Military Aircraft Accidents San Diego Plane Crash
Having a strong military air presence is critical to the safety of our nation and democracy throughout the world. We ask our men and women in the military to sacrifice their lives in the service to their country. It is only fitting that we should provide them with the best and safest equipment possible. America is deservedly proud of its air force and is the envy of all other nations. Our military aircraft provide a host of things: flying combat and bombing missions in times of war, providing relief aid to impoverished areas or areas that have been struck by a natural disaster, such as a hurricane or flood, training pilots, mechanics, and others to keep our superiority in the air. Military aircraft accidents happen in various ways: pilot error, substandard maintenance of the aircraft, faulty repairs, defective component parts, or air traffic controller negligence, to name a few.
To illustrate the dynamics of a military aircraft accident, let’s look at one specific case: On December 8, 2008, a United States marine jet—a twin-engine F/A-18D Hornet—had engine problems and was attempting to land at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar in San Diego (the setting for the movie “Top Gun”) when it crash-landed two miles away in University City, plowing into a home and killing the four occupants. The pilot of the craft was able to safely eject from the plane moments before the crash. The right engine of the F-18 fighter jet gave out with an oil leak shortly after it took off from an aircraft carrier on a training flight. Instead of choosing to land at Naval Air Station North Island, on the tip of a peninsula in San Diego Bay in Coronado, the pilot attempted to make it to Miramar Marine Corps Air Station, several miles inland surrounded by residential communities. North Island is approached over water and there are fewer buildings to hit if things go wrong. Air traffic controllers told the pilot three times that he was cleared to land at North Island, according to flight tapes released by the Federal Aviation Administration. As the jet approached Miramar, the other engine failed, and the pilot safely ejected, resulting in the plane crashing into two houses, killing four people inside one house.
After an investigation into the crash, military officials called it “clearly avoidable.” Among the mistakes made was the decision by maintenance crews to allow the aircraft to fly despite reports of a problem with its fuel flow, the decision by the pilot to try to land at Miramar rather than the nearby Naval Air Station North Island in Coronado despite losing function of the jet’s right engine, and a series of “miscommunications and bad assumptions” by the pilots and officers directing him that eventually caused the left engine to “flame out.” As a result of the investigation, four Marine Corps officers were relieved of duty for directing the aircraft to fly over the residential area, and nine other military personnel received lesser reprimands. Officials stated that the pilot should have been told to fly over San Diego Bay and land at Coronado. The next of kin of the four people killed may be able to bring a lawsuit against the United States based on the carelessness (“negligence”) of the pilot, the mechanics, and others.
Suppose a military pilot takes off in a jet but encounters problems with the handling of the jet due to the negligence of the repair crew, causing the pilot to crash the plane and suffer injuries or even death. Can the injured pilot (or a deceased pilot’s loved ones) sue the federal government for his or her injuries or death? No. Under the longstanding Feres doctrine, the federal government is immune from lawsuits for injuries or deaths to servicemembers that occur because of activities that are “incident to service.”
One rationale behind the Feres doctrine is the same as that which prohibits civilian employees from suing their employers. Injured employees are given the right to receive worker’s compensation benefits, even where the injury is due to their own fault, as a trade-off for not being allowed to sue their employers. Servicemen and women are entitled to receive benefits under the Veterans Benefits Act for service-related injuries, akin to worker’s compensation benefits. However, even though the servicemember or his or her next of kin cannot sue the federal government, they may sue the manufacturer of the aircraft, the supplier of a defective product or component that was used in the aircraft, negligent air traffic controllers, subcontractors who performed substandard maintenance or repair work on the aircraft, or any other nongovernmental company whose wrongful conduct was a cause of the accident.
Lawsuits involving military aircraft crashes typically involve a number of people and entities being sued. For instance, there is the federal government, as owner and maintainer of the aircraft; the manufacturer of the aircraft; subcontractors who supplied defective parts or service to the aircraft; air traffic controllers; and others. However, because of procedural legal restraints and laws protecting the government and defense contractors, lawsuits based on, for instance, defective military aircraft or pilot error, are considerably more difficult to pursue than accidents involving civil aircraft.
Investigating a military aircraft accident presents difficulties not found in non-military aircraft crashes. When a commercial plane crashes, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) sends a cadre of experts in various areas of expertise to investigate the accident. Its findings and conclusions are released to the public and may be used by the victims’ attorneys in placing the blame for the accident. In serious military aircraft accidents, a Safety Mishap Board investigates the accident and compiles a Safety Mishap Investigative Report that is kept secret.
Unlike commercial airliners, military aircraft traditionally have not been equipped with cockpit voice records (CVRs) and flight data recorders (FDRs), the so-called “black boxes.” One reason for this is that, if the plane were shot down in enemy territory, the enemy could access the black boxes to determine where the plane had been flying and gather important intelligence information from them. Today, more and more military aircraft are being equipped with CVRs and FDRs, which can provide invaluable information in the event of a crash or other accident.
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that the Safety Mishap Board Report and confidential statements obtained in its making do not have to be disclosed to the injured victim or his or her survivors, or any other pubic person or entity. One reason given for this policy is that the investigation team often includes or is assisted by members of the manufacturer of the aircraft or the supplier of a defective component that may have failed. The thinking is that if the manufacturer, supplier, or other government contractor were not guaranteed the confidentiality of its findings, they would not be forthcoming about possible causes of the accident due to their fault, stalling the investigation and putting other lives in peril (that is, the pilots of other aircraft of the same type and make that may have the same defect).
The military releases an “Accident Report,” which is used for court martial and other punitive or administrative proceedings against servicemembers resulting from the accident. The Accident Report may consist of the purely factual components of the safety mishap investigation, but does not include the most important technical analysis performed by the safety mishap investigative team, especially if it involves a government contractor.
Lawsuits against the United States government arising out of a military aircraft crash or other mishap must be brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). Usually a government cannot be sued and held liable for injuries and damages its agencies and employees cause. This is known as “governmental immunity.” However, the FTCA provides that the United States government may be held liable for damages “for injury or loss of property, or personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the Government while acting within the scope of his office or employment, under circumstances where the United States, if a private person, would be liable to the claimant in accordance with the laws of the place where the act or omission occurred.” The FTCA also provides that you cannot recover prejudgment interest or punitive damages from the government.
However, although the federal government allows people to sue it for their injuries or the wrongful deaths of their loved ones, there are a number of exceptions to this rule that may protect the United States from liability. One such exception is the “discretionary function” immunity, which provides that the government cannot be held liable for any claim based upon the exercise or performance, of the failure to exercise or perform, a discretionary function or duty on the part of a federal agency or an employee of the United States government, regardless of whether the discretion involved is abused.
Conduct cannot be discretionary unless it involves an element of judgment or choice. If there is a federal statute, regulation, or policy that specifically prescribes a course of action for an employee to follow, then the discretionary rule does not apply. The discretionary function exception applies only to conduct that involves the permissible exercise of policy judgment. The discretionary function exception marks the boundary between Congress’ willingness to impose tort liability upon the United States and its desire to protect certain governmental activities from exposure to suit by private individuals.
Many military aircraft are deployed throughout the world. Two exceptions to the FTCA’s imposition of liability against the federal government are especially worth noting here. First, the FTCA specifically prohibits claims against the federal government for injuries or deaths arising out of the “combatant activities” of the military or naval forces, or of the Coast Guard, during times of war. Second, the FTCA forbids claims against the United States arising in a foreign country.
Although the designer and manufacturer of a product generally has a duty to design their product so that it does not pose an unreasonable risk of harm to users of its products and others who might be foreseeably injured by the product, manufacturers of military aircraft can escape liability for design defects under the so-called “government contractor defense.” Under the government contractor defense doctrine, a manufacturer or subcontractor is not liable for injuries or deaths resulting from a defective and dangerous design of the aircraft or any part of it where the United States government approved reasonably precise specifications for the plane’s design, the equipment conformed to those specifications, or the manufacturer or supplier warned the government about the dangers in the use of the equipment which were known to the manufacturer or supplier, but not to the government.
If you have been injured or a loved one killed in an accident involving a military aircraft, whether it be a fighter jet on training maneuvers or a transport helicopter, you should contact an experienced personal injury law firm as soon as possible. It is also important to promptly contact an experienced personal injury law firm, as the law firm may want to send its own investigator to the scene of the accident to inspect and take pictures of the accident site and any dangerous condition that caused or contributed to the accident, especially before there is a change in the condition of the area or vehicle.
The attorney or his or her investigator will also want to talk to any witnesses to the accident as soon as possible while the facts are still fresh in their minds. Further, before filing a lawsuit in court against the United States government under the Federal Tort Claims Act, it is necessary to submit a claim to the appropriate government agency within a set time period. An experienced personal injury law firm knows how and where to file such a claim and will do so on your behalf.
An experienced personal injury law firm can also help with seeing to it that you obtain appropriate and thorough medical care for your physical, emotional, and psychological injuries suffered as a result of the accident. The attorneys in the firm can also do everything possible to ensure that you obtain full compensation for your medical expenses, pain and suffering, mental anguish, property damage, lost wages, and all of your other injuries and damages.
Call now and talk to a lawyer for free about your case 888.207.5321