56 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 7:53 pm

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 1):
So WHO is Sueing Massport for the lousy security??

I'm wondering the same thing....
 
phxa340
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:07 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 7:55 pm

Quoting VC10DC10 (Reply 3):
I'm wondering the same thing....

The former owners of the WTC ... I think
 
kl911
Posts: 3979
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 1:10 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 7:59 pm

Wow, it always seems to us in Europe that you can just sue anything and anyone in the US. Will it ever stop?
What arethey trying to accomplish? Money? I hate that system.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 8:00 pm

Quoting stlgph (Thread starter):


UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings  

Wait, didn't the Statuate (sp?) of Limitations already run out? It's been 11 years now! I see this getting dismissed fairly quick, this really won't see the light of day in a court of law. This is getting ridiculous, time to move on, but never forget the victims!
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
azstar
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 5:25 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 8:09 pm

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 6):
Wait, didn't the Statuate (sp?) of Limitations already run out? It's been 11 years now! I see this getting dismissed fairly quick, this really won't see the light of day in a court of law

It wasn't dismssed.

"District Judge Alvin Hellerstein in Manhattan said a trial is required" according to the article.

How about suing Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Algeria, the Palestinian Authority, Al Qaeda and all the organizations that
supported and financed these mass murderers?

[Edited 2012-09-04 13:11:19]
 
rwy04lga
Posts: 1976
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 7:21 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 8:10 pm

I agree it's a complete waste of the court's time, but it's the system we have. Only lawyers like the system, while you and I don't have to like it.
Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 8:15 pm

Quoting azstar (Reply 7):
It wasn't dismssed.

I never said it was. But it SHOULD be dismissed.

Quoting azstar,reply=7District Judge Alvin Hellerstein in Manhattan said a trial is required:

Required?! Under what laws/regulations?

[Edited 2012-09-04 13:16:32]
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
srbmod
Posts: 15446
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 1:32 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 8:22 pm

The a/c were hijacked with items that were allowed through security at that time. While some of the hijackers were flagged for additional screening, all that meant was their luggage was not put onboard until they were onboard the a/c (Interestingly enough, Mohammed Atta was one who was flagged for additional screening [at PWM] but his bags never made it onto AA11.). AA and UA followed all of the rules and policies that were expected of them at that time, and if you're going to sue them, then they need to include the security contractors at PWM, BOS and EWR as well since they are the ones that let the hijackers through security.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22947
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 8:23 pm

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 1):
So WHO is Sueing Massport for the lousy security?

On September 11, 2011 it was legal per FAA regulation to take a box cutter aboard a commercial airliner in your hand luggage.



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 6):
Wait, didn't the Statuate (sp?) of Limitations already run out?


Per the Judge's Wikipedia entry, in 2003 he agreed to hear a consolidated master case against three airlines, ICTS International NV and Pinkerton's airport security firms, the World Trade Center owners and the Boeing Company. I don't see any information on whether this case actually went to trial.

His entry states that a lawsuit was filed in September 2004 by the insurers of the WTC against UA and AA as the Statue of Limitations expired on 11 September 2004. However, the Air Transportation Act limits the liability of airlines, aircraft manufacturers, and airports to the amount of their insurance coverage.

[Edited 2012-09-04 13:24:34]
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 8:34 pm

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 1):
So WHO is Sueing Massport for the lousy security??

Security back in the day belonged to airlines.

There was no TSA, and airlines contracted with various vendors to provide the screening, and were held responsible for their performance.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 8:38 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
Per the Judge's Wikipedia entry, in 2003 he agreed to hear a consolidated master case against three airlines, ICTS International NV and Pinkerton's airport security firms, the World Trade Center owners and the Boeing Company.

Ok, that makes sense.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
His entry states that a lawsuit was filed in September 2004 by the insurers of the WTC against UA and AA as the Statue of Limitations expired on 11 September 2004.

So, why are we hearing about it again now, in 2012, 8 years after the Limitations had ran out? Or am I missing the point here?

Quoting srbmod (Reply 10):
The a/c were hijacked with items that were allowed through security at that time

Yup!    Not saying you, SRBMod, but it's certainly amazing how some select few forget that one very important little fact. I'm glad you brought that up.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
the Air Transportation Act limits the liability of airlines, aircraft manufacturers, and airports to the amount of their insurance coverage.

I wonder if the judge knows and or knew this.....
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
aklrno
Posts: 1164
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 11:18 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 8:53 pm

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 13):
So, why are we hearing about it again now, in 2012, 8 years after the Limitations had ran out? Or am I missing the point here?

