Foreigners Hit Jackpot in US Court: Garuda Crash Settles | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-06.23.25

Airborne-NextGen-06.24.25

AirborneUnlimited-06.25.25

Airborne-AffordableFlyers-06.26.25

AirborneUnlimited-06.27.25

Thu, Sep 25, 2003

Foreigners Hit Jackpot in US Court: Garuda Crash Settles

You may remember it, almost six years ago (September 26, 1997): Flight 152, a Garuda Indonesia Airlines A300, went through a horrible crash, cartwheeling down a mountainside in Sumatra, Indonesia. All 234 aboard, including two Americans, died.

Chicago's Nolan Law Group figured out a way to have the trial in the US, despite there having been just two Americans aboard the foreign-made plane, flown by foreigners for a foreign airline, that crashed in a foreign country. The money's just too good, from the juries and courts in the USA...

The settlement for 28 victims' families, reached Tuesday, minutes before trial, does not cover the two Americans' deaths.

Sundstrand (now part of Honeywell) is being sued jointly and severally, for everything the lawyers can think of. Sundstrand manufactured the early-1980s-design Mk II GPWS (ground proximity warning system); and plaintiffs claim that some malfunction, or the design itself, caused the crash. In fact, reports say, lawyers say the crash would have been totally avoidable, had the system worked as designed. The more-common theory of the crash (the official investigation hasn't released conclusions; but those well-researched reports are excluded from American court proceedings, as they tend to deflate lawyers' wallets) is that smoke from extensive forest fires obscured visibility, and that some ATC communications with the crew were misunderstood.

The flight left Jakarta, and was headed for Medan. the crash was about eighteen miles short of the destination airport, which had been closed on and off in the preceding days, due to that fire activity.

The confusion in the cockpit was exacerbated by confusion on the ground. 'Left' and 'right' were not clear -- directions to turn one way, were followed by confirmations of turns in the other direction. But, of course, it was all Sundstrand's fault.

FMI: www.honeywell.com

Advertisement

More News

NTSB Final Report: Douglas A-4K

Pilot Applied Full Aft Stick And Nose-Up Trim, But The Airplane Remained On The Runway Analysis: The pilot reported that a preflight inspection and flight control checks revealed n>[...]

ANN FAQ: Q&A 101

A Few Questions AND Answers To Help You Get MORE Out of ANN! 1) I forgot my password. How do I find it? 1) Easy... click here and give us your e-mail address--we'll send it to you >[...]

Classic Aero-TV: PBY Catalina--From Wartime to Double Sunrise to the Long Sunset

From 2022 (YouTube Edition): Before They’re All Gone... Humankind has been messing about in airplanes for almost 120-years. In that time, thousands of aircraft representing i>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (07.01.25): Advanced Air Mobility (AAM)

Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) A transportation system that transports people and property by air between two points in the NAS using aircraft with advanced technologies, including el>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (07.01.25)

Aero Linx: MQ-1B Predator The MQ-1B Predator is an armed, multi-mission, medium-altitude, long-endurance remotely piloted aircraft that is employed primarily as an intelligence-col>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2025 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC