FlightSafety International filed a lawsuit this week in Sedgwick County District Court over the 2014 Beechcraft King Air crash at Wichita Eisenhower National Airport that killed four people, injured six others and destroyed one of its buildings and “multiple” flight simulators.
FlightSafety names nearly 20 companies in the lawsuit that it alleges contributed to the fatal crash because of negligence, breach of implied warranty and other counts. It is seeking to recover damages caused by the crash, but the suit does not list a dollar figure.
Among those companies named as defendants are the manufacturer of the airplane, Textron Aviation and its predecessors, Beechcraft Corp. and Hawker Beechcraft Corp.; engine-maker Pratt & Whitney; Hartzell Propeller; Yingling Aircraft Services, the employer of the airplane’s pilot, and the 14-year-old King Air B200 airplane’s previous owner, Sheetz Aviation.
A FlightSafety spokesman said Wednesday the company wouldn’t comment on its reasons behind filing the lawsuit five days before the second anniversary of the crash, Oct. 30, 2014.
Digital Access For Only $0.99
For the most comprehensive local coverage, subscribe today.
A Textron Aviation spokeswoman said the company does not comment on pending litigation.
One minute and 11 seconds elapsed between the time the plane departed an Eisenhower Airport runway and the pilot, Mark Goldstein, radioed the air-traffic control tower that he was declaring an emergency and had lost his left engine.
The plane subsequently crashed on the roof of FlightSafety’s building, killing Goldstein and three other people in the building.
In March, the National Transportation Safety Board said in its probable cause report of the crash that Goldstein failed “to maintain lateral control of the airplane after a reduction in left engine power and his application of inappropriate rudder input.”
It also said he didn't “follow the emergency procedures for an engine failure during takeoff.”
NTSB said contributing to the accident was a reduction in left engine power “for reasons that could not be determined because a postaccident examination did not reveal any anomalies that would have precluded normal operation and thermal damage precluded a complete examination.”