If the lawsuit was FILED before the time limit, then the limit has been met. It can (obviously) take years from the time the suit is filed to get to court, but this is longer than most, probably because it is very complicated.

If there are factual disputes (as opposed to just interpretations of the law) then a trial is required.
 
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:04 pm

Quoting Rwy04LGA (Reply 8):
I agree it's a complete waste of the court's time, but it's the system we have. Only lawyers like the system, while you and I don't have to like it.
Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
Per the Judge's Wikipedia entry, in 2003 he agreed to hear a consolidated master case against three airlines, ICTS International NV and Pinkerton's airport security firms, the World Trade Center owners and the Boeing Company. I don't see any information on whether this case actually went to trial.

His entry states that a lawsuit was filed in September 2004 by the insurers of the WTC against UA and AA as the Statue of Limitations expired on 11 September 2004. However, the Air Transportation Act limits the liability of airlines, aircraft manufacturers, and airports to the amount of their insurance coverage.
Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 13):
Quoting srbmod (Reply 10):
The a/c were hijacked with items that were allowed through security at that time

Yup!    Not saying you, SRBMod, but it's certainly amazing how some select few forget that one very important little fact. I'm glad you brought that up.

Looks like the lawyers are going to get richer and tie up the court system for more years over their greediness to get richer.   
Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
 
rwy04lga
Posts: 1976
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 7:21 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:11 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
against three airlines....the World Trade Center owners and the Boeing Company

What was the third airline? Sue all the victims but not the perps. Why not sue Todd Beamer as well?
Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
 
jfk777
Posts: 5828
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:38 pm

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 2):
Why? There's no chance in hell of the airlines being found liable for anything.

Since both United and AMR have declared Bankruptcy since 2001 wouldn't that kill and liability they had ? Their insurance at the time may pay for a claim ?
 
fxra
Posts: 599
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 1999 1:03 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:48 pm

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."

Henry The Sixth, Part 2 Act 4, scene 2 - William Shakespeare.

(Yes i know out of context but still seems fitting here)
Visualize Whirled Peas
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:58 pm

I feel for the families of 9/11, but despite the grief they unfortunately endure... this is stupid.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 1):
the lousy security

How was it lousy security? What illegal items were allowed on the aircraft?
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
BlueDanube
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu May 03, 2012 5:12 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 10:42 pm

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 17):

Since both United and AMR have declared Bankruptcy since 2001 wouldn't that kill and liability they had ? Their insurance at the time may pay for a claim ?

  

This was one of my first thoughts too.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 12):
There was no TSA, and airlines contracted with various vendors to provide the screening, and were held responsible for their performance.

Here's my question. How were the airlines or the aircraft manufacturer, or anyone else, negligent? What actions could the airlines have taken to prevent this? The terrorists literally killed the pilots and took command of the planes. Both UA and AA were following the law that day, acting in the good faith of transporting people from one place to another. The manufacturer's plane hit the buildings because terrorists flew it there, not through some sort of operational malfunction.

Want to blame someone? Blame the terrorists!!!!!

****okay, rant over***

The plaintiffs (World Trade Center LLC) are just grasping at straws for money because their insurance policy didn't pay out enough. It sucks for them but it happens. Our hearts break for what happened that day. But nothing good comes of this lawsuit. I hope UA, AA, and others fight it to the end. But this is why we need some sort of remedy for those who have frivilous lawsuits filed against them. If such a remedy was in place here, this lawsuit may not have ever been filed.

[Edited 2012-09-04 15:51:01]

[Edited 2012-09-04 15:51:50]
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 10:48 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 12):
airlines contracted with various vendors to provide the screening

I thought the airports contracted out the screening, but left the responsibility of the operation to the airlines, hence the dreaded two question routine at time of check-in that the airlines had to ask each and every pax.

Why was the two question routine dropped anyway??

Quoting BlueDanube (Reply 20):
The plaintiffs (World Trade Center LLC) just grasping at straws for money because their insurance policy didn't pay out enough. It sucks for them but it happens. Our hearts break for what happened that day. But nothing good comes of this lawsuit. I hope UA, AA, and others fight it to the end. But this is why we need some sort of remedy for those who have frivilous lawsuits filed against them.

   Agreed 100%
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
Braniff747SP
Posts: 2565
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 4:56 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 11:26 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
Boeing Company

Suing the airlines is idiotic, but at least I see some connection... I don't see the connection to Boeing. How is it the manufacturer's fault if some nuts hijack a plane and crash it into a building?
The 747 will always be the TRUE queen of the skies!
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22947
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 11:31 pm

Quoting Braniff747SP (Reply 22):
How is it the manufacturer's fault if some nuts hijack a plane and crash it into a building?

