- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
US Army Black Hawk helicopter hit by snowmobile, rider sues government for $9.5 million
Posted on 3/9/24 at 12:49 pm
Posted on 3/9/24 at 12:49 pm
quote:
A Massachusetts lawyer is suing the government for $9.5 million after he crashed into a Black Hawk helicopter while riding a snowmobile, The Associated Press reported.
Jeff Smith collided with the tail of a Black Hawk helicopter while riding his snowmobile on an evening in March 2019, losing the use of his left arm and having been unable to return to full-time work since, per the report.
"The last five years, there's been surgery, recovery, surgery, recovery," he continued.
"Honestly, right now, it feels like I'm in a worst place than when I first had the surgeries in 2019," he added.
Smith's case is that the Black Hawk crew was negligent in parking the stealth helicopter on a seldom-used airfield that snowmobilers also used, adding that they did not warn them about the aircraft's presence.
"Our argument from the beginning has been that it's incompatible to have a helicopter land on an active snowmobile trail," Smith's attorney said.
The government has attempted to pin blame on Smith, saying he was driving at 65 mph after drinking two beers and taking prescription medication. It has also argued that it can't be sued under the Federal Tort Claims Act and that the crew was unaware it was landing in an area used by snowmobilers.
Following an internal inquiry into the incident, the US Army released a report saying it found "no negligence by the crew" and expressing doubt whether lighting would have prevented the crash.
LINK
26
Posted on 3/9/24 at 12:52 pm to hikingfan
quote:
parking the stealth helicopter on a seldom-used airfield that snowmobilers also used
Thats a new one.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 12:53 pm to hikingfan
In the old days lawyers used to call this failure to keep a proper lookout.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 12:56 pm to hikingfan
quote:
stealth helicopter
So, he couldn’t see it?
Posted on 3/9/24 at 12:56 pm to hikingfan
At the least, he deserves credit for creativity 
Posted on 3/9/24 at 12:56 pm to hikingfan
qhat difference does it make that was "stealth" Was he using radar?
Posted on 3/9/24 at 1:01 pm to hikingfan
quote:
Smith's case is that the Black Hawk crew was negligent in parking the stealth helicopter on a seldom-used airfield that snowmobilers also used, adding that they did not warn them about the aircraft's presence.
Unless the area was designated for the snowmobilers, I don’t see where he has a case on this one.
We snowmobiled on a private air strip in Idaho Falls but we were all still aware it was an air strip.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 1:01 pm to hikingfan
quote:
stealth
Posted on 3/9/24 at 1:04 pm to hikingfan
quote:
The government has attempted to pin blame on Smith, saying he was driving at 65 mph after drinking two beers and taking prescription medication. It has also argued that it can't be sued under the Federal Tort Claims Act and that the crew was unaware it was landing in an area used by snowmobilers.
Sort of reminds me of the movie Flight.
Denzel's character, the pilot, was a drunk drug abuser. He was under the influence when something beyond anyone's control, happened to the plane. He was able to land it in away not many pilots would have been able to do which saved the lives of most people on board.
But because his blood tested positive for alcohol that changed it from being considered an act of god to the pilot was drunk.. There was a little more to it than that, but either the helicopter had a right to be parked there without informing people or it didn't. If it didn't its should be on the US Army, if it did then ole Jeff Smith shouldn't have much of a case.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 1:13 pm to hikingfan
quote:
Smith's case is that the Black Hawk crew was negligent in parking the stealth helicopter on a seldom-used airfield that snowmobilers also used, adding that they did not warn them about the aircraft's presence.
first thought is how can you miss seeing it, but then on a trail i could see the oh shite of coming over a hill or around some hill and there it is.
guy lost the use of his arm so i hope he wins this, it sounds like the tail rotor hit his arm with all those surgeries he had
its not like it was sitting out in an open field you can see from far away
Posted on 3/9/24 at 1:36 pm to hikingfan
quote:
Our argument from the beginning has been that it's incompatible to have a helicopter land on an active snowmobile trail,
Hmmm, if it is an airstrip and designated as an airstrip, why would they be expected to know snowmobilers use it?
quote:
The government has attempted to pin blame on Smith, saying he was driving at 65 mph after drinking two beers and taking prescription medication.
Hmm, if this is indeed true, then I'd say that is additional evidence the plaintiff is a dumbass.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 1:45 pm to hikingfan
quote:
snowmobilers
quote:
helicopter
quote:
airfield
Airfields are built for one of these and not the other.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 1:48 pm to hikingfan
quote:
Smith's case is that the Black Hawk crew was negligent in parking the stealth helicopter on a seldom-used airfield that snowmobilers also used, adding that they did not warn them about the aircraft's presence.
This dipshit act like a child and expects the government to bail him out for his own stupidity.
I find it hard to miss a black hawk helicopter in front of me.
This post was edited on 3/9/24 at 1:49 pm
Posted on 3/9/24 at 1:49 pm to hikingfan
Was the airfield decommissioned/abandoned or is it technically still classified as active? If active, I can’t see how this case isn’t thrown out regardless of how “seldom used” it is. If I go riding an ATV at the Hammond airport and run into an airplane, that’s my own dumbass fault.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 2:10 pm to hikingfan
OK, so the helicopter set down on an AIRFIELD and the snowmobile rider crashed into it. Personally, I don't think it matters that the airfield was seldom used, it's still an airfield and subject to use when needed.
I can't see where he has a winnable case here.
I can't see where he has a winnable case here.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 2:25 pm to hikingfan
Taking out the fact it was an actual airfield, this guy basically rear ended someone. How is it anyone but his own fault? Maybe don’t go 65 on a snowmobile and you won’t have an issue?
Posted on 3/9/24 at 2:32 pm to hikingfan
Helicopter on an airfield. Is a snowmobile an aircraft in need of an airfield? Which really belongs there?
Posted on 3/9/24 at 2:43 pm to hikingfan
quote:
drinking two beers and taking prescription medication.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 2:44 pm to hikingfan
If he’s a Dem he’ll get a check.
Posted on 3/9/24 at 3:30 pm to hikingfan
Seldom used is not abandoned
Good job drunk snow baw
Good job drunk snow baw
This post was edited on 3/9/24 at 3:30 pm
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News