Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site terak.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!hao!noao!terak!doug
From: doug@terak.UUCP (Doug Pardee)
Newsgroups: net.aviation
Subject: Product liability
Message-ID: <957@terak.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 31-Dec-85 12:47:57 EST
Article-I.D.: terak.957
Posted: Tue Dec 31 12:47:57 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 1-Jan-86 19:23:34 EST
Distribution: na
Organization: Calcomp Display Products Division, Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Lines: 28

It *must* be true, everyone says that it is:  one of the big reasons
that small planes cost so much is because of product liability
lawsuits.

I was hangar-flying about this subject the other day, when it occurred
to me that nearly all of the lawsuits I could remember were in high-
performance planes, mostly twins.  So I dug back through my six years
worth of Aviation Consumer magazine, and made a list of the various
lawsuits against the plane manufacturers.

I found myriads of lawsuits about crashes in Beech Bonanzas and Barons.
Cessna got sued over its 206's, 210's, 340's, 411's, Conquests and
Citations.  Piper lost lawsuits on its Pawnees, Twin Comanches,
Aerostars, Navajos and Cheyennes.  And the story was much the same for
the smaller manufacturers.

But I didn't find a single lawsuit regarding a 2-seater.  And I found
only three lawsuits that centered around 4-place fixed-gear fixed-prop
singles, and none of those three lawsuits alleged that there was
anything wrong with the design of the airframe nor engine.

In all three lawsuits, the issue was the same: seats.  Cessna lost two
over the "slipping 172 pilot's seat", and Piper lost one because the
Warrior's rear seat can short out the battery.

Another myth should bite the dust.  But I'll bet it hangs on anyway.
-- 
Doug Pardee -- CalComp -- {hardy,savax,seismo,decvax,ihnp4}!terak!doug