Family Of Dr. Perry Inhofe Files Wrongful Death Suit | 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-06.17.24

Airborne-NextGen-06.18.24

Airborne-Unlimited-06.12.24 Airborne-FltTraining-06.13.24

Airborne-Unlimited-06.14.24

Thu, Dec 11, 2014

Family Of Dr. Perry Inhofe Files Wrongful Death Suit

Attorney Claims NTSB Was Wrong In Citing Pilot Error Probable Cause In Fatal MU-2 Accident

The family of Dr. Perry Inhofe, the son of Senator Jim Inhofe, has filed a wrongful death suit saying one of the engines on the Mitsubishi MU-2B-25 Dr. Inhofe had recently purchased failed during the accident flight.

The NTSB said in its probable cause report, which is not admissible in court, that Dr. Inhofe lost control of the airplane "during a known one-engine-inoperative condition. The reasons for the loss of control and engine shutdown could not be determined because the airplane was not equipped with a crash-resistant recorder and postaccident examination and testing did not reveal evidence of any malfunction that would have precluded normal operation."

Dallas, TX-based attorney William Angelley said the NTSB was wrong in making that assessment. "My investigators found it within thirty minutes. Plus it's right there in the NTSB's own data," Angelley said in a news release reported by Tulsa television station KOTV.

The suit names engine manufacturer Honeywell International, as well as Landmark Aviation Services and Standard Aero, which the suit says worked on the engine that failed. It also names Intercontinental Jet Service Corporation, which the suit says reinstalled the engine on the MU-2.

The accident flight was the first time Dr. Inhofe had flown the airplane solo. He had completed  training required by the FAA for engine-out situations in the MU-2. In the suit, Angelley says the NTSB is wrong in saying that the MU-2 should have been "flyable" on one engine. Configured as the airplane was, the lawyer who is a former Navy helicopter pilot says, with landing gear and flaps extended, "virtually no one could have recovered from that. There is simply too much drag and not enough power."

(Mitsubishi MU-2 pictured in file photo. Not accident airplane)

FMI: NTSB Probable Cause Report

Advertisement

More News

ANN FAQ: Submit a News Story!

Have A Story That NEEDS To Be Featured On Aero-News? Here’s How To Submit A Story To Our Team Some of the greatest new stories ANN has ever covered have been submitted by our>[...]

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (06.12.24)

“The legislation now includes a task force with industry representation ensuring that we have a seat at the table and our voice will be heard as conversations about the futur>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (06.12.24)

Aero Linx: Waco Museum The WACO Historical Society, in addition to preserving aviation's past, is also dedicated and actively works to nurture aviation's future through its Learnin>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (06.12.24): Adcock Range

Adcock Range National low-frequency radio navigation system (c.1930-c.1950) replaced by an omnirange (VOR) system. It consisted of four segmented quadrants broadcasting Morse Code >[...]

Airborne Affordable Flyers 06.06.24: 200th ALTO, Rotax SB, Risen 916iSV

Also: uAvionix AV-Link, Does Simming Make Better Pilots?, World Games, AMA National Fun Fly Czech sportplane manufacturer Direct Fly has finished delivering its 200th ALTO NG, the >[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2024 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC