Preview
GARRY L. MONTANARI, State Bar No. 89790
WESLEY S. WENIG, State Bar No. 162351
JOHN H. MOON, State Bar No. 253811 Electronically
MICHAELIS, MONTANARI & JOHNSON, P.C. by Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo
4333 Park Terrace Dr. #100 ON 2/18/2021
Westlake Village, CA 91361
Telephone No.: (818) 865-0444 By. /s/ Una Finau
Deputy Clerk
Attorneys for defendants, STEPHEN MAGEE and
SAC AERO FLYING CLUB, INC.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
10
11
BRYAN TRUJILLO and CINDY Case No.: 18CIV01901
TRUJILLO, Honorable Nancy L. Fineman; Dept. 4
12
13
Plaintiffs, OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 5 TO
14
YS. EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY
REGARDING DEFENDANTS’
15 EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF
STEPHEN MAGEE, SAC AERO FLYING
16
CLUB, INC. and DOES 1 - 50, Date: March 8, 2021
Time: 1:30 p.m.
Defendants. Dept.: 4
17
18 Complaint filed: Aj pri 17, 2018
Trial Date:
19
20 I INTRODUCTION
21 Defendants’ pilot expert, Captain Barry Schiffis an ATP-rated pilot (Airline Transport Pilot)
22 with over 28,000 flight hours in 357 different aircraft. His curriculum vitae is attached hereto as
23 Exhibit A. Captain Schiff has experienced wind shear on numerous occasions throughout his career
24 as a pilot. In fact, Captain Schiff has also written an article about wind shear for the AOPA (Aircraft
25 Owners and Pilot Association), entitled “Wind Shear: The Mystery of the Vanishing Airspeed.”
26 Captain Schiff’s article is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Captain Schiff does not seek to opine on
27 wind shear as a meteorologist. Among other things, Captain Schiff will testify as an expert pilot
28 witness concerning encountering wind shear as a pilot and what wind shear can do to an aircraft
-l-
OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 5 TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY
EGARDING DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF
when it encounters such turbulence during flight and Mr. MAGEE’s specific encounter with the
turbulence at the time of the incident. As such, he is more than qualified to testify about STEPHEN
MAGEE’s encounter with turbulence during the flight which forms the basis of this litigation
because his testimony is clearly based on his special knowledge, skill, experience, training, and
education.
IL. BARRY SCHIFF IS QUALIFIED AS AN EXPERT PILOT
WITNESS TO TESTIFY REGARDING WIND SHEAR
Evidence Code section 801 provides, in pertinent part, as follows:
“Ifa witness is testifying as an expert, his testimony in the form of an
10 opinion is limited to such an opinion as is:
il +
12 “(b) Based on matter (including special knowledge, skill, experience,
13 training, and education) perceived by or personally known to the
14 witness or made known to him at or before the hearing whether or not
15 admissible, that is of a type that reasonably may be relied upon by an
16 expert in forming an opinion upon the subject to which his testimony
17 relates...”
18 Captain Barty Schiff will be testifying based upon his special knowledge, skill, experience,
19 training, and education as an ATP-rated pilot with more than 28,000 flight hours of experience. His
20 special knowledge is also demonstrated by authoring an article on wind shear and his experience in
ai encountering wind shear during his career as a pilot.
22 Captain Schiff may rely on the testimony of meteorologists Jim Purpura and Jan Null, both
23 of whom have testified as to the presence of wind shear at the site of the incident. He also may rely
24 on the National Transportation Safety Board’s (“NTSB”) weather study which includes achart based
25 on sounding data which shows the presence of low level wind shear at the Half Moon Bay Airport
26 at the time of the accident.
27 Plaintiffs’ suggestion that a pilot cannot testify as to the presence of wind shear during a
28 specific event, despite the fact that the pilot is not a meteorologist, is meritless. In Roberts v. Trans
-2-
OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO, 5 TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY
REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF
World Airlines (1964) 225 Cal.App.2d 344, the Court of Appeal held that a pilot who encountered
wind shear could testify about that encounter, and that he believed it was wind shear, and that such
testimony constitutes substantial evidence. The Court of Appeal stated, in pertinent part, as follows:
“Pointing out that Captain Gerow was an expert transport pilot whose
opinion was entitled to weight, defendant puts forth his opinion
testimony of a ‘shear wind’ or ‘jet stream’ as substantial evidence
which the jury, as trier of fact, could have accepted as an explanation
for the accident.”
(Id. at 353.)
10 Similarly, the Court of Appeal in Grotheer v. Escape Adventures, Inc. (2007) 14 Cal.App.5th
11 1283, the Court of Appeal relied upon testimony of the presence of wind shear during an incident
12 from a pilot expert witness:
13 “James Kitchel, Grotheer’s expert who has piloted balloons for over
14 25 years, concluded the cause of the crash landing was Gallagher’s
15 failure to maintain safe control over the ‘delta’ temperature [,J
16 anticipate changing pressure differentials [,] and counterbalance the
17 effects on the rate of descent.’ He disagreed with Gallagher’s false
18 lift theory, opining instead the balloon had likely simply experienced
19 a wind shear.”
20 (Grotheer, supra, 14 Cal.App.Sth at 1291.)
21 In addition to being qualified to testify about piloting encounters with wind shear turbulence,
22 Captain Schiffis permitted under Evidence Code section 801 (b) to rely upon the testimony or other
23 evidence provided by others to reach an opinion about whether Mr. MAGEE encountered wind shear
24 turbulence and whether his reaction
to it was reasonable. As stated above, such other matter Captain
28 Schiff could rely upon would be the testimony of Mr. MAGEE, the testimony of defense
26 meteorologist James Purpura or even plaintiffs’ meteorologist, Ernest Jan Null, who also concluded
a7 the presence of wind shear at the location of the incident. (Deposition of Ernest Jan Null, 26:13-15,
28 Exhibit Cc)
3-
OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 5 TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY
REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF
Il. THERE IS NO AUTHORITY FOR DISQUALIFYING AN
EXPERT WITNESS FOR BELIEVING A LAY WITNESS IS
CREDIBLE
Without citing any specific authority, plaintiffs take the position that Captain Schiff should
be precluded from offering any opinion that he will give the pilot, STEPHEN MAGEE, the benefit
of the doubt and then he tried to climb away but could not. It is not unreasonable to assume that a
pilot would want to avoid a crash which ultimately results in fatal injuries to his wife! Plaintiffs’
contention that Captain Schiff’s opinion of MAGEE as “credible” usurps the providence of the jury
is meritless - MAGEE is going to testify at this trial and the jury is free to reach their own opinion
10 as to his credibility. If Captain Schiff concludes that MAGEE is credible, and the jury does not, then
11 the jury will give less weight to the testimony of Captain Schiff, iL.e., weight, not admissibility.
12 The testimony of Captain Schiff cited in plaintiffs’ MIL No, 5 at page 5 comes from a line
13 of hypothetical questions raised by plaintiffs’ counsel concerning climbing when the aircraft is
a4 sinking (Decl, Montanari, Exhibit B, Schiff deposition, 59:7-16.) Captain Schiff does testify that
15 the pilot did attempt to do a “go around” because he added full power which is “a pretty clear sign
16 that he was attempting to go around.” (Decl. Montanari, Exhibit D, Schiff deposition, 61:13-20.)
17 When questioned why Captain Schiff believed MAGEE added full power, he referenced his
18 deposition testimony. (Decl. Montanari, Exhibit D, Schiff deposition, 61:21-62:2.) Captain Schiff
19 based his opinion on the actual testimony of MAGEE, more than a “benefit of the doubt.”
20 Tv. CONCLUSION
21 Based on the foregoing, the Court is requested to deny plaintiffs’ motion in limine No. 5 in
22 its entirety.
23
24 DATED: February 17, 2021 MICHAELIS, MONTANARI & JOHNSON
25
26 By
ARRY/LY. MONTANARI
27 Attorme for Defendants STEPHEN MAGEE
and SAC AERO FLYING CLUB, INC,
28 NAL751 7iplditriallMLL- new - pltfstoppositions\p-opp.mil.5. wpe
-4-
OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO, 5 TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY
REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF
PROOF OF SERVICE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
S.S.
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
1am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18
and not a party to the within action; my business address is 4333 Park Terrace Dr. #100, Westlake
Village, California 91361.
On February 17, 2021, I served the foregoing document described as OPPOSITION TO
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 5 TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY
REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF on the interested parties in this
action by placing a true copy thereof in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid in the
United States mail at Westlake Village, California, addressed as follows:
Michael S. Danko, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Shawn Miller, Esq.
10 Danko Meredith
333 Twin Dolphin Dr. #145
TL Redwood Shores, CA 94065
tel: (650) 453-3600; fax: (650) 394-8672
12 Email: mdanko@dankolaw.com; smiller@dankolaw.com
13 [x] (MAIL) I deposited such envelope addressed in the mail at Westlake Village, California,
The envelope was mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid. | am “readily familiar” with firm’s
14 practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. It is deposited with U.S. postal
service on that same day in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of party
15. served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than 1
day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit.
16
17 [xX] (ELECTRONIC TRANSFER) I caused all of the pages of the above-entitled document to
be sent to the recipient noted above via electronic transfer (email) at the respective email addresses
18 indicated above because of the COVID-19 virus.
19 f] (FEDERAL EXPRESS) I deposited such envelope addressed at the Federal Express office
located at Westlake Village, California. The envelope was mailed fully prepaid. I am “readily
20 familiar” with firm’s practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing with Federal
Express. It is deposited with the Westlake Village Federal Express service on that same day in the
21 ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of party served, service is presumed invalid
if cancellation date is more than 1 day after date of deposit for overnight mailing in affidavit.
22
23 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
is true and correct.
24
25 Executed on February 17, 2021 at Westlake Village, California.
26 CA eZ.
Barbara Haus: ‘CLS
27
28
GARRY L. MONTANARI, State Bar No. 89790
WESLEY S. WENIG, State Bar No. 162351
JOHN H. MOON, State Bar No. 253811
MICHAELIS, MONTANARI & JOHNSON, P.C.
4333 Park Terrace Dr. #100
Westlake Village, CA 91361
Telephone No.: (818) 865-0444
Attorneys for defendants, STEPHEN MAGEE and
SAC AERO FLYING CLUB, INC.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
10
11
BRYAN TRUJILLO and CINDY Case No.: 18CIV01901
TRUJILLO, Honorable Nancy L. Fineman; Dept. 4
12
13
Plaintiffs, DECLARATION OF GARRY L.
MONTANARI IN SUPPORT OF
14
VS. OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 5 TO
15 EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY
STEPHEN MAGEE, SAC AERO FLYING REGARDING DEFENDANTS’
16
CLUB, INC. and DOES 1 - 50, EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF
L?
Defendants. Date: March 8, 2021
Time: 1:30 p.m.
18 Dept.; 4
Complaint filed: April 17, 2018
19 Trial Date: TBD
20 I, GARRY L. MONTANARI, declare and state:
21 1 Tam an attorney at law duly licensed to practice before all the Courts of the State of
22 California. I am a partner with the law firm of Michaelis, Montanari & Johnson, counsel of record
23 for defendants STEPHEN MAGEE and SAC AERO FLYING CLUB, INC, I have personal
24 knowledge of the matters set forth below and could testify thereto in any proceeding in this litigation
25 2, Attached hereto, marked Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference, is a true and
26 correct copy of Captain Barry Schiff’s curriculum vitae.
27 3 Attached hereto, marked Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference, is a true and
28 correct copy an AOPA article entitled “Wind Shear: The Mystery of the Vanishing Airspeed”
-1-
DECL. OF GARRY L, MONTANARI IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO.
5 TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF
prepared by Captain Schiff.
4 Attached hereto, marked Exhibit C and incorporated herein by reference, is atrue and
correct copy a deposition excerpt of Ernest Jan Null, 26:13-15.
5 Attached hereto, marked Exhibit D and incorporated herein by reference, is atrue and
correct copy of excerpts of the deposition of Capital Barry Schiff.
Tdeclare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
is true and correct.
Executed this 17th day of February, 2021, at Westlake Village, California.
10
121
A ONTA’
12
13 NAI7517iplditrial\MIL- new - pltfS\oppositions\p-opp.mil.5.deo.wpd
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
22
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
DECL. OF GARRY L. MONTANARIIN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION INLIMINE NO.
5 TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF
EXHIBIT A
i RURRISULOM VEE 44
Capt. Barry Schiff
673 Trueno Avénus
Camantillo, CA 93010
Telephone; 805-987-4561
email’ barryschifi@earthlink.net
web site: www.barryschifi.com
Ce. 1O)38O “37 73
February 21, 2018
ey
AGRON CREDENTIALS shot =
AIRLINE TRANSPORT (AND COMMERCIAL) PILOT CERTIFICATES
‘Type Ratings (16): Boeing 747, 707, 720, 727, 757 & 767, Martin
202 & 404, Lockheed L-1011, Bushmaster 2000, Douglas DC-3,
and Ford Tri-Motor. SIC ratings: Boeing B-17, North American B-
25, and Bosittg 8-29.
Airplane: Single and Mult-Engine, Land.
Airplane: Single- and MultiEngine, Sea
Rotorcraft Helicopter and Gyroplane.
der, Lighter-Than-Alr; Free Balloor.
Instrument: Helicopter and Airplane
FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR CERTIFICATE WITH GOLD SEAL
Airplane: Single-engine and Multi-engine.
Instrument: Airplane and Helicopter.
Rotoreraft: Helicopter and Gyroplane.
Glider.
GROUND INSTRUCTOR CERTIFICATE: Basic, Advanced & Instrument
REMOTE PILOT (commercial drone} SERTIFICATE
AA-DESIGNATED PILOT EXAMINER: 1977-1990
FAA-DESIGNATED CHECK AIRMAN: Boeing 767,
FAA-DESIGNATED AVIATION SAFETY COUNSELOR (for life).
GALIFORNIA STATE TEACHING CREDENTIAL (Aerospace)
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE DEGREE (Professional Agronautics)
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
Also cettificated in Canada, israel, Jordan, and Mew Zealand with Letters
of Validation in Australia, France, and South Africa,
AVIATION EXPERIENCE . "
he
AIRLINE EXPERIENCE
Employed by TWA In 1964 and subsequently became qualified on the
Lockheed Constellation, Bosing 707, Boeing 727, Lockheed 1011, Boeing
747, Basing 757, and Boelng 767.
Served as an FAA-designated check airman on the Boeltig 767.
Performed maintenance and engingering-related flight testing.
Retired from TWA at age-60 on June 23, 1998, while jlying as a Bosing
757-767 captain in domestic and intermational operations.
GENERAL EXPERIENCE
28,000 hours in 357 types of aircraft. These include a Spirit of St Louls
replica, a P-51D Mustang, a 8-29 Superfortress, a B-52H Stratofortress,
and a high flight {na U.S. Air Force U-2 to above 75,000 feet.
Experience in experimental flighttesting of light aircraft with emphasis on
modifications and flight-data, acquisition.
Experience In transogeanic, polar, and iriternational operations {including
numerous flights around the world) in both large aircraft and small.
Operational experience with Loran (A and ©), Doppler, Inertial, Celestial;
Polar (grid), Pressure Pattern, Global Positioning (GPS), VLF/Oinega, and
Flight Matiagemant System navigation,
Experience in air taxi, corporate, and flight training activities.
Organized, established curricula for, and taught FAA-approved flight and
ground schouis for all levels of pilot cartfication.
Conducted numerous flight-safety saminars all over the world,
Served as chair and participant on numerous FAA-advisory cominitices.
Served as an aviation safely expert and consultant for numerous
agrospace organizations, insurance companies, and saw firms (1970 te
present).
HOnbER OF 6HVORY "AVIATION RECORDS... oer
® SPEED AROUND A 500-KM CLOSED-CIRCUIT COURSE
Glass C4-d, Group | Alrerart
Aerostar 607A - January 22, 1975
SPEED AROUND A 100-KM CLOSED-CIRCUIT COURSE
Class C1-b, Group | Aircraft
Sial-Marehetti SF.260 - March 29, 1969
TIME-TO-CLIMB TO 6,000 METERS
Class G1.d, Group | Aircraft
Cessna Turbo 310R ~ August 2, 1978
SPEED OVER A RECOGNIZED COURSE
Glass C-1,6, Group | Aircraft
Aera Commander 200 ~ April 90, 1967
LOS ANGELES TO HONOLULU (speed)
Lockheed 1014 — October 10, 1989
i, AND. SBATIONAL RESORHS [COMMERCIAIRAL RGUTEB)
(7 1
® WICHITA TO AMARILLO (Boeing 727)
o LOS ANGELES TQ KANSAS GITY (Boeing 727)
e ALBUQUERQUE TO CHICAGO (Boaing 727)
* PHOENIX TO AMARILLO (Boeing 727)
‘The USSR and France had previously held the first two world records,
respectively,
7
IONCRSAND AWARDS pantie , rhe 4
INDUGTED Into the LIVING LEGENDS OF AVIATION, 2042
INDUCTED inte the CALIFORNIA AVIATION HALL OF FAME, 2018
AVIATION JOURNALIST OF THE YEAR AWARD, 2003
General Aviation Category (spongored by Aéro-Glub de France)
DOCTOR OF AERONAUTICAL SCIENCE, 1989
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
DISTINGUISHED STATESMAN OF AVIATION AWARD, 2004
National Aeronautic Assoclation
INDUCTED Into the NATIONAL FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR HALL OF FAME, 2003
INDUCTED Into the AVIATION HALL OF FAME OF NEW JERSEY, 2002
ALFRED AND CONSTANCE WOLF AVIATION FUND AWARD, 1992
LAWRENCE F. SHARPLES PERPETUAL AWARD, 1990
Ajrcraft Owners and Pilots Association
1QUIS BLERIOT AIR MEDAL, 1969"
Fédération Aéronautique internationale, France
U.S. CONGRESSIONAL COMMENDATION, 1975
FLIGHT DECK MAN OF THE YEAR, 1968
Trans World Airlines
GOLD PROFICIENCY AWARD, 1982
Federal Aero Club of Switzeriand
JOURNALISM AWARDS (10)
Aviation/Space Writers Association
COMMENDATIONS
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, 1975
Santa Monioa (CA) Chamber of Gornmerce, 1982
SPECIAL AWARDS (4), Federal Aviation Administration
PRESIDENT’S AWARD, 1987, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association
WRIGHT BROTHERS’ MASTER PILOT AWARD, FAA, 2005
ARVOEES neha J
1 *
Author of more than 1,700 magazine articles regarding flight safety,
operational procedures and techniques, and aeronautical theory,
Some of these articlas Involve the development of original concepts,
procedures, and techniques that received considerable international and
industry attention, .
Many were translated Into other languages and published by various
governments, military services, and airlines (foreign and domestic).
These articles have been published in 112 publications, which include
e The Airline Pitot
° AOPA Piast
Boeing Airliner
Business and Commercial Aviation
Combat Crew (USAF)
Fileger (Germany)
Flight Deck (British Alnways)
Flight International (England)
Flight Safety (New Zealand Government)
Flying
interceptor (USAF)
Las Angeles Times
Professional Pilot
U.S, Air Foree Flying Safety
U.S, Army Aviation Digest
Vector (New Zealand Civil Aeronautics Administration}
Washington Post
re +
BOOKS PUBLISHED: be .
® Basic Aviation Science (scheduled for publication In 2048).
Dream Aircraft: The Most Fascinating Alreraft I've Ever Flown
Aviation Supplies and Academics (ASA)—2008
Test Pilot—t,001 Things You Thought You Knew About Aviation
Aviation Supplies and Academics (ASA)--2004
The Profigient Plot, Vokime 7
The Proficient Pilot, Voluine 2
The Proficient Pilot, Volume3
Aviation Suppiles and Academics (ASA)—1984, 1995, 1997
Flight 902 is Down! (a novel)
St. Martin’s Preas—1 982
The Vatican Target (a novel)
St. Martin's Press—1979
Flying (A Golden Science Guide)
Wester Publishing Company—1974
The Boeing 707
Aero, Publishers—1967
All About Flying
Aero Products Research—1964
Basic Metearolagy
Aero Progress—1963
The Pilot's Digest
Agro Progress—1962
Proficlent Flying § fl, and lil (full-length videos)
ABC’s Wide World of Flying, Aviation Media, and ASA.
PLUS THE FOLLOWING TRAINING PUBLICATIONS (1959-1863)
On Course, On the Glide Path—instrument Flight— Tower Communications —
Log Angeles to New York, VFR ~ ATG Clears — Theory of Flight— Weather for
Pilots —~ in Radar Contact -- Bustor BT (a children’s racording)
EES1A AICHDENSIV AIRSPACE:
innovated and developed the cancept in 1991 that provides guidance for VFR
pilots through complex, high-denalty alrspace. The assoclated charts were,
published by Jeppesen Sanderson. A legislative bill, H.R. 3243, was written by
then-Oklahoma representative, now Senator James M. Inhofe, which mandated
the adoption of this concept by the Federal Aviation Administration.
BRACE RUIGHT: ISRAEL TOUORDAN. "| a
itt
, xe
Conceived, organized, and led the first flight of any kind ever allowed between
Israel and Jordan. This flight consisted of 34 light airplanes and had the direct
and personal approvals of H.M. King Hussein and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak
Rabin—May 23-24, 1995.
wT
ADOIONAL CREDITS Fo 1s © Va
« Contributing Editor and Columnist AOPA Pilot, 1975-present.
o National Mentor for AOPA’s Project Pilot 1994- 1995.
Technical Advisor, Writer, and Performer:
ABC's Wide World of Flying, 1987-1992.
Aviation Safety Expert nd Consultant for the print and electronic media,
Columnist: Air Progress (1974-1975), Private Pilot (1985 ~1969), and
AOPA Pitot (1994-current). .
Alr Gartier Editor: Jeppesen Sanderson Yearbooks, 1975 -1980,
Technical Directer/Advisor for thetelevision and motion picture industry.
U.S. Correspondent:
Australian Flying, and Pllot and Light Aeroplane (U..), 1965 -1968"
Regional Editor: TWA Filte Facts, 1986 -1970
Product development, preparation of marketing literature, product Instruction
manuals, and technical manuals for prominent aerospace firms.
> TT
RROGRESS 4 anc b
Founded and became president of Aero-Progress, Inc. in 1959 (age 21)
Concelved, developed, wrote, and published a series of unique and innovative
educational products and training aids for pilots. These were marketed
commercially and received International recognition. The product line was
purchased by the Times-Mirror Corporation for its subsidiary, Jeppesen
Sanderson, In 1963, Aero-Progress was dissolved at that time.
%
eke NEI AVIATION AOVORATHALTIIGT * 8
Active in numerous’ general aviation causes, Has bean Influential, for example, in
preventing the closure of tha Sants Monica Munielpal Alrpost (a major reliever
alrport In the |.os Angeles Basin) and providing airspace access to yenoral
aviation alrcraft subsequent fo the emergency closure of the VFR Corridor
thraugh the Los Angeles Class 8 airspace
:
wae rey
SINTIONS peat andl presen!) -™ ua x ,
aut
Society of Experlmental Test Pilots
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Fellow of the Royal Aeranautloal Society (FRA@S).
Society of Aviation and Flight Educators.
Airline Pilots Association (ALPA),
National Association of Flight Instructors.
international Society of Aiv Safety investigators,
Board of Advisors, Daparhnent of Aeronautics
San Jose State University 1980-1995).
Board of Advisore, AOPA Air Safety Foundatlon (1990-1996).
Chairman of the Board (22 years) and President (3 years),
Santa Monica Airport Association.
Institate of Navigation
EXHIBIT B
as parse = russes ene meen suse 253 prea ges see BR ara8: css
,
zt
Na oe)
Cla
U:25./¢f
Ys IN SH
THE MYSTERY
OF THE
VANISHING
AIRSPEED
by BARRY SCHIFF / AOPA 110803
i
| Figure 1
es SSE)
tim On June 24, 1975, an Eastern Airlines Boeing 727
crashed on short final approach to New York's JFK Interna- Sar
xu, 9
earentee
—
tional Airport. More than 100 passengers perished, making
this one of the worst air disasters in U.S. history.
Based on the initially available facts, it appears that wind (a mnsreES = a GTS
shear was an influential factor in the accident, if not the ‘GA0UND SPEED = 135 Knots
primary cause.
rf
Because of this accident’s spectacular nature, considerable rr
Ri, attention is suddenly being focused on wind shear. It is almost a
ge shameful that a disaster of this magnitude was required to
attract industry-wide attention to a phenomenon with which
¥, pilots have always had to cope.
Air carrier aircraft, of course, are not the exclusive victims
of this invisible hazard. General aviation aircraft also fall annoying power and attitude corrections to complete lay af
prey to this misunderstood, underestimated menace. Hun- control
fi
ba dreds, if not thousands, of accidents presumably caused by Wind shear is a unique hazard not only because it is f
pilot error were direct or indirect results of wind-shear en- quently undetectable, but because so many pilots are un ie
counters. It is imperative, therefore, that pilots become famil- to acknowledge the threat. They consider it incredible that a
iar with the potentially lethal effects of wind shear and the change in wind velocity can alter airspeed; it is contrary to
various conditions during which these effects are most likely their earliest lessons in Hight.
to occur. “Airspeed : they were taught, “is determined solely by
Simply stated, wind shear is a variation in wind velocity variations in aircraft attitude, configuration and power ser
(speed and/or direction) that occurs over a relatively short ting; wind affects only track and ground speed.”
distance. Airspeed is affected when an airplane is flown from Unfortunately, this simplistic axiorn is but the tip of
one wind condition—through a wind shear—into another another iceberg and applies only when the wind is constant or
wind condition in less time than ground speed can adjust to changes gradually. Unless a pilot examines what lies beneatit
the new environment, The consequences can range from the surface, he is liable to fly unwittingly into the jaws of
30 THE AOPA PILOT | NOVEMBER 1975
wa
fs aE Bea HN ih das
ats ey rhe oh
a “i tn
-4
what is coming to be regarded as one of aviation's most in- « Just how long it takes to recover lost airspeed was dvama-
sidious killers. 1 tized in a USAF yeport by Major C. L, Hazeltine. He demon-
‘The subject is seldom taught in ground school because in- strated that if a given aircraft, maintaining a constant alti-
structors either don’t want to complicate a student pildt’s tude and power setting, encounters an abrupt 20-knot loss (due
cgmprehension of the basic airspeed/ground-speed relation- to wind shear), recovery of only 10 knots would require 78
ship or don’t fully comprehend wind-shear fundamentals, séconds; récovery of 16 latiets would require 176 seconds.
To understand wind shear is to recognize that an airplane Adding power and/ox sacrificing altitude reduces recovery
has inertia and as u xesult resists a change in ground speed. time significantly aiid points out the dlarming need for pilots
This is best stated by paraphrasing Sir Isaac Newton, the to bé particularly alert for a Jow-level wind shear when on
brilliant English physicist who developed the inescapable firial approach or whan climbing out at marginal airspeeds.
laws of motion: An alrevaft in flight at a given ground speed ‘The problem’ of aizspeed recovery is critical if the airspeed
tends to remain at the same ground speed unless acted upon loss results in the drag vise associated with flight behind the
by an exterior force. power curve, , When required power and altitude may not be
f: ws available,
(In reality, the airspeed lose is not quite as large as shown
Figure 2 in Figure 1 because some acceleration occurs while the air-
craft crosses the shear line, depending on the line’s width,) -
ieh Would the pilot in Figure 1 have any warring bout the
ep
Sx
ampending airspeed loss? In this case, yes. When two op:
CEN posing. air currents rub shoulders, there is bound to be some
frictional turbulence, The degree of turbulence increases in
proportion to the change in wind velocity and decreases in
proportion to the width of the shear line, For similar reasons,
the air surrounding a jet stream. is often turbulent, even
~IS
VEY)
though a smooth ride can be had within, the core,
The aixcraft in Figure 1 encountered a rapidly decreasing
headwind, which has the same effect as an increasing tail-
So Oo HH o. wind: an airspeed loss. If the direction of the aircraft is
yeversed, so that it flies ‘into an increasing headwind (or
fe SraT WG
S10" 2 Pisces)
[Pie | decreasing tailwind), airspeed will increase when the shear
line is crossed, The theoretical gain is 26 knots.
‘The affect of wind shear ‘s similar to what.happens to a
i
th
hobo who jumps from a bridge to the top of an express train
passing below, As the man leaves the bridge, his ground speed
An application of this is illustrated in Figure 1. A tem- (orward motion) is nil, The train, hqwever, is clipping along
perature invérsion overlies a coastal city from the ground to at 60 mph. When the hitchhiker first touches down, it should
2,000 feet, Within the inversion, the wind is westerly at 5 be obvious that he cannot remain on the roof at the point of
knots. Immediately above, the wind is easterly at 20 knots initial contact. His inertia prevents him from being accelerated
(not an unusual situation), The narrow band separating the so rapidly, from 0 mph to 60 mph, Instead, the hapless hob
two “als masses” is called a “shear line.” will fall and roll backwards with respect to the train, Bventu-
An aireraft descending toward the shear has an airspeed of ally, the friction of the train acting on his body will accelerate
120 knots; its ground speed is obviously 100 knots. This him to 60 mph. Whether he survives to realize this ts ques-
ground speed represents aircraft momentum with respect to tionable.
f the earth and, according to Newton's First Law of Physics, If the unfortunate chap were to misjudge and jump imme-
ig the quantity that resists change. diately in front of the train, the locomotive would force his
As the aircraft penetrates the shear line and enters the in- body to adapt quite rapidly to the speed of the train, But the
version, ground speed will increase, but not instantly. Because acceleration would exert such overwhelming and crushing
of aircraft inertia, ground speed after crossing the narrow G-loads that the Hobe would instantly regret not having pur-
shear line is very nearly what it was earlier, 100. knots. chased a ticket and boarded the train under more comfortable
But since the alreraft is now under the influence of a cireumstances.
