Top Causes of Aviation Accidents

Uncovering the Truth Behind Your Crash

Air travel feels routine until it isn’t. One hard landing. One sudden drop. One strange noise that turns your stomach. When a flight goes wrong in New York, whether you were at JFK, LaGuardia, or flying out of Albany International, the fallout hits fast. 

You’re left piecing together what caused it, why it happened, and how you’re supposed to keep your life on track while you’re still hurting. 

Our aviation and airplane accident attorneys at Horn Wright, LLP, handle aviation cases in New York and also serve New Jersey, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Maine. The rules change as you cross state lines. 

New York’s Civil Practice Law & Rules Section 214(5) sets three years for most injury suits, while EPTL § 5-4.1 controls wrongful death timing; New Hampshire’s modified comparative negligence works differently than New York’s system; Maine and Vermont bring their own twists. Those details shape your strategy from day one.

If you want a focused review now, contact us at (855) 465-4622 and we’ll walk through what happened and what comes next for you. We’ll keep this human and give you clarity, so you can make strong decisions without feeling pulled in a hundred directions.

Why Causes Matter For Your New York Claim

Understanding cause isn’t trivia. It’s leverage. In New York, the legal road to compensation depends on proof that someone acted carelessly or a product failed in a way that made harm foreseeable. 

That’s negligence and product liability in plain terms. When we identify the cause and lock it down with records, experts, and testimony, we set the foundation for real recovery, not guesswork.

Cause also guides who we sue and how we structure the case. If a design flaw contributed, the manufacturer belongs in the complaint. If a rushed schedule pushed a tired crew to fly, the operator’s policies take center stage. 

When multiple players share blame, CPLR Article 14-A lets a jury apportion responsibility across them. That helps protect your recovery if one defendant points fingers at another.

Timing ties into cause too. Investigations by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) take months. While those agencies work, we move to preserve evidence, request data, and issue letters that stop records from vanishing. 

Waiting for every report invites delay tactics. Acting early keeps the claim alive and your options open under New York’s deadlines.

Pilot Decisions That Spiral Into Disasters

Even great pilots face rough skies. Decisions under pressure can tilt a flight toward danger. You deserve to know how those choices get evaluated and why they matter to your claim.

• Rushed approaches and unstable landings. Pilots sometimes try to save a schedule and continue a shaky approach instead of going around. The energy is high, and the runway gets short fast. Unstable landings lead to runway excursions and hard impacts. Procedures exist to prevent this, and breaking them puts responsibility on the cockpit and the operator that set the tempo.
• Checklist shortcuts during critical phases. Takeoff and landing demand full attention, but pressure can nudge crews to move past items too quickly. Missed flap settings, incorrect autothrottle selections, or skipped cross-checks create a chain that ends badly. When records show incomplete compliance, the paper trail ties cause to conduct. That link strengthens liability against the airline’s training and oversight.
• Fatigue and decision drift over long duty days. Tired brains make slow choices. Reaction times slip, and small errors stack up. If logs show extended duty or minimum rest, fatigue becomes part of the liability picture. Policies that allow this pattern can implicate the operator, not just the pilot.
• Weather calls made too late. Thunderstorms, icing, and low visibility aren’t surprises in New York. Pushing into marginal conditions increases risk on every leg. A prudent diversion protects lives; a late decision invites harm. When we compare weather briefings to choices made, responsibility starts to come into focus.

Machines That Fail When You Need Them Most

Mechanical failures don’t care how careful you are. When a critical system quits, everything around it gets harder. In aviation, a single component can turn an ordinary flight into an emergency, which is why we chase maintenance records and part histories like our case depends on them, because it does.

First, we examine maintenance logs, inspection intervals, and shop reports. New York juries respond to timelines that show what was done, when it was done, and who signed off. If an airline stretched intervals, swapped parts from other aircraft, or deferred work beyond safe margins, those choices matter. They show priorities, and they explain how a known risk stayed in service.

Second, we look upstream to manufacturers. Some failures start at the drawing board. Other times, the part was fine, but the instructions weren’t. In product liability, design defects, manufacturing defects, and inadequate warnings are different beasts. We work with engineering experts to test theories, replicate failures, and translate the science into clear language a jury trusts.

Third, we connect the dots between failure and injury. The defense may argue the aircraft landed safely or that the event didn’t cause your harm. We contrast incident data with your medical records and flight dynamics to show how the failure created forces that injured you. That blend of technical proof and human impact builds credibility with adjusters and the court.