I would hazard a guess that they would argue that due to the many historical instances of an airplane being hijacked, the OEMs (in this case, Boeing as the planes were 767-200ERs and 757-200s) should have designed features and systems into their planes to prevent hijackings or make them more difficult - features like the the reinforced cockpit doors mandated after the event.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Tue Sep 04, 2012 11:36 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 23):
the OEMs (in this case, Boeing as the planes were 767-200ERs and 757-200s) should have designed features and systems into their planes to prevent hijackings or make them more difficult - features like the the reinforced cockpit doors mandated after the event.

(Not directed at you Stitch...) So, they are suing for something that was not required before, but was mandated after the fact? Unreal. The reinforced cockpit doors was not required before 9/11. The plaintiff's beef is with the F.A.A. on this one, IMO.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
Braniff747SP
Posts: 2565
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 4:56 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:04 am

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 24):
So, they are suing for something that was not required before, but was mandated after the fact? Unreal. The reinforced cockpit doors was not required before 9/11. The plaintiff's beef is with the F.A.A. on this one, IMO.

Agreed. Idiotic. If that's their case against the manufacturer, then they should go after the FAA.
The 747 will always be the TRUE queen of the skies!
 
HAL
Posts: 1740
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 1:38 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:14 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 23):
I would hazard a guess that they would argue that due to the many historical instances of an airplane being hijacked, the OEMs (in this case, Boeing as the planes were 767-200ERs and 757-200s) should have designed features and systems into their planes to prevent hijackings or make them more difficult - features like the the reinforced cockpit doors mandated after the event.

It wouldn't matter if the doors had been reinforced or not. At the time, the policy was to comply with any hijackers demands, because the thought was that they wanted to make a political statement by diverting the plane to another destination, not by intentionally crashing the plane. Even if there had been secure doors, the crew would have opened it to allow the hijackers whatever they wanted. This was Federal policy at the time, not up to crew discretion. The hijackers knew that, and exploited that loophole. That has since changed, but it's not anything that should be sued over.

HAL
One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:42 am

Where's the trial re: the faulty design of the twin towers? If anyone is to blame for the magnitude of the tragedy, it's the designers of those towers and those who approved the faulty designs and materials involved. Between the failed experiment of the novel WTC structural design (a method never used before nor again for good reason), the faulty fire proof insulation (known to be ineffective when installed), the unprotected fire suppression system (what good is fire suppression system that can't withstand heat long enough to suppress a fire?) and other design flaws, those two buildings were death traps. The result would not have been the same had any other landmark building in manhattan been the target, whether it was older or newer than those towers. But the PANYNJ operates outside the law, in that they have their own laws and codes, and they were able to get many dangerous aspects of the WTC pushed through and built.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:52 am

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 27):

Uhm, the building codes that NYC had back in the 60's-70's are probably more than likely not the same codes that we see today.

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 27):
But the PANYNJ operates outside the law, in that they have their own laws and codes, and they were able to get many dangerous aspects of the WTC pushed through and built.

Source?
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:01 am

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 27):

I don't know much about building codes but are all buildings supposed to be able to survive 757/767 impacts?
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:07 am

Quoting BlueDanube (Reply 20):
How were the airlines or the aircraft manufacturer, or anyone else, negligent?

Argument is that the airlines had negligence and failed fulfill their duty to provide proper security.

Quoting BlueDanube (Reply 20):
The plaintiffs (World Trade Center LLC) are just grasping at straws for money because their insurance policy didn't pay out enough.

As the judge found, World Trade Center Properties was well within its rights to continue seeking compensation beyond what insurance had out, and to be made whole for its loss.

As one of the stories I read, it basically provided the analogy how a car accident driver may go and sue the other party separately beyond the insurance pay out to recoup any outstanding loss.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 21):
I thought the airports contracted out the screening, but left the responsibility of the operation to the airlines, hence the dreaded two question routine at time of check-in that the airlines had to ask each and every pax.

Not at airports I worked at. Security screening was either contracted by airlines directly, or sometimes via airline consortium's in case of many airlines using the same facility.

FAA held airlines responsible for security at the checkpoints.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
tharanga
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2009 3:29 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:41 am

Quoting srbmod (Reply 10):
The a/c were hijacked with items that were allowed through security at that time.

and if they tried the exact same thing again today, it wouldn't work. not because of anything the security would do, but because the other passengers would react.

