Wednesday, September 11, 2024
Pentagon still stands, healed of 9-11 wounds
Monday, June 24, 2024
Greenland opens new capital airport terminal, hopes to boost tourism, increase economic autonomy
I was among the first passengers at the new Nuuk terminal today. |
A couple of days ago I wrote about Greenland's autonomy from Denmark, observing that tourism and fisheries, at present levels, might not be enough to sustain the economy of an independent Greenland, notwithstanding popular support for the proposition. The new terminal and runways at Nuuk, co-located with the older facility, are a calculated measure to amp up tourism and ween off Greenland of dependence on Danish aid.
The old Nuuk GOH terminal, closed today, is adjacent to the new. |
Constructed as a military air base in 1941, Kangerlussuaq airport was a strategic refueling point. It was therefore equipped with a runway that could handle large aircraft. After the war, and for decades since, Kangerlussuaq's capacity made it the international hub for Air Greenland.
A larger-than-most Air Greenland plane prepares to fly from Kangerlussuaq to Copenhagen. |
Landing at Nuuk is not for the faint of heart. |
As well, the old Nuuk runway was not designed for volume or large aircraft. Because of surrounding mountains and frequent cloud cover, the approach is notoriously challenging for pilots. In fact, when I landed at Nuuk a couple of days ago on a domestic flight, my Air Greenland pilot aborted landing northbound in the dense fog. We circled round and sailed alongside snowy mountain peaks—a bit unnerving—to land in the clearer southbound direction.
New Nuuk's first guests got gift bags. |
The great hall of the new Nuuk airport is not yet ready for prime time. A plastic sheet covers the escalator, and limited strips of seating equipped with electrical outlets are not yet plugged in to anything. There are not yet any concessions; free coffee and breads were on offer this morning.
For the time being, all roads lead to Kangerlussuaq. |
For now, Nuuk airport will retain its IATA code, GOH, which was derived from the Danish name for Nuuk: Godthåb, or "Good Hope."
UPDATE, Aug. 5, 2024: One of my favorite YouTube channels, the B1M, has posted an excellent video with more detail and context than I had about the expansion of Greenland's airports, albeit with production dating to 2023. If you want to learn more, I recommend B1M, How to Build an Arctic Airport, YouTube (posted July 24, 2024).The Nuuk tarmac at GOH: new runways lie beyond the old, where a plane taxis. |
Air Greenland operates a diverse fleet of planes and helicopters to connect the largely roadless country. |
Tuesday, May 18, 2021
Automatic-door failures fuel injuries, tort claims, but road to recovery in litigation can be bumpy
Pixabay by djedj |
If you travel much, as I do, you probably have passed through those one-way transparent security doors that whip open and closed to allow only a person at a time to pass. They frighten me a bit, and I never linger on the threshold. The plaintiff in the instant case likewise denied having paused upon egress from Wagga Wagga City Airport arrivals in New South Wales, yet was struck by one of the doors. She complained of shoulder and back injury, requiring surgery, and the court confirmed that the impact of the door at least worsened a preexisting condition.
Arrivals at Wagga Wagga Airport (2012 photo by Bidgee CC BY-SA 3.0 AU) |
The outcome strikes me as questionable, because there seems to be no dispute that the 44-year-old plaintiff was struck by the door, and that that's never supposed to happen. Even if the photoelectric cell failure cannot be blamed, the case seems well suited to res ipsa loquitur, which, to the best of my knowledge, is recognized in New South Wales common law, and is not mentioned by the court. Maybe the plaintiff failed to plead the theory. Or maybe this is a Palsgraf-esque scenario in which the court concealed skepticism of the plaintiff's injury. Of 100,000 arriving passengers annually, there were no other reported incidents, the court troubled to say.
Anyway, the case reminds me of one that I use sometimes in torts class to teach punitive damages with a dash of professional responsibility. In 2015, 61-year-old James Hausman won a $21.5m verdict against the Holland America Line (HAL) after being hit by an automatic sliding door on a cruise ship, in an incident captured on camera.
There's plenty to inform a class discussion just there. Hausman's injury did not look too bad in the video, but traumatic brain injury is tricky. And the court awarded $16.5m in punitive damages after hearing about 16 other sliding-door injuries on HAL ships. The plaintiff's lawyer accused HAL of trying to save on air conditioning, which HAL denied, the ABA Journal reported.
Then the case took a turn. In 2016, the district court threw out the verdict after revelations of spoliation. The ugly dissolution of an employment relationship between Hausman and a personal assistant led to an undiscovered personal email account and deleted messages that cast doubt on Hausman's veracity (ABA Journal, Seattle Times). The court ordered a new trial and clarified that there was no evidence the plaintiff's attorney was complicit in wrongdoing. The docket suggests that the case ended in settlement later that year.
The Australian case is Gray v. Wagga Wagga City Council, [2021] NSWDC 108, 07 April 2021 (Wolters Kluwer). Simon Liddy at HWLEbsworth published commentary. The American case is Hausman v. Holland America Line-USA, No. 2:13-cv-00937 (W.D. Wash. 2016) (Court Listener).
Sunday, August 18, 2019
Mass. Superior Court dismisses nuisance claim over airport skydiving concession on Cape Cod
Chatham Municipal Airport approach (CC BY 2.0 woodleywonderworks) |
Chatham Municipal Airport on Cape Cod |