Fashion Model walks into plane propeller

Page 13 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Capt Caveman

Lifer
Jan 30, 2005
34,547
651
126
That's because they drill pilots with endless obligatory safety training every year they're in the air, and after some time anyone would start to believe many of the common sense things are not and actually need to be covered. Lawyers have managed to make the lowest common denominator the most important people in the world, and have created in the public mindset an illusion that blame can always be shifted to those in power or with money.

Anyone over the age of 3 would know not to stick their hand in a lawn mover, garbage disposal, etc. Sharp spinning things are not flesh-friendly. Any adult SHOULD KNOW how a prop plane works, and if they do not, then they shall live at their own peril. As far as I am concerned that pilot did everyone a favor by not telling someone stupid enough to not be automatically super careful around a running aircraft to be super careful.

The fact that we are even arguing over this makes me feel ill.

More re-education for you!

It's the pilot's fault. Stop trolling.
 

Sonikku

Lifer
Jun 23, 2005
15,752
4,562
136
How is a woman to know that stepping head first into a spinning plane propeller could potentially prove harmful for her face? The pilot should have explained the health risks of inserting flesh or limbs into a moving propeller. The only good to come of this is he succeeded in stimulating the health care industry and create American jobs by ensuring there would be work for those in the business of repairing someones face.
 

Rifter

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,522
751
126
Having just recently been on 2 seaplanes and a small 4 seater prop plane over the last 4 months and having a previous fear of small planes i stand by my original post in this thread. She is an IDIOT.

Granted the pilot is partially at fault for not relaying proper safty procedures(all my pilots recently did relay proper procedures, once on one of the seaplanes the pilot came unglued when a passanger tried to open the door to get out before the pilot was ready). But the majority of the blame/fault is hers and hers alone.

After having flown a few times in small planes now i have great respect for the proplellers, you sit there a few feet from them screaming away for a hour/hours pulling you through the air, shaking the whole plane at times. To simply get out and walk right into one is almost unbelievable, and IMO is on the shoulders of the person who willingly walked right into it.
 

chusteczka

Diamond Member
Apr 12, 2006
3,400
1
71
How is a woman to know that stepping head first into a spinning plane propeller could potentially prove harmful for her face? The pilot should have explained the health risks of inserting flesh or limbs into a moving propeller. ...

There should be a warning label on the back surface of the propeller.
"Do not approach when in motion."
 

Aikouka

Lifer
Nov 27, 2001
30,383
912
126
There should be a warning label on the back surface of the propeller.
"Do not approach when in motion."

Unfortunately, you wouldn't be able to read that while it's actually in motion. Unless it was one of those LED strips that adjusted the lit LEDs while rotating to print out a message! That would be kind of nifty.
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,967
19
81
What's funny is this chick even now would still turn most down here. That makes them angry.
 

Red Squirrel

No Lifer
May 24, 2003
67,933
12,383
126
www.anyf.ca
I find it hilarious that some people are actually defending the chick.

To actually walk directly into something that is moving at high speed is just insane retarded. It's sickening that she's getting money for her very own damn stupid mistake and now she will be rich for life while other people actually work for their money and will never make as much as she got for free. Well it did cost her an arm and a leg, but she willingly gave those up.

The pilot should not be blamed. Being that stupid, she was bound to land herself in some other trouble if that incident did not happen.
 

Wreckem

Diamond Member
Sep 23, 2006
9,459
987
126
I find it hilarious that some people are actually defending the chick.

To actually walk directly into something that is moving at high speed is just insane retarded. It's sickening that she's getting money for her very own damn stupid mistake and now she will be rich for life while other people actually work for their money and will never make as much as she got for free. Well it did cost her an arm and a leg, but she willingly gave those up.

The pilot should not be blamed. Being that stupid, she was bound to land herself in some other trouble if that incident did not happen.

It was negligence. Even if you don't want to believe it.

The propellers SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN MOVING while passengers were deplaning. PERIOD. It was a breach of standard of care. Company owning the plane was going to lose. Ins. Co. settled a valid claim, likely at or below policy limits. Ins. Co. settled because if they didn't and it went to court and the defendants lost(trust me they would have) and the plaintiff got more than policy limits, the insurance co. would then be sued by the defendant for violating their(the ins. co's) duty under Stowers.

