I am beginnng to see red

[pembquist]

Bah!  http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2015/10/family_of_girl_4_who_perished.html

[mbailey]

That poor baby 

[WaffenVW]

Could be a good thing to get this decided once and for all in a court.

[saggs]

Ridiculous.

All the Vans lineup are good designs.  (I believe Hitech has an RV-8) I've personally worked on RV-7s and an RV-4, they are solid designs and the kits are well prepared. Vans also has more tech support then any other kit company out there.  Just check out www.vansairforce.net  As of today there are 9,219 completed and flown RVs. https://www.vansaircraft.com/public/first-flights.htm

90% of GA accidents be they in certified or experimental aircraft are down to human factors.  Just because they are called experimental does not mean there are all kinds of wacky crazy aircraft designs flying out there.  Because any overtly dangerous design would never make it past an DAR inspection required to receive an airworthiness certificate.  Experimental designs, provided they are built to plans, are just as safe as certified designs, they are made with the same materials and processes as certified aircraft.  It's just done in a garage/hangar by 1 or 2 people over many months/years, instead of on an assembly line.

There are no FAA "loopholes" there are only FAA regulations.  What's with people today calling laws or regulations they disagree with "loopholes"

Hopefully this frivolous lawsuit gets thrown out of court post haste.  Have they even gotten the NTSB final report on what caused the accident yet? I doubt it.

[pembquist]

There's the rub, the NTSB reports are not admissible. It is terrible that the little girl died but this lawsuit makes it more terrible. Grief makes people mad, in both senses.

[saggs]

A quick google found me the NTSB report.

http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief.aspx?ev_id=20140531X15032&key=1

Basically he goobered up a fuel flow TX with RTV, with caused a fuel blockage, even though his A&P told him not to.    Like I said, human factors.

Tell me again how his incompetent mechanical skills, and inability to follow competent advice are Dick VanGrunsvens fault.  Van himself has been a HUGE advocate for greater GA safety, I've read several articles on safety authored by him in EAA publications, one in which he lambasted idiots who buy his kits then dramatically change the design, basically he calls them out as idiots who think they know better then aeronautical engineers who designed the plane.

Also in addition to Vans, they are suing the maker of the fuel flow TX, calling it defective.  Because, apparently... ... I guess fuel flow TXers are somehow supposed to work flawlessly, even when they are clogged with silicon.        

I just... .... I can't even...     *sigh* *deep breath*         It's called RTFM MORONS!!

[WaffenVW]

What you're saying kind of lends itself to the plaintiff's case.

[Scherf]

Cheezus, that NTSB report is short and to the point.

[colmbo]

Not only was the owner/pilot an idiot when it came to maintenance practices but his basic stick and rudder skills were lacking as well. What killed the little girl wasn't the engine failure, it was the failure of the pilot to maintain control of the airplane.

[WaffenVW]

To me it didn't read like Vans were being sued because their product is lacking or dangerous. They're being sued because they specifically market their kits to idiots like this guy, who then endanger or kill innocent people with it. Kit 'experimental' planes were never intended to be as prolific as they are today by the lawmakers. A revision of the laws could very well be in order.

[colmbo]

The suit is BS regardless.  Just because the kits are marketed to consumers with minimal or no experience that doesn't mean you can build in a willy-nilly fashion.    I'm not up to snuff on all the rules for homebuilding but the builder has to work with the local FAA rep, there are inspections done on the builders work and the builder MUST COMPLY with the regulations relating to building technique and procedure.

This guy would have killed himself in a Cessna, Piper or any other factory built airplane.

[WaffenVW]

They're not being sued because he killed himself with it. They're being sued because he killed a little girl with it.

[hitech]

Yep utter BS.

BTW there are a number of misleading stats in the article about 20% accidents vs 10% of fleet.

First it assumes all experimental are the same.

2nd it assumes the experimental class is flown the same amount as standard aircraft. My assumption would be that experimental get more hours then standard by a substantial amount.

HiTech

[WaffenVW]

You assume they're making assumptions, and berate those assumed assumptions with more assumptions of your own. Ok.

[hitech]

You assume they're making assumptions, and berate those assumed assumptions with more assumptions of your own. Ok.

No I am berating the person who uses stats trying to show or imply that an experimental are more likely to have accidence. When the stats he used are meaningless to that conclusion.

HiTech