Garmin’s announcement has the potential to make General Aviation 2 orders of magnitude safer. In reviewing NTSB records of accidents, the aircraft has been the cause of the accident only 3% of the time, with the pilot responsible 97% of the time. This potEntially makes the GA equipped aircraft as safe as Part 121 aircraft.
Not withstanding your story about safety and reserves, the 777 has a 15 hour plus duration capacity with reserves This would mean that there was poor planning and that possibly in pursuit of reduction of cost. I would be a mighty unhappy camer if i was on that flight, unless, of course, United funded the extened stay.
Jason gives more credit to the article than it might deserve. The article uses anecdotal and cherry picked statistics to make an expository case. Having said that, no has mentioned that from 90-98% of the accidents overwhelming cause is the pilot. This is not to bash pilots but to demonstrate that human beings are limited in their ability to timely process data in critical situations. This is also true for airline. As well as general aviation pilots. The safety gains have come from automation technology assistance. The real question should be why is the focus on 2-10% of faults rather on the 90+%.
As for manufacturers liability, the tort law involved uses the principle of joint and several liability rather than comparative liability that many states use for automobile liability and damage determinations. The 1990s limitation to 18 years was a compromise albeit akin to don't ask don't tell. If a manufacturer is a fraction of a percent responsible for what could be related to an accid