5-knot tailwind, something has to give, That something, un- For those who cannot correlate the hobo and the train with
fortunately, is airspeed, which reduces from 120 knots (above an aircraft in flight, consider this extreme, but illustrative,
the shear line) to 95 knots (below the shear Hine), a net and
Preview
GARRY L. MONTANARI, State Bar No. 89790 WESLEY S. WENIG, State Bar No. 162351 JOHN H. MOON, State Bar No. 253811 Electronically MICHAELIS, MONTANARI & JOHNSON, P.C. by Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo 4333 Park Terrace Dr. #100 ON 2/18/2021 Westlake Village, CA 91361 Telephone No.: (818) 865-0444 By. /s/ Una Finau Deputy Clerk Attorneys for defendants, STEPHEN MAGEE and SAC AERO FLYING CLUB, INC. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 10 11 BRYAN TRUJILLO and CINDY Case No.: 18CIV01901 TRUJILLO, Honorable Nancy L. Fineman; Dept. 4 12 13 Plaintiffs, OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 5 TO 14 YS. EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ 15 EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF STEPHEN MAGEE, SAC AERO FLYING 16 CLUB, INC. and DOES 1 - 50, Date: March 8, 2021 Time: 1:30 p.m. Defendants. Dept.: 4 17 18 Complaint filed: Aj pri 17, 2018 Trial Date: 19 20 I INTRODUCTION 21 Defendants’ pilot expert, Captain Barry Schiffis an ATP-rated pilot (Airline Transport Pilot) 22 with over 28,000 flight hours in 357 different aircraft. His curriculum vitae is attached hereto as 23 Exhibit A. Captain Schiff has experienced wind shear on numerous occasions throughout his career 24 as a pilot. In fact, Captain Schiff has also written an article about wind shear for the AOPA (Aircraft 25 Owners and Pilot Association), entitled “Wind Shear: The Mystery of the Vanishing Airspeed.” 26 Captain Schiff’s article is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Captain Schiff does not seek to opine on 27 wind shear as a meteorologist. Among other things, Captain Schiff will testify as an expert pilot 28 witness concerning encountering wind shear as a pilot and what wind shear can do to an aircraft -l- OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 5 TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY EGARDING DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF when it encounters such turbulence during flight and Mr. MAGEE’s specific encounter with the turbulence at the time of the incident. As such, he is more than qualified to testify about STEPHEN MAGEE’s encounter with turbulence during the flight which forms the basis of this litigation because his testimony is clearly based on his special knowledge, skill, experience, training, and education. IL. BARRY SCHIFF IS QUALIFIED AS AN EXPERT PILOT WITNESS TO TESTIFY REGARDING WIND SHEAR Evidence Code section 801 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: “Ifa witness is testifying as an expert, his testimony in the form of an 10 opinion is limited to such an opinion as is: il + 12 “(b) Based on matter (including special knowledge, skill, experience, 13 training, and education) perceived by or personally known to the 14 witness or made known to him at or before the hearing whether or not 15 admissible, that is of a type that reasonably may be relied upon by an 16 expert in forming an opinion upon the subject to which his testimony 17 relates...” 18 Captain Barty Schiff will be testifying based upon his special knowledge, skill, experience, 19 training, and education as an ATP-rated pilot with more than 28,000 flight hours of experience. His 20 special knowledge is also demonstrated by authoring an article on wind shear and his experience in ai encountering wind shear during his career as a pilot. 22 Captain Schiff may rely on the testimony of meteorologists Jim Purpura and Jan Null, both 23 of whom have testified as to the presence of wind shear at the site of the incident. He also may rely 24 on the National Transportation Safety Board’s (“NTSB”) weather study which includes achart based 25 on sounding data which shows the presence of low level wind shear at the Half Moon Bay Airport 26 at the time of the accident. 27 Plaintiffs’ suggestion that a pilot cannot testify as to the presence of wind shear during a 28 specific event, despite the fact that the pilot is not a meteorologist, is meritless. In Roberts v. Trans -2- OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO, 5 TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF World Airlines (1964) 225 Cal.App.2d 344, the Court of Appeal held that a pilot who encountered wind shear could testify about that encounter, and that he believed it was wind shear, and that such testimony constitutes substantial evidence. The Court of Appeal stated, in pertinent part, as follows: “Pointing out that Captain Gerow was an expert transport pilot whose opinion was entitled to weight, defendant puts forth his opinion testimony of a ‘shear wind’ or ‘jet stream’ as substantial evidence which the jury, as trier of fact, could have accepted as an explanation for the accident.” (Id. at 353.) 10 Similarly, the Court of Appeal in Grotheer v. Escape Adventures, Inc. (2007) 14 Cal.App.5th 11 1283, the Court of Appeal relied upon testimony of the presence of wind shear during an incident 12 from a pilot expert witness: 13 “James Kitchel, Grotheer’s expert who has piloted balloons for over 14 25 years, concluded the cause of the crash landing was Gallagher’s 15 failure to maintain safe control over the ‘delta’ temperature [,J 16 anticipate changing pressure differentials [,] and counterbalance the 17 effects on the rate of descent.’ He disagreed with Gallagher’s false 18 lift theory, opining instead the balloon had likely simply experienced 19 a wind shear.” 20 (Grotheer, supra, 14 Cal.App.Sth at 1291.) 21 In addition to being qualified to testify about piloting encounters with wind shear turbulence, 22 Captain Schiffis permitted under Evidence Code section 801 (b) to rely upon the testimony or other 23 evidence provided by others to reach an opinion about whether Mr. MAGEE encountered wind shear 24 turbulence and whether his reaction to it was reasonable. As stated above, such other matter Captain 28 Schiff could rely upon would be the testimony of Mr. MAGEE, the testimony of defense 26 meteorologist James Purpura or even plaintiffs’ meteorologist, Ernest Jan Null, who also concluded a7 the presence of wind shear at the location of the incident. (Deposition of Ernest Jan Null, 26:13-15, 28 Exhibit Cc) 3- OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 5 TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF Il. THERE IS NO AUTHORITY FOR DISQUALIFYING AN EXPERT WITNESS FOR BELIEVING A LAY WITNESS IS CREDIBLE Without citing any specific authority, plaintiffs take the position that Captain Schiff should be precluded from offering any opinion that he will give the pilot, STEPHEN MAGEE, the benefit of the doubt and then he tried to climb away but could not. It is not unreasonable to assume that a pilot would want to avoid a crash which ultimately results in fatal injuries to his wife! Plaintiffs’ contention that Captain Schiff’s opinion of MAGEE as “credible” usurps the providence of the jury is meritless - MAGEE is going to testify at this trial and the jury is free to reach their own opinion 10 as to his credibility. If Captain Schiff concludes that MAGEE is credible, and the jury does not, then 11 the jury will give less weight to the testimony of Captain Schiff, iL.e., weight, not admissibility. 12 The testimony of Captain Schiff cited in plaintiffs’ MIL No, 5 at page 5 comes from a line 13 of hypothetical questions raised by plaintiffs’ counsel concerning climbing when the aircraft is a4 sinking (Decl, Montanari, Exhibit B, Schiff deposition, 59:7-16.) Captain Schiff does testify that 15 the pilot did attempt to do a “go around” because he added full power which is “a pretty clear sign 16 that he was attempting to go around.” (Decl. Montanari, Exhibit D, Schiff deposition, 61:13-20.) 