Vident Partners provides vetted aerospace engineering expert witnesses for cases involving aircraft design, certification, flight control systems, manufacturing quality, structural failure and space systems. Request a referral today.
Find a Aerospace Engineering Expert →Overview
An aerospace engineering expert decides whether an aircraft or spacecraft system was designed, certified, built and maintained the way the governing rules and sound engineering required, and whether a failure in that chain led to the loss. This is design and manufacturing work. Airline operations and pilot conduct belong to an aviation expert, crash mechanics at the scene to an accident reconstructionist or investigator, and a failed metal part's fracture to a metallurgist.
The expert reads type certificate data, system safety assessments, design and test reports, service bulletins, manufacturing records, maintenance logs, flight data and investigation reports. Certification paperwork is often the richest record, and it can run to thousands of pages, so a good expert knows quickly where to look.
For transport category airplanes, the core rule is 14 CFR 25.1309. Systems must be designed and installed so that each catastrophic failure condition is extremely improbable and does not result from a single failure, and each hazardous failure condition is extremely remote 1. The NTSB explains that the primary means of compliance for systems critical to safe flight is through safety assessments or rational analyses 2. So the fight often concerns the assessment itself. Did it classify the failure correctly? What did it assume about the rest of the system and about the crew?
The 737 MAX is the clearest recent example. The NTSB concluded that the assumptions Boeing used in its functional hazard assessment of uncommanded MCAS function did not adequately consider and account for the impact that multiple flight deck alerts and indications could have on pilots' responses to the hazard 2. FAA's review identified, as its first safety item, that erroneous data from a single angle of attack sensor activated MCAS and caused nose-down trim, and Boeing updated the software to use both sensors 3. For an expert, that history shows the kind of question to ask: what failure was assumed, what did the human do in tests, and did the analysis follow the design as it changed?
Certification does not end a civil case by itself. How much weight compliance carries depends on state law and on the claim, and federal preemption arguments can arise. Counsel should resolve that before the expert writes.
Design is only half of it. The NTSB determined that the probable cause of the 2024 in-flight separation of a left mid exit door plug was Boeing's failure to provide adequate training, guidance and oversight needed to ensure manufacturing personnel could consistently and correctly comply with its parts removal process, a process meant to document and ensure that securing bolts and hardware removed during rework were reinstalled 4. It also found that FAA's ineffective compliance enforcement surveillance and audit planning contributed 4.
That finding shows how these disputes run. The expert follows the work: traveler paperwork, nonconformance records, rework, shift handoffs and sign-offs. A missing record may be the most important fact in the case, especially where parts were removed and put back with no document to show it. Supplier work adds another layer, since a part may have been made by a lower-tier supplier under a flowed-down quality system.
Other assignments focus on a specific technical area:
Each opinion must stay within what a reliable method supports, and the technical basis must be shown 5. An NTSB report is useful background, but the rules on its use in civil cases are strict, so an expert should work from the underlying data.
Look for an engineer with direct design, certification or quality experience on the same class of aircraft or system. Former Designated Engineering Representatives, FAA engineers and senior airframer or supplier engineers each bring different strengths. A PE license is not common in this field, so the project record matters more. Match the specialty: a structures engineer should not give a flight controls opinion. A human factors expert addresses pilot response, and a metallurgist addresses the failed part.
Under 14 CFR 25.1309, each catastrophic failure condition must be extremely improbable and must not result from a single failure.
Case Types
Aircraft design and certification defects
Flight control and software failures
Manufacturing quality and missing rework records
Fatigue and structural failures
Component supplier disputes
Aircraft maintenance and airworthiness directive compliance
Satellite and launch contract disputes
Whistleblower claims involving technical safety questions
Qualifications
Related Specialties
FAQ
Look for direct design, certification or quality experience on the same class of aircraft or system. Former Designated Engineering Representatives, FAA engineers and senior airframer engineers each bring different strengths. Match the specialty to the failure.
It requires that systems be designed so that each catastrophic failure condition is extremely improbable and does not result from a single failure, and each hazardous failure condition is extremely remote.
The NTSB concluded the assumptions in Boeing's assessment did not adequately account for the effect of multiple alerts on pilots. FAA identified erroneous data from a single sensor as its first safety item, and Boeing updated the software to use both sensors.
Not by itself. Its weight depends on state law and the claim, and federal preemption arguments can arise. Counsel should settle that before the expert writes.
It found that Boeing failed to provide adequate training, guidance and oversight to ensure compliance with its parts removal process, and that FAA's surveillance and audit planning contributed.
In general, aerospace engineering expert fees are determined by the expert themselves, based on a variety of criteria. Among those criteria are experience, the type of aircraft or system, the volume of certification data, testing needs and the amount of testimony. Vident does have some influence over expert fees by comparing experts within a specialty, but ultimately it is a personal decision by the expert.
Related Insights
The Arizona Supreme Court has held that automakers are not legally required to include lane departure warning systems in passenger vehicles simply because the technology exists. In Maywald v. Toyota M...
Practice Area Intelligence1. NDMA Contamination and Cancer Risk Core Allegation: Plaintiffs allege that Zantac (ranitidine) is inherently unstable and can break down into N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), a probable human...
Research BriefingOur previous post concerned a knee replacement products liability lawsuit against DePuy. However, a recent review indicates that active cases against DePuy are rare at this time. The landscape of...
Sources
Vident Partners connects attorneys with qualified aerospace engineering expert witnesses. Complimentary consultation, 24-hour turnaround, no obligation.
Request an Expert →