And if her medical ins. paid the medical bills, they are now going to have their hands out wanting to be reimbursed everything they have paid. There was likely over a million in medical bills and other associated medical costs. That is why the settlement is in the millions(probably around $3mm, possibly $5mm if medical costs/future medical costs are higher).
 
Last edited:

Wreckem

Diamond Member
Sep 23, 2006
9,459
987
126
Stop being a fucking idiot.

Only people being idiots, are people who don't understand that the standard of care was breached in this instance and that breach gives rise to a valid claim for which she can recover damages.

Ins. Co.'s do their damnedest to get out of paying. They fight tooth and nail and they have great legal representation. Do you honestly think if the plaintiffs didn't have valid claim, the ins. co. would settle?
 
Last edited:

SphinxnihpS

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2005
8,368
25
91
Only people being idiots, are people who don't understand that the standard of care was breached in this instance and that breach gives rise to a valid claim for which she can recover damages.

Ins. Co.'s do their damnedest to get out of paying. They fight tooth and nail and they have great legal representation. Do you honestly think if the plaintiffs didn't have valid claim, the ins. co. would settle?

I'm quite aware of how things are. My opinion deals with how things should be. A million layers at the bottom of the sea! Just because something is so does not make it right. Just because the majority agree, does not make it just.

I could give a fuck what the insurance companies do, nor do I give a fuck what the law states, what the training is, what the regulations are, or how many people think I am wrong, including experts and life-long pilots; if you are not careful around dangerous things and you are harmed by them it is your own damn fault, period. The fact that insurance companies pay, legislators legislate, regulators regulate, experts pontificate, and pilots acquiesce to the standard the WE are responsible in any way to the stupid makes me sick to my stomach.

This woman walked right into a roaring spinning airplane propeller and is neither deaf nor blind. Only a very small child would lack the common sense necessary to avoid this danger. She's a fucking idiot and deserves nothing but scorn. The world would be much better off without her, but sadly she survived.
 

Saint Nick

Lifer
Jan 21, 2005
17,722
6
81
I'm quite aware of how things are. My opinion deals with how things should be. A million layers at the bottom of the sea! Just because something is so does not make it right. Just because the majority agree, does not make it just.

I could give a fuck what the insurance companies do, nor do I give a fuck what the law states, what the training is, what the regulations are, or how many people think I am wrong, including experts and life-long pilots; if you are not careful around dangerous things and you are harmed by them it is your own damn fault, period. The fact that insurance companies pay, legislators legislate, regulators regulate, experts pontificate, and pilots acquiesce to the standard the WE are responsible in any way to the stupid makes me sick to my stomach.

This woman walked right into a roaring spinning airplane propeller and is neither deaf nor blind. Only a very small child would lack the common sense necessary to avoid this danger. She's a fucking idiot and deserves nothing but scorn. The world would be much better off without her, but sadly she survived.
Pretty brutal post, but I agree with much of it. Some kid burned himself on a boiler here at work (power plant) and he had to get life flighted to the hospital.

What he was doing was against regulation...who cares. He completely threw out his common sense and touched/brushed up on some ultra-hot metal that HE KNEW was hot.

The girl walked into a propeller. Yeah, it might have been against regs to not have the plane running while passengers were boarding/exiting/whatever, but she walked into a propeller that should have been clear as day.
 

Wreckem

Diamond Member
Sep 23, 2006
9,459
987
126
Pretty brutal post, but I agree with much of it. Some kid burned himself on a boiler here at work (power plant) and he had to get life flighted to the hospital.

What he was doing was against regulation...who cares. He completely threw out his common sense and touched/brushed up on some ultra-hot metal that HE KNEW was hot.

The girl walked into a propeller. Yeah, it might have been against regs to not have the plane running while passengers were boarding/exiting/whatever, but she walked into a propeller that should have been clear as day.

And nothing either of y'all posted changes the fact that this case is a text book negligence claim.

And that is never going to change. This case or the laws regarding negligence.

The pilot had the duty to make sure it was safe to deplane before the door was opened.
The pilot breached that duty.
If the pilot did not breach that duty the accident would not have happened.
And oh yes damages, she has million(s) in medical bills, shes been dismembered, she has lost of wages, loss of future damages, and yes pain and suffering.