17 When questioned why Captain Schiff believed MAGEE added full power, he referenced his 18 deposition testimony. (Decl. Montanari, Exhibit D, Schiff deposition, 61:21-62:2.) Captain Schiff 19 based his opinion on the actual testimony of MAGEE, more than a “benefit of the doubt.” 20 Tv. CONCLUSION 21 Based on the foregoing, the Court is requested to deny plaintiffs’ motion in limine No. 5 in 22 its entirety. 23 24 DATED: February 17, 2021 MICHAELIS, MONTANARI & JOHNSON 25 26 By ARRY/LY. MONTANARI 27 Attorme for Defendants STEPHEN MAGEE and SAC AERO FLYING CLUB, INC, 28 NAL751 7iplditriallMLL- new - pltfstoppositions\p-opp.mil.5. wpe -4- OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO, 5 TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF PROOF OF SERVICE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) S.S. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) 1am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 4333 Park Terrace Dr. #100, Westlake Village, California 91361. On February 17, 2021, I served the foregoing document described as OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 5 TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF on the interested parties in this action by placing a true copy thereof in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid in the United States mail at Westlake Village, California, addressed as follows: Michael S. Danko, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Shawn Miller, Esq. 10 Danko Meredith 333 Twin Dolphin Dr. #145 TL Redwood Shores, CA 94065 tel: (650) 453-3600; fax: (650) 394-8672 12 Email: mdanko@dankolaw.com; smiller@dankolaw.com 13 [x] (MAIL) I deposited such envelope addressed in the mail at Westlake Village, California, The envelope was mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid. | am “readily familiar” with firm’s 14 practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. It is deposited with U.S. postal service on that same day in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of party 15. served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than 1 day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. 16 17 [xX] (ELECTRONIC TRANSFER) I caused all of the pages of the above-entitled document to be sent to the recipient noted above via electronic transfer (email) at the respective email addresses 18 indicated above because of the COVID-19 virus. 19 f] (FEDERAL EXPRESS) I deposited such envelope addressed at the Federal Express office located at Westlake Village, California. The envelope was mailed fully prepaid. I am “readily 20 familiar” with firm’s practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing with Federal Express. It is deposited with the Westlake Village Federal Express service on that same day in the 21 ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if cancellation date is more than 1 day after date of deposit for overnight mailing in affidavit. 22 23 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. 24 25 Executed on February 17, 2021 at Westlake Village, California. 26 CA eZ. Barbara Haus: ‘CLS 27 28 GARRY L. MONTANARI, State Bar No. 89790 WESLEY S. WENIG, State Bar No. 162351 JOHN H. MOON, State Bar No. 253811 MICHAELIS, MONTANARI & JOHNSON, P.C. 4333 Park Terrace Dr. #100 Westlake Village, CA 91361 Telephone No.: (818) 865-0444 Attorneys for defendants, STEPHEN MAGEE and SAC AERO FLYING CLUB, INC. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 10 11 BRYAN TRUJILLO and CINDY Case No.: 18CIV01901 TRUJILLO, Honorable Nancy L. Fineman; Dept. 4 12 13 Plaintiffs, DECLARATION OF GARRY L. MONTANARI IN SUPPORT OF 14 VS. OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 5 TO 15 EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY STEPHEN MAGEE, SAC AERO FLYING REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ 16 CLUB, INC. and DOES 1 - 50, EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF L? Defendants. Date: March 8, 2021 Time: 1:30 p.m. 18 Dept.; 4 Complaint filed: April 17, 2018 19 Trial Date: TBD 20 I, GARRY L. MONTANARI, declare and state: 21 1 Tam an attorney at law duly licensed to practice before all the Courts of the State of 22 California. I am a partner with the law firm of Michaelis, Montanari & Johnson, counsel of record 23 for defendants STEPHEN MAGEE and SAC AERO FLYING CLUB, INC, I have personal 24 knowledge of the matters set forth below and could testify thereto in any proceeding in this litigation 25 2, Attached hereto, marked Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference, is a true and 26 correct copy of Captain Barry Schiff’s curriculum vitae. 27 3 Attached hereto, marked Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference, is a true and 28 correct copy an AOPA article entitled “Wind Shear: The Mystery of the Vanishing Airspeed” -1- DECL. OF GARRY L, MONTANARI IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 5 TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF prepared by Captain Schiff. 4 Attached hereto, marked Exhibit C and incorporated herein by reference, is atrue and correct copy a deposition excerpt of Ernest Jan Null, 26:13-15. 5 Attached hereto, marked Exhibit D and incorporated herein by reference, is atrue and correct copy of excerpts of the deposition of Capital Barry Schiff. Tdeclare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 17th day of February, 2021, at Westlake Village, California. 10 121 A ONTA’ 12 13 NAI7517iplditrial\MIL- new - pltfS\oppositions\p-opp.mil.5.deo.wpd 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- DECL. OF GARRY L. MONTANARIIN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION INLIMINE NO. 5 TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TESTIMONY REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT BARRY SCHIFF EXHIBIT A i RURRISULOM VEE 44 Capt. Barry Schiff 673 Trueno Avénus Camantillo, CA 93010 Telephone; 805-987-4561 email’ barryschifi@earthlink.net web site: www.barryschifi.com Ce. 1O)38O “37 73 February 21, 2018 ey AGRON CREDENTIALS shot = AIRLINE TRANSPORT (AND COMMERCIAL) PILOT CERTIFICATES ‘Type Ratings (16): Boeing 747, 707, 720, 727, 757 & 767, Martin 202 & 404, Lockheed L-1011, Bushmaster 2000, Douglas DC-3, and Ford Tri-Motor. SIC ratings: Boeing B-17, North American B- 25, and Bosittg 8-29. Airplane: Single and Mult-Engine, Land. Airplane: Single- and MultiEngine, Sea Rotorcraft Helicopter and Gyroplane. der, Lighter-Than-Alr; Free Balloor. Instrument: Helicopter and Airplane FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR CERTIFICATE WITH GOLD SEAL Airplane: Single-engine and Multi-engine. Instrument: Airplane and Helicopter. Rotoreraft: Helicopter and Gyroplane. Glider. GROUND INSTRUCTOR CERTIFICATE: Basic, Advanced & Instrument REMOTE PILOT (commercial drone} SERTIFICATE AA-DESIGNATED PILOT EXAMINER: 1977-1990 FAA-DESIGNATED CHECK AIRMAN: Boeing 767, FAA-DESIGNATED AVIATION SAFETY COUNSELOR (for life). GALIFORNIA STATE TEACHING CREDENTIAL (Aerospace) BACHELOR OF SCIENCE DEGREE (Professional Agronautics) Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Also cettificated in Canada, israel, Jordan, and Mew Zealand with Letters of Validation in Australia, France, and South Africa, AVIATION EXPERIENCE . " he AIRLINE EXPERIENCE Employed by TWA In 1964 and subsequently became qualified on the Lockheed Constellation, Bosing 707, Boeing 727, Lockheed 1011, Boeing 747, Basing 757, and Boelng 767. Served as an FAA-designated check airman on the Boeltig 767. Performed maintenance and engingering-related flight testing. Retired from TWA at age-60 on June 23, 1998, while jlying as a Bosing 757-767 captain in domestic and intermational operations. GENERAL EXPERIENCE 28,000 hours in 357 types of aircraft. These include a Spirit of St Louls replica, a P-51D Mustang, a 8-29 Superfortress, a B-52H Stratofortress, and a high flight {na U.S. Air Force U-2 to above 75,000 feet. Experience in experimental flighttesting of light aircraft with emphasis on modifications and flight-data, acquisition. Experience In transogeanic, polar, and iriternational operations {including numerous flights around the world) in both large aircraft and small. Operational experience with Loran (A and ©), Doppler, Inertial, Celestial; Polar (grid), Pressure Pattern, Global Positioning (GPS), VLF/Oinega, and Flight Matiagemant System navigation, Experience in air taxi, corporate, and flight training activities. Organized, established curricula for, and taught FAA-approved flight and ground schouis for all levels of pilot cartfication. Conducted numerous flight-safety saminars all over the world, Served as chair and participant on numerous FAA-advisory cominitices. Served as an aviation safely expert and consultant for numerous agrospace organizations, insurance companies, and saw firms (1970 te present). HOnbER OF 6HVORY "AVIATION RECORDS... oer ® SPEED AROUND A 500-KM CLOSED-CIRCUIT COURSE Glass C4-d, Group | Alrerart Aerostar 607A - January 22, 1975 SPEED AROUND A 100-KM CLOSED-CIRCUIT COURSE Class C1-b, Group | Aircraft Sial-Marehetti SF.260 - March 29, 1969 TIME-TO-CLIMB TO 6,000 METERS Class G1.d, Group | Aircraft Cessna Turbo 310R ~ August 2, 1978 SPEED OVER A RECOGNIZED COURSE Glass C-1,6, Group | Aircraft Aera Commander 200 ~ April 90, 1967 LOS ANGELES TO HONOLULU (speed) Lockheed 1014 — October 10, 1989 i, AND. SBATIONAL RESORHS [COMMERCIAIRAL RGUTEB) (7 1 ® WICHITA TO AMARILLO (Boeing 727) o LOS ANGELES TQ KANSAS GITY (Boeing 727) e ALBUQUERQUE TO CHICAGO (Boaing 727) * PHOENIX TO AMARILLO (Boeing 727) ‘The USSR and France had previously held the first two world records, respectively, 7 IONCRSAND AWARDS pantie , rhe 4 INDUGTED Into the LIVING LEGENDS OF AVIATION, 2042 INDUCTED inte the CALIFORNIA AVIATION HALL OF FAME, 2018 AVIATION JOURNALIST OF THE YEAR AWARD, 2003 General Aviation Category (spongored by Aéro-Glub de France) DOCTOR OF AERONAUTICAL SCIENCE, 1989 Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University DISTINGUISHED STATESMAN OF AVIATION AWARD, 2004 National Aeronautic Assoclation INDUCTED Into the NATIONAL FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR HALL OF FAME, 2003 INDUCTED Into the AVIATION HALL OF FAME OF NEW JERSEY, 2002 ALFRED AND CONSTANCE WOLF AVIATION FUND AWARD, 1992 LAWRENCE F. SHARPLES PERPETUAL AWARD, 1990 Ajrcraft Owners and Pilots Association 1QUIS BLERIOT AIR MEDAL, 1969" Fédération Aéronautique internationale, France U.S. CONGRESSIONAL COMMENDATION, 1975 FLIGHT DECK MAN OF THE YEAR, 1968 Trans World Airlines GOLD PROFICIENCY AWARD, 1982 Federal Aero Club of Switzeriand JOURNALISM AWARDS (10) Aviation/Space Writers Association COMMENDATIONS Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, 1975 Santa Monioa (CA) Chamber of Gornmerce, 1982 SPECIAL AWARDS (4), Federal Aviation Administration PRESIDENT’S AWARD, 1987, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association WRIGHT BROTHERS’ MASTER PILOT AWARD, FAA, 2005 ARVOEES neha J 1 * Author of more than 1,700 magazine articles regarding flight safety, operational procedures and techniques, and aeronautical theory, Some of these articlas Involve the development of original concepts, procedures, and techniques that received considerable international and industry attention, . Many were translated Into other languages and published by various governments, military services, and airlines (foreign and domestic). These articles have been published in 112 publications, which include e The Airline Pitot ° AOPA Piast Boeing Airliner Business and Commercial Aviation Combat Crew (USAF) Fileger (Germany) Flight Deck (British Alnways) Flight International (England) Flight Safety (New Zealand Government) Flying interceptor (USAF) Las Angeles Times Professional Pilot U.S, Air Foree Flying Safety U.S, Army Aviation Digest Vector (New Zealand Civil Aeronautics Administration} Washington Post re + BOOKS PUBLISHED: be . ® Basic Aviation Science (scheduled for publication In 2048). Dream Aircraft: The Most Fascinating Alreraft I've Ever Flown Aviation Supplies and Academics (ASA)—2008 Test Pilot—t,001 Things You Thought You Knew About Aviation Aviation Supplies and Academics (ASA)--2004 The Profigient Plot, Vokime 7 The Proficient Pilot, Voluine 2 The Proficient Pilot, Volume3 Aviation Suppiles and Academics (ASA)—1984, 1995, 1997 Flight 902 is Down! (a novel) St. Martin’s Preas—1 982 The Vatican Target (a novel) St. Martin's Press—1979 Flying (A Golden Science Guide) Wester Publishing Company—1974 The Boeing 707 Aero, Publishers—1967 All About Flying Aero Products Research—1964 Basic Metearolagy Aero Progress—1963 The Pilot's Digest Agro Progress—1962 Proficlent Flying § fl, and lil (full-length videos) ABC’s Wide World of Flying, Aviation Media, and ASA. PLUS THE FOLLOWING TRAINING PUBLICATIONS (1959-1863) On Course, On the Glide Path—instrument Flight— Tower Communications — Log Angeles to New York, VFR ~ ATG Clears — Theory of Flight— Weather for Pilots —~ in Radar Contact -- Bustor BT (a children’s racording) EES1A AICHDENSIV AIRSPACE: innovated and developed the cancept in 1991 that provides guidance for VFR pilots through complex, high-denalty alrspace. The assoclated charts were, published by Jeppesen Sanderson. A legislative bill, H.R. 3243, was written by then-Oklahoma representative, now Senator James M. Inhofe, which mandated the adoption of this concept by the Federal Aviation Administration. BRACE RUIGHT: ISRAEL TOUORDAN. "| a itt , xe Conceived, organized, and led the first flight of any kind ever allowed between Israel and Jordan. This flight consisted of 34 light airplanes and had the direct and personal approvals of H.M. King Hussein and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin—May 23-24, 1995. wT ADOIONAL CREDITS Fo 1s © Va « Contributing Editor and Columnist AOPA Pilot, 1975-present. o National Mentor for AOPA’s Project Pilot 1994- 1995. Technical Advisor, Writer, and Performer: ABC's Wide World of Flying, 1987-1992. Aviation Safety Expert nd Consultant for the print and electronic media, Columnist: Air Progress (1974-1975), Private Pilot (1985 ~1969), and AOPA Pitot (1994-current). . Alr Gartier Editor: Jeppesen Sanderson Yearbooks, 1975 -1980, Technical Directer/Advisor for thetelevision and motion picture industry. U.S. Correspondent: Australian Flying, and Pllot and Light Aeroplane (U..), 1965 -1968" Regional Editor: TWA Filte Facts, 1986 -1970 Product development, preparation of marketing literature, product Instruction manuals, and technical manuals for prominent aerospace firms. > TT RROGRESS 4 anc b Founded and became president of Aero-Progress, Inc. in 1959 (age 21) Concelved, developed, wrote, and published a series of unique and innovative educational products and training aids for pilots. These were marketed commercially and received International recognition. The product line was purchased by the Times-Mirror Corporation for its subsidiary, Jeppesen Sanderson, In 1963, Aero-Progress was dissolved at that time. % eke NEI AVIATION AOVORATHALTIIGT * 8 Active in numerous’ general aviation causes, Has bean Influential, for example, in preventing the closure of tha Sants Monica Munielpal Alrpost (a major reliever alrport In the |.os Angeles Basin) and providing airspace access to yenoral aviation alrcraft subsequent fo the emergency closure of the VFR Corridor thraugh the Los Angeles Class 8 airspace : wae rey SINTIONS peat andl presen!) -™ ua x , aut Society of Experlmental Test Pilots American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Fellow of the Royal Aeranautloal Society (FRA@S). Society