Airline turbulence injury blamed on weather forecasters

by Walter Olson on December 22, 2009

“Two Alaska Airlines flight attendants who were injured when a 2007 flight from Seattle to California encountered turbulent air have filed a legal claim against a national weather forecasting service and against the U.S. government.” [Seattle Times/Belleville News-Democrat]

{ 7 comments }

1 Cloudesley Shovell 12.22.09 at 10:25 am

Well of course. Any government that claims it has the power and ability to control the climate ought in fairness be held to account for its failure to predict the weather. Duh.

2 A.W. 12.22.09 at 10:43 am

cloud

its more than that. if we can change the climate, than surely we can change the weather itself.

Of course to be fair, the predictions that there would be no turbulance were based on data collected from East Anglia and after the plane dropped 200 feet in 2 seconds, they quickly worked to “hide the decline.”

3 VMS 12.22.09 at 5:19 pm

There was an unsucessful case (Cunard v. United States) in the Southern District of New York along the same lines. Cunard Lines claimed that the United States did not chart a known shoal, and their ship, the QE2, ran aground in 1992 off of Martha’s Vineyard as a result, causing 20 million in damages to the ship.

http://www.hydro-international.com/issues/articles/id1071-Grounding_of_the_Queen_Elizabeth.html

In the Cunard case it is arguable that the court made a bad decision. The flight attendant case, in contrast, seems to be a sure loser.

4 Waste9 12.22.09 at 8:25 pm

I think back when I first discovered this site there was a similair story. It was about a boater that sued a weatherman after his boat captsized during a storm. Weatherman hadn’t predicted any storms. If I remember correctly the case was tossed. Think it was on the east coast.

5 Amy Alkon 12.22.09 at 10:08 pm

What’s the matter, couldn’t they get a current address for somebody to serve god?*

(*PS Not that I believe in god, flying chairs or politicians with integrity, as I see no evidence any of these exist.)

6 Bob Neal 12.22.09 at 11:00 pm

As usual, this isn’t about viability of the claim, it’s about the deepness of the pockets and the lack of commitment to defend – you think this government is going to decline to give another plaintiff’s lawyer a bounty in settlement?

7 Melvin H. 12.25.09 at 2:31 am

Amy, did you forget about Bob Knight (or Detroit Pistons fans) re: flying chairs? (LOL)

Comments on this entry are closed.