Regulatory: August 2008 Archives

The other day I had what I'd like to think was a brilliant idea. Airlines that offer uncomfortably snug seating arrangements in steerage class (you know who you are), could start charging for compression stockings to prevent Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT).

Hear me out. A trendy compression stocking supplier - if there is such a thing - or some other willing clothier could design fashionable yet sturdy hose for use on long-haul flights. Just imagine the array of designs and logos that could be employed.

"JetBlue won't let your leg turn blue" or "Skip the trains. Protect your veins. Fly Delta" or "United we stand in our stockings". And just as passengers can now purchase "pillow and blanket" sets for keeps, so too would the stockings be reusable on other flights. 

But alas, I'm afraid this idea may never fly. Why? Passengers pursuing damages for DVT injuries allegedly sustained during flights have lost yet another landmark lawsuit.

In what could very well close the book on these types of cases (and give airlines even more incentive to keep seat pitch tight), the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has rejected the argument that airlines are liable for such injuries because they had not properly warned passengers of the risk of developing DVT.

Here's the ruling.

A key quote:
"Passengers maintain that such DVT warnings as were given through videos, magazines, and in ticket packets, failed to notify them of the risks of DVT. This is beside the point, given our holding in Caman that the airlines have no duty to warn of the risks of DVT. Given no duty to warn, it follows that there is no duty to warn in any particular way."

An attorney for the defense, Rod Margo, has followed the issue on his insightful blog. Speaking to me yesterday, he said: "The House of Lords in the UK has decided DVT in favour of the airlines and the High Court of Australia has done the same so effectively the courts here are following well-established international precedent as well."

He adds: "I would say that the airline industry and the airline insurers are relieved by the outcome."

No doubt they are. I guess it's back to the think tank for me. But first, I'm taking a walk. Gotta let the blood flow, don't ya know...

"Monkey see monkey do. Just what the world needs, another bloody regional jet." So said one observer upon learning that India is looking to build a 70- to 100-seat RJ. I'm guessing that the aviation industry may have a similar reaction.

Reports out of India say state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) has been asked by the government to prepare a roadmap for the design and construction of a so-called Indian Regional Jet (IRJ), and that the project will seek assistance from Bombardier or Embraer.

Should the plan progress, the world of regional aircraft manufacturing is going to get awfully crowded. China's AVIC I Commercial Aircraft Corporation, Japan's Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Russia's Sukhoi have already thrown their hats into the ring with the ARJ, the MRJ and the SSJ, respectively. They are hoping to ride a wave of order activity that has seen Bombardier and Embraer build record backlogs and forecast robust demand for larger-capacity types for many years to come. Whether the newbies will attract large orders outside of their own backyards remains to be seen.

For the record, Bombardier says it does not have any industry arrangement with HAL on commercial aircraft at this time "and we do not comment on discussion with aerospace companies on future programmes". Embraer could not be immediately reached for comment.

I question whether either company will be keen to help India develop something that will squarely compete with aircraft in their own portfolios. Then again, Bombardier says it remains committed to supporting the Chinese-built ARJ21-900.

Regardless, the news means potentially big business for HAL, which is also likely to be the production house for India's very first civil transport aircraft, a 14-seat multi-role twin turboprop now in testing. This will give HAL a foray into commercial aircraft development.

On hearing news that the same firm will probably take the lead on both projects, our oh-so-cynical industry observer quips: "Even better, they'll take 50 years to get on with both and then realise that it is out of date." Easy tiger.

(HAL logo from company web site www.hal-india.com)