TradeCraft wrote:Class action lawsuit!? This is Alaska. Fix it and move on...

Love that mentality.

Does the second picture mean you were able to get yours fixed? Or was that a before picture?

-Asa

I'm thinking Phil was having a bad day when he suggested a class action lawsuit. Nobody would win but the lawyers while the perps enjoyed the shit show in the press.

Aviation in general would certainly lose out.

asadarnell wrote:

TradeCraft wrote:Class action lawsuit!? This is Alaska. Fix it and move on...

Love that mentality.

Does the second picture mean you were able to get yours fixed? Or was that a before picture?

-Asa

Had the Taylorcraft fixed by lunch! Waiting on tires for two other planes though.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

Sincerely hope the idiots who did this get caught.

I know this is not going to happen but would love their sentence to be manual labor....maybe hand filling holes in runway and hauling rocks....at minimum wage until the earned wages, which go back to the ac owners, equal the damages. Of course the cost of overseeing these a'holes would have to be earned as well.

H'mmm seems like there are a couple of songs along those lines.

Amazing how hard labor in the hot sun ( or freezing cold) will refocus one's outlook.

TD

My greatest fear is that the fences and access codes will go up. Alaska makes GA accessible. My absolute favorite part of GA in Alaska is that I can drive up and down rows and rows of real working bush planes. I have hauled my boys up and down every row of parked airplanes w/in 200 miles of the Anchorage basin w/out ever being looked at sideways. They could pick out a Super Cub from a 170 at 3 years old. That can’t be done in the lower 48. If you are lucky enough to find a ramp that isn’t hidden by hangar row it will likely be contained by a 10’ tall fence and/or razor wire. If you work hard you might get a hundred yard look at an old ragged 172.

I sincerely hope this doesn’t change that.

A comment: suits against the airport, which is owned by the city of Anchorage, would be a suit against the city. That raises a concept called by various names: governmental immunity and sovereign immunity are the most common. Most states seem to base their governmental immunity statutes loosely on the Federal Tort Claims Act, but that does not appear to be how Alaska has done it. I haven't done any kind of thorough examination of Alaska statutes, but it's a topic that is in several of them, as well as in several cases decided by the Alaska Supreme Court.

The basic idea is that only those lawsuits which are specifically allowed by statute can be brought against governmental entities. It also means that if they are allowed, there will be very specific rules of procedure that must be followed. And what it really means is that suits against governmental entities are very difficult, much moreso than suits against individuals or corporations. A pretty good analogy is that it's a lot like skiing uphill against an avalanche, and the likelihood of prevailing is minimal but still expensive--very discouraging.

On the related topic of alternative sentencing, should the perps be caught: when I was a minor courts judge, I used that frequently, especially with kids. I always thought that fines were superfluous--their parents paid them, and the kids learned nothing. So I did such things as sentence them to the maximum I could under the statutes that existed at the time, which was so many days in jail depending on the offense and a big fine, but suspended all of it on the condition that they do community service of X hours--and I picked the community service. Most often, that involved cleaning the dog pound, scrubbing floors and windows at the library, cleaning the oil sumps at the city garage, and other unpleasant tasks. I can't say how well it worked, except that I rarely had repeat offenders after alternative sentences--and in a little town, you get to know the repeaters. If I were to sentence these particular perps, there'd probably be some really clean airplanes at Merrill Field.

Cary