Force Majeure, as used in contract law, typically refers to natural events or Acts of God or war, that are beyond the control of a party (in this case, AA) and that the event prevented the party from performing its obligations. According to Capt Norton, the problem here was a systems failure or, at the least, the pilots' lack of systems knowledge. Force Majeure probably does not apply in this situation.

I'd like to hear from current 757 pilots. What are you supposed to do when there is an electrical failure? Is this situation handled differently depending on the airline? What does Boeing say you have to do? Did you have this as one of the scenarios in sim?

I was going with the force majeure, or act of god that caused the electrical problem in the first place

I'm glad you bring this up. I read the NTSB report on this incident:

NTSB AA 268

With the situation they were in, I'm not sure if the crew made the right decision to continue the flight to NY. Read it for yourself. I REALLY hate to say it, but this chick's case may have some legs. That being said... I think she's just trying to take advantage of the situation, and she'll probably get a nice settlement from AMR.

I'm reminded of a movie quote that goes something like:

"Id rather you just say thank you [for getting your sorry ass safely back on the ground] and went on your way. . ."

No friggin' clue what we do up there.

"My life is over. I want my life back. I want to be Jewel again."

And money apparently will get this piece of work's life back. This is what makes me sick to my stomach. "If I suddenly have a few million in my bank account, I'll be able to fly again"

Idiot should be glad to be alive.

Don't get me started on Capt. Vickie.

I'm sure I will take heat from you guys over this post, but I can no longer remain silent.

I'll start by saying that I am 100% opposed to frivolous lawsuits. With that said, I'm surprised nobody has commented on a crew that continued across the country despite experiencing a major failure in their electrical system. In every transport category aircraft I've ever flown, the first priority is to get the plane on the ground ASAP after experiencing such a failure. In the case of this crew, their problems started approximately 45 minutes into the flight and they were on battery power within an hour of departing Seattle, yet in spite of those problems they elected to continue on to New York. Only after they were forced, due to system failure after system failure, to land short of their scheduled destination, did they do so.

Their problems were so bad that my understanding is after landing the fire department had a difficult time assisting in the evacuation of the jet as they were unable to safely approach it because the engines continued running, even after running off the end of the runway and pilots who wanted them shut down. From what I've been told and read, the crew was unable to shut down engines due to little-to-no residual electrical power;there wasn't even enough electrical power available to close the fuel SOV's!

As a pilot I've made, and will continue to make many mistakes in my career, as we all have. I am not for beating up on our fellow pilots or arm chair quarterbacking, but when an event that's so egregious as this rears its ugly head, I'm a little surprised that nobody has spoken up yet. I am not here to debate whether this lawsuit has merits or not, but I think it's safe to say the pilots here did not appear to exercise good judgement nor did they exercise the utmost care and diligence in the performance of their duties, as would be expected by any NTSB administrative law judge.

If we, as trained professionals, do not properly police ourselves and are willing to accept such behavior, then I shudder to think where this industry is headed.

Ok, fire away.

So you consider the crew's action to continue across the country after a major electrical malfunction to be professional?

This doesn't look like a particularly brilliant job by the flight crew, which does not preclude the fact it also looks like an opportunistic move by "Joule".

I wouldn't dismiss out of hand the idea that she was scared, but nothing that occured on her flight would have been traumatic enough for a reasonable person to be unable to fly again. So I think the explanation would be either that she was pre-disposed to some sort of freak-out, OR that she saw in the NTSB report an opportunity to explain her absence at the dying friend's side. And make a little coin.

Francis X. Wellman noted in his book "The Art of Cross-Examination" that plaintiffs are always complaining of and experts testifying to debilitating and permanent injuries, only to be miraculously restored to full health after a judgment in plaintiff's favor. He talks about it in Chapter 5, available on Google Books (p. 93) and elsewhere on the web.

The frequent targets of personal injury lawsuits in Mr. Wellman's day were the railroad companies. The book was published in 1921. The names and dates change, but the BS all remains the same.

AA will spend lots of money defending this lawsuit, taking depositions, etc., and will most likely end up settling the case. Even if they eventually prevail, it will cost them a lot of money to win.

The crew had a problem with the electrical system. They turned the standby power switch to "battery" which isolates the standby busses to the battery, and prevents the battery from receiving a charge. The boeing checklist does not state "land at nearest suitable airport" for this, but it should have. (it does now!)

The reason the pilots couldn't turn off the engines is because that function is controlled by the standby busses (power that you are never supposed to lose). They had drained the battery down to nothing, and the engine generators could not power those busses since the pilots isolated them.

The biggest problem I have with all of this is that the captain decided to land on 22R at ORD. He had an active runway that was 13,000 feet long, and he landed on a 7,500 foot runway. He ALMOST got it stopped in 7,500 feet! If he would have chosen a longer runway, we would not be talking about this right now.

Multiple system failures and you choose a short runway.....that's hard to understand.