The biggest key is that our actions as passengers have changed since that day. Before 9/11, if your plane was being hijacked, the best plan was to sit there quietly, and odds were, you'd eventually be released.

the real failures were in the CIA and FBI not properly communicating with each other. intelligence had leads on some of these guys. the best plan is always to disrupt the plot well before the day of the event.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:46 am

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 27):
If anyone is to blame for the magnitude of the tragedy, it's the designers of those towers and those who approved the faulty designs and materials involved.

What?

The design of the twin towers are what LIMITED the magnitude of the tragedy to what it was, to a large extent.

Any other buildings and everyone would have died.

NS
 
mpdpilot
Posts: 688
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 6:44 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:18 am

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 27):
Quoting gigneil (Reply 32):

You both have valid points. I know a few engineers that have basically said that the design shouldered the weight longer than most buildings would have because of the design, but had to shoulder more weight in smaller places because of the poor fire proofing. They basically said, had the buildings been made out of reenforced concrete they would still be standing as concrete is the only thing strong enough to support the weight and withstand the heat. To my knowledge nothing was out of code, yet it could be argued that the code wasn't adequate in this case, but no one had foreseen such a situation to make the code adequate.

About the lawsuit:

I really don't see any ground that they have for this case to ask for more money. I guess I understand where the judge is coming from as having a trial about it isn't the worst thing in the world. Almost like he is just erring on the side of having a trial.
One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.
 
dlphoenix
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 7:30 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:36 am

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 24):
The plaintiff's beef is with the F.A.A. on this one, IMO.

The plaintiff's beef is with whoever carries the biggest wallet.
 
OB1504
Posts: 2985
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:10 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:45 am

Quoting kl911 (Reply 5):
Wow, it always seems to us in Europe that you can just sue anything and anyone in the US.

This is true, but it doesn't mean that you'll win. A lot of frivolous lawsuits either get thrown out or defeated.
 
PHX787
Posts: 7877
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:50 am

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 2):
Quoting stlgph (Thread starter):

Well, can't see this looking attractive to a potential AMR merger partner.

Why? There's no chance in hell of the airlines being found liable for anything.

Exactly. What could they do?   

Quoting srbmod (Reply 10):
The a/c were hijacked with items that were allowed through security at that time.

Which is why the TSA and all of those banned items lists exits. Based on this, I see this case going nowhere.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 30):
Argument is that the airlines had negligence and failed fulfill their duty to provide proper security.

Again, what could they have done? IIRC back then the airports provided the security? Or am I wrong?
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
FI642
Posts: 992
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 9:48 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 3:15 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 30):
Not at airports I worked at. Security screening was either contracted by airlines directly, or sometimes via airline consortium's in case of many airlines using the same facility.

FAA held airlines responsible for security at the checkpoints.

Eactly- so why just limit the suit to AA and UA? Sue them all! This is absurd.

The FAA allowed everything that was taken aboard on every flight every day........
737MAX, Cool Planes for the Worlds Coolest Airline.
 
lweber557
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 11:52 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 3:58 am

This is just sick. The cases will likely never make it to court but the fact that lawyers will actually pursue something like this makes me ashamed to be an american. We should always remember the victims but there's absolutely no to open up old wounds like that.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:00 am

Quoting lweber557 (Reply 38):
We should always remember the victims but there's absolutely no to open up old wounds like that.

Agreed! The judge in this case should be disbarred, IMO, for allowing this to even proceed 11 years later. This should have been solved before the Statue of Limitations expired. Why we are hearing it now is BEYOND me.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
flymia
Posts: 6806
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:05 am

Quoting kl911 (Reply 5):

Only about 2% of cases in the United Sates actually go to trial. Of course you can sue anyone for anything. But if it's frivolous it will be thrown out. Filing a law suit is only the first step in a very long process.

As for this one, guess they got lucky with the judge. I see no case. Sucks that it will waste time and money if it is forced to go to trial.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 4549
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:19 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 30):

Not at airports I worked at. Security screening was either contracted by airlines directly, or sometimes via airline consortium's in case of many airlines using the same facility.

FAA held airlines responsible for security at the checkpoints.

it doesn't matter. If it was the TSA, The airport, Delta, United, Some homeless guy down the street. These guys only took things they *could* have on the aircraft. FAA allowed box cutters, now this point is moot.

Quoting mpdpilot (Reply 33):

You both have valid points. I know a few engineers that have basically said that the design shouldered the weight longer than most buildings would have because of the design, but had to shoulder more weight in smaller places because of the poor fire proofing. They basically said, had the buildings been made out of reenforced concrete they would still be standing as concrete is the only thing strong enough to support the weight and withstand the heat. To my knowledge nothing was out of code, yet it could be argued that the code wasn't adequate in this case, but no one had foreseen such a situation to make the code adequate.

no one ever thought that they would have to make a building that could be hit by a aircraft full of fuel going 500MPH and still stand. Same reason why most people sat there and let it happen. No one knew that people could be so evil.

Quoting dlphoenix (Reply 34):

The plaintiff's beef is with whoever carries the biggest wallet.

which would be the federal government.
New airliners.net web site sucks.
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 1706
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:26 am

This is bullcrap.. Im fuming that that someone is trying to get money out of this.... the major responsible parties have had bullets placed between their eyes are unavailable for court for the foreseeable future...
-__-.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:27 am

Quoting flymia (Reply 40):
Sucks that it will waste time and money if it is forced to go to trial.

It still costs money even if it does not go to trial. You still have attorneys being paid by the hour.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
KBUF
Posts: 368
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 1:12 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 5:11 am

What a load of shit. AA and UA didn't do a single thing wrong, the whole thing was out of their control.

Quoting Rwy04LGA (Reply 16):
What was the third airline?

My best guess would be Colgan, since that's who two of the terrorists flew with from PWM to BOS earlier that morning.
"Starting today, the Buffalo Sabres' reason for existence will be to win a Stanley Cup."-Terry Pegula, February 22, 2011
 
ghifty
Posts: 885
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 9:12 pm

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 8:11 am

Quoting KBUF (Reply 44):

What a load of shit. AA and UA didn't do a single thing wrong, the whole thing was out of their control.

  

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 41):
which would be the federal government.

and definitely not AA.   

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 28):
Uhm, the building codes that NYC had back in the 60's-70's are probably more than likely not the same codes that we see today.

When building codes are updated, buildings that were built before the revised codes were introduced still have to meet the new codes, don't they? I personally don't know.. but that would make sense to me.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 29):
I don't know much about building codes but are all buildings supposed to be able to survive 757/767 impacts?

Definitely not back then, probably not now. Before 9/11 the idea of not one, but three (nearly four), commercial airliners being turned into WMDs, was ridiculous. After 9/11, the likelihood of that ever happening again is very slim. I'm doubtful anybody would "allow" a hijacking to occur, on the slim chance that the hijackers can even start their hypothetical attempts.

However, in 1945 a USAF B-25 crashed into the Empire State Building. IIRC, because of this, the Twin Towers were designed to withstand a Boeing 707 colliding into it's sides. Mind you, this was in the 1960's.. back when there'd be no way to test for such a situation.
Fly Delta Jets
 
hiflyer
Posts: 1270
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:38 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 8:23 am

Why isn't the FAA in this suit...it was their security procedures...continually tested and repeatedly validated by them that were enforced?
 
Fabo
Posts: 1141
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 1:30 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 10:18 am

Quoting ghifty (Reply 45):
When building codes are updated, buildings that were built before the revised codes were introduced still have to meet the new codes, don't they? I personally don't know.. but that would make sense to me.

Does not make much sense to me to make building codes retroactive, unless there is a very specific safety risk uncovered in meantime (say, for example, that you have to get rid of asbesthos).
General updates that would deal with stuff like higher safety margins, or new materials - I dont see the need to spend many millions rebuilding every other building.

Maybe this could be likened to airframe certification - you are allowed to continue to fly with aircraft certified under old rules, unless a serious safety concern is found, in which case the design would be grounded and further measures taken.
The light at the end of tunnel turn out to be a lighted sing saying NO EXIT
 
soon7x7
Posts: 2267
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 10:51 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 10:50 am

Since most of the "evil doers" originated from Saudi Arabia, why doesn't the US just sue them...kind of Oil for Blood...Utter nonsense!   
 
jfk777
Posts: 5828
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: UAL/AA To Face Trial For 9-11 Hijackings

Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:31 am

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 39):
Quoting lweber557 (Reply 38):
We should always remember the victims but there's absolutely no to open up old wounds like that.

Agreed! The judge in this case should be disbarred, IMO, for allowing this to even proceed 11 years later. This should have been solved before the Statue of Limitations expired. Why we are hearing it now is BEYOND me.

There was a victims fund set up by the government administered by Mr. Feinberg who also administered the BP Fund in the Gulf of Mexico. People are not entitiled to a second bight at the "pay me " apple.

Who is online