Air Traffic Control Breakdowns That Create Danger

Controllers are the quiet guardians of crowded skies. In New York’s airspace, they balance volume, weather, and speed minute by minute. When the system slips, collisions and close calls become real risks. If you were involved in an incident tied to controller errors, details in the record can be decisive.

• Conflicting clearances that cross paths. A single incorrect instruction can place two aircraft on intersecting tracks. Radar replays and audio tapes reveal where communications went wrong. When transcripts show mixed signals, accountability points toward the facility and its employer.
• Runway incursions that should never happen. Multiple aircraft or vehicles on the same surface create chaos. Signs, lighting, and human direction must work together. If a clearance was issued too early or without visual confirmation, the lapse becomes part of your claim. Those facts help anchor fault.
• Equipment outages without effective backups. Radar, ground movement detection, and data links reduce risk when they work. If a critical system was offline without proper contingency, we look at maintenance logs and notices to air missions. Failures in redundancy expose deeper problems.
• Staffing and fatigue inside the tower. Overloaded schedules and extended shifts affect performance. Duty rosters, overtime records, and internal memos can show a pattern that makes errors more likely. Systemic issues turn individual mistakes into institutional responsibility.

Weather And Risk Judgment That Push The Limits

Weather in New York changes fast. Snow squalls roll across the Hudson Valley. Summer storms blink on and off over Queens. Fog settles along the coast. Weather by itself isn’t negligence. The choices made around it are. When pilots and operators push into conditions that outmatch the aircraft or the plan, liability enters the conversation.

We start with briefings and updates. What did the crew know before pushback? What changed in flight? Comparing forecasts, pilot reports, and onboard weather tools against the decisions made helps the jury see whether risk was managed or ignored. If a safer route or delay would have reduced danger, that matters.

Next, we evaluate equipment. Anti-ice systems, weather radar, and visibility aids only help if they’re maintained and used. If maintenance records show deferred items or repeat write-ups, we connect those dots. A system that should have protected you but didn’t becomes a factor in liability.

Finally, our New York attorneys examine the operator’s culture. Written rules can look great, and real life can look different. If internal pressure emphasized on-time arrivals over safety margins, we surface that conflict through emails, training materials, and testimony. Culture often explains why a crew pressed on when a delay or diversion was the safer call.

Airline And Operator Negligence Behind the Curtain

So much of flight safety lives behind closed doors. Policies. Budgets. Staffing. When companies cut corners, risk rises for everyone on board. Your claim shines a light in that space, and the evidence we gather shows how choices stacked up to cause harm.

• Thin training that leaves gaps under stress. Simulator time and emergency procedures matter when alarms start chiming. If crews weren’t drilled on rare but predictable events, hesitation follows. Training records, syllabi, and instructor notes reveal what was emphasized and what wasn’t. That record helps a jury understand how preventable failures slipped through.
• Maintenance deferred past safe limits. Airlines track costs closely. Sometimes repairs move to later dates and later turns into too late. Deferred maintenance lists and component histories show patterns that speak louder than excuses. When a part fails after repeated pushes, the paper trail tells the story.
• Loading and balance errors that change how a plane flies. Weight and balance aren’t abstract numbers. They decide how the aircraft responds on takeoff and landing. If cargo was misloaded or fuel planning was sloppy, handling changes in ways crews may not anticipate. Load sheets and ground crew statements become key exhibits.
• Compliance problems with safety reporting. Regulations exist to surface hazards. When reports are ignored or minimized, the risk stays in the system. Audit results, corrective action plans, and correspondence with regulators reveal whether a company fixed issues or looked away. That contrast resonates in court.

Moving Forward With Proof That Holds Up

By now, you can see the pattern. Causes are rarely a single point. They’re chains. A choice here, a skipped step there, a part that wasn’t ready for the job. 

Our work is to break that chain into clear links and show exactly how each link led to your injuries. That’s how we move a claim from guesswork to proof in New York courts, within the bounds of CPLR Section 214(5) and, when necessary, EPTL Section 5-4.1. It’s careful, steady, and built to stand up to cross-examination.

We’ll keep you informed without burying you in jargon. You’ll know what we’re doing and why it matters. And when defense teams try to fog the record, we’ll clear it with facts. That’s how you regain control after a moment that felt completely out of your hands.

Protect What Matters Most After a Crash

You deserve answers, not noise. Causes can be complex, but your path forward shouldn’t be. At Horn Wright, LLP, our aviation team builds cases that connect evidence to accountability and accountability to results. When you’re ready, we’ll dig into your timeline, line up the records, and fight for the outcome that helps you move forward.