Originally Posted by LarryJ
That is the NTSB's recommendation but I don't understand how you conclude negligence. It is a legal and approved procedure to use the thrust reverser adjustment when calculating required landing distance in the 737-700. Following the manufacturer's FAA-approved procedures is hardly negligence.
The NTSB has also recommended that the FAA reduce the maximum allowable duty day for a flight crew member but, as of yet, they have not done so. Do you find it to be negligence when an airline schedules a pilot to fly up to the current legal limit?
Generally speaking, a current legal limit does not