I think this is a strange and slightly macabre thread.
I would say it has more to do with the modern obsession with “Celebrities”; these are the accidents people remember, but the lives lost are no more or less valuable than the many others who die, they just make the news bulletins.
The interesting angle is that the perception of risk in GA by the public is heavily driven by those accidents.
Good corporate outfits make clear that crew keep a formal distance from HNWI owners/charters, and keep a sensible polite approach without accepting socialising. SOPs overrule celebrities.
The interesting angle is that the perception of risk in GA by the public is heavily driven by those accidents.
Yes; very much so.
Thank you for the continued input.
I think this is a strange and slightly macabre thread.
I would say it has more to do with the modern obsession with “Celebrities”;
Sorry that you see it that way. Nothing to do with that. Couldn’t care less about it. This is an aviation forum not TMZ. Im going for operational and human factors aspects.
It has partly to do with the myth that „flying is the safest transport option“, which, when thrown around a as a blanket statement, is not true.
By the way, I think this „obsession“ was way back in the 90‘s and 00‘s with „streisand effect“ etc.. Nowadays everybody is famous on Instagram. Nobody dies on Instagram, it’s all bling bling success and awesomeness there.
The court wouldn’t mandate that you should have had higher insurance. E.g. your insurance coverage is 3 millions. The court sentences you to pay 5 millions, that is the court finds that you are responsible of having caused damages worth 6 millions. Your insurance pays out 3 millions, and you are liable to pay 2 millions, out of your assets, and if those don’t suffice out of all your future earnings beyond the legal survival minimum in your jurisdiction.
Aren’t damages in air accidents limited by a maximum amount of SDRs? Probably only applies to commercial flying? Anyway one can be protected from such claims when flying privately?
Snoopy wrote:
Im going for operational and human factors aspects
The co-pilot who flies with Kim Jong in IL62 has lot to say about your topic Snoopy 
True
lionel wrote:
It starts the counter for when the royalties will stop (70 years after death? Something like that?). So, if they die 20 years earlier, that’s 20 years of royalty income lost.
I don’t know of any legal system that calculates damages based on a more than 70 year income projection…