of Aviation and Flight Educators. Airline Pilots Association (ALPA), National Association of Flight Instructors. international Society of Aiv Safety investigators, Board of Advisors, Daparhnent of Aeronautics San Jose State University 1980-1995). Board of Advisore, AOPA Air Safety Foundatlon (1990-1996). Chairman of the Board (22 years) and President (3 years), Santa Monica Airport Association. Institate of Navigation EXHIBIT B as parse = russes ene meen suse 253 prea ges see BR ara8: css , zt Na oe) Cla U:25./¢f Ys IN SH THE MYSTERY OF THE VANISHING AIRSPEED by BARRY SCHIFF / AOPA 110803 i | Figure 1 es SSE) tim On June 24, 1975, an Eastern Airlines Boeing 727 crashed on short final approach to New York's JFK Interna- Sar xu, 9 earentee — tional Airport. More than 100 passengers perished, making this one of the worst air disasters in U.S. history. Based on the initially available facts, it appears that wind (a mnsreES = a GTS shear was an influential factor in the accident, if not the ‘GA0UND SPEED = 135 Knots primary cause. rf Because of this accident’s spectacular nature, considerable rr Ri, attention is suddenly being focused on wind shear. It is almost a ge shameful that a disaster of this magnitude was required to attract industry-wide attention to a phenomenon with which ¥, pilots have always had to cope. Air carrier aircraft, of course, are not the exclusive victims of this invisible hazard. General aviation aircraft also fall annoying power and attitude corrections to complete lay af prey to this misunderstood, underestimated menace. Hun- control fi ba dreds, if not thousands, of accidents presumably caused by Wind shear is a unique hazard not only because it is f pilot error were direct or indirect results of wind-shear en- quently undetectable, but because so many pilots are un ie counters. It is imperative, therefore, that pilots become famil- to acknowledge the threat. They consider it incredible that a iar with the potentially lethal effects of wind shear and the change in wind velocity can alter airspeed; it is contrary to various conditions during which these effects are most likely their earliest lessons in Hight. to occur. “Airspeed : they were taught, “is determined solely by Simply stated, wind shear is a variation in wind velocity variations in aircraft attitude, configuration and power ser (speed and/or direction) that occurs over a relatively short ting; wind affects only track and ground speed.” distance. Airspeed is affected when an airplane is flown from Unfortunately, this simplistic axiorn is but the tip of one wind condition—through a wind shear—into another another iceberg and applies only when the wind is constant or wind condition in less time than ground speed can adjust to changes gradually. Unless a pilot examines what lies beneatit the new environment, The consequences can range from the surface, he is liable to fly unwittingly into the jaws of 30 THE AOPA PILOT | NOVEMBER 1975 wa fs aE Bea HN ih das ats ey rhe oh a “i tn -4 what is coming to be regarded as one of aviation's most in- « Just how long it takes to recover lost airspeed was dvama- sidious killers. 1 tized in a USAF yeport by Major C. L, Hazeltine. He demon- ‘The subject is seldom taught in ground school because in- strated that if a given aircraft, maintaining a constant alti- structors either don’t want to complicate a student pildt’s tude and power setting, encounters an abrupt 20-knot loss (due cgmprehension of the basic airspeed/ground-speed relation- to wind shear), recovery of only 10 knots would require 78 ship or don’t fully comprehend wind-shear fundamentals, séconds; récovery of 16 latiets would require 176 seconds. To understand wind shear is to recognize that an airplane Adding power and/ox sacrificing altitude reduces recovery has inertia and as u xesult resists a change in ground speed. time significantly aiid points out the dlarming need for pilots This is best stated by paraphrasing Sir Isaac Newton, the to bé particularly alert for a Jow-level wind shear when on brilliant English physicist who developed the inescapable firial approach or whan climbing out at marginal airspeeds. laws of motion: An alrevaft in flight at a given ground speed ‘The problem’ of aizspeed recovery is critical if the airspeed tends to remain at the same ground speed unless acted upon loss results in the drag vise associated with flight behind the by an exterior force. power curve, , When required power and altitude may not be f: ws available, (In reality, the airspeed lose is not quite as large as shown Figure 2 in Figure 1 because some acceleration occurs while the air- craft crosses the shear line, depending on the line’s width,) - ieh Would the pilot in Figure 1 have any warring bout the ep Sx ampending airspeed loss? In this case, yes. When two op: CEN posing. air currents rub shoulders, there is bound to be some frictional turbulence, The degree of turbulence increases in proportion to the change in wind velocity and decreases in proportion to the width of the shear line, For similar reasons, the air surrounding a jet stream. is often turbulent, even ~IS VEY) though a smooth ride can be had within, the core, The aixcraft in Figure 1 encountered a rapidly decreasing headwind, which has the same effect as an increasing tail- So Oo HH o. wind: an airspeed loss. If the direction of the aircraft is yeversed, so that it flies ‘into an increasing headwind (or fe SraT WG S10" 2 Pisces) [Pie | decreasing tailwind), airspeed will increase when the shear line is crossed, The theoretical gain is 26 knots. ‘The affect of wind shear ‘s similar to what.happens to a i th hobo who jumps from a bridge to the top of an express train passing below, As the man leaves the bridge, his ground speed An application of this is illustrated in Figure 1. A tem- (orward motion) is nil, The train, hqwever, is clipping along perature invérsion overlies a coastal city from the ground to at 60 mph. When the hitchhiker first touches down, it should 2,000 feet, Within the inversion, the wind is westerly at 5 be obvious that he cannot remain on the roof at the point of knots. Immediately above, the wind is easterly at 20 knots initial contact. His inertia prevents him from being accelerated (not an unusual situation), The narrow band separating the so rapidly, from 0 mph to 60 mph, Instead, the hapless hob two “als masses” is called a “shear line.” will fall and roll backwards with respect to the train, Bventu- An aireraft descending toward the shear has an airspeed of ally, the friction of the train acting on his body will accelerate 120 knots; its ground speed is obviously 100 knots. This him to 60 mph. Whether he survives to realize this ts ques- ground speed represents aircraft momentum with respect to tionable. f the earth and, according to Newton's First Law of Physics, If the unfortunate chap were to misjudge and jump imme- ig the quantity that resists change. diately in front of the train, the locomotive would force his As the aircraft penetrates the shear line and enters the in- body to adapt quite rapidly to the speed of the train, But the version, ground speed will increase, but not instantly. Because acceleration would exert such overwhelming and crushing of aircraft inertia, ground speed after crossing the narrow G-loads that the Hobe would instantly regret not having pur- shear line is very nearly what it was earlier, 100. knots. chased a ticket and boarded the train under more comfortable But since the alreraft is now under the influence of a cireumstances. 5-knot tailwind, something has to give, That something, un- For those who cannot correlate the hobo and the train with fortunately, is airspeed, which reduces from 120 knots (above an aircraft in flight, consider this extreme, but illustrative, the shear line) to 95 knots (below the shear Hine), a net and