Its fucking text book. I don't know why the fuck anyone is arguing in this thread. Its the law of negligence and that law isn't going to change. And it appears the settlement is likely be in the low single digit million range. Shes certainly not receiving a windfall from that settlement.
 

SphinxnihpS

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2005
8,368
25
91
And nothing either of y'all posted changes the fact that this case is a text book negligence claim.

And that is never going to change. This case or the laws regarding negligence.

The pilot had the duty to make sure it was safe to deplane before the door was opened.
The pilot breached that duty.
If the pilot did not breach that duty the accident would not have happened.
And oh yes damages, she has million(s) in medical bills, shes been dismembered, she has lost of wages, loss of future damages, and yes pain and suffering.

Its fucking text book. I don't know why the fuck anyone is arguing in this thread. Its the law of negligence and that law isn't going to change. And it appears the settlement is likely be in the low single digit million range. Shes certainly not receiving a windfall from that settlement.

Because the textbook is the problem. And it certainly can change because it changed to this way from not this way.
 

AyashiKaibutsu

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2004
9,306
3
81
Because the textbook is the problem. And it certainly can change because it changed to this way from not this way.

It's amazing how people have been conditioned to rage and try to tear down the things that protect them so that others may profit. Yea, this country would be a much better place if people who committed absolutely crystal clear cases of negligence couldn't be held accountable.
 

Red Squirrel

No Lifer
May 24, 2003
67,933
12,383
126
www.anyf.ca
It was negligence. Even if you don't want to believe it.

The propellers SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN MOVING while passengers were deplaning. PERIOD. It was a breach of standard of care. Company owning the plane was going to lose. Ins. Co. settled a valid claim, likely at or below policy limits. Ins. Co. settled because if they didn't and it went to court and the defendants lost(trust me they would have) and the plaintiff got more than policy limits, the insurance co. would then be sued by the defendant for violating their(the ins. co's) duty under Stowers.

And if her medical ins. paid the medical bills, they are now going to have their hands out wanting to be reimbursed everything they have paid. There was likely over a million in medical bills and other associated medical costs. That is why the settlement is in the millions(probably around $3mm, possibly $5mm if medical costs/future medical costs are higher).

Oh I understand the pilot should have stopped the propeller. But accidents/forgetting happens. At worse he should maybe get a slap on the hand. There are lot of dangerous situations that exist in every day life. Traffic, industrial properties, construction sites, etc. If someone walks directly into one of these dangers, they should not be held liable for the stupidity of that person for walking into what is an obviously marked danger.

It's just unfortunate that a stupid person can walk into someone else's danger and make that person pay for their own stupidity.
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
I'm quite aware of how things are. My opinion deals with how things should be. A million layers at the bottom of the sea! Just because something is so does not make it right. Just because the majority agree, does not make it just.

I could give a fuck what the insurance companies do, nor do I give a fuck what the law states, what the training is, what the regulations are, or how many people think I am wrong, including experts and life-long pilots; if you are not careful around dangerous things and you are harmed by them it is your own damn fault, period. The fact that insurance companies pay, legislators legislate, regulators regulate, experts pontificate, and pilots acquiesce to the standard the WE are responsible in any way to the stupid makes me sick to my stomach.

This woman walked right into a roaring spinning airplane propeller and is neither deaf nor blind. Only a very small child would lack the common sense necessary to avoid this danger. She's a fucking idiot and deserves nothing but scorn. The world would be much better off without her, but sadly she survived.
Spoken truth.
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,235
117
116
I'm quite aware of how things are. My opinion deals with how things should be. A million layers at the bottom of the sea! Just because something is so does not make it right. Just because the majority agree, does not make it just.

I could give a fuck what the insurance companies do, nor do I give a fuck what the law states, what the training is, what the regulations are, or how many people think I am wrong, including experts and life-long pilots; if you are not careful around dangerous things and you are harmed by them it is your own damn fault, period. The fact that insurance companies pay, legislators legislate, regulators regulate, experts pontificate, and pilots acquiesce to the standard the WE are responsible in any way to the stupid makes me sick to my stomach.

This woman walked right into a roaring spinning airplane propeller and is neither deaf nor blind. Only a very small child would lack the common sense necessary to avoid this danger. She's a fucking idiot and deserves nothing but scorn. The world would be much better off without her, but sadly she survived.

This.

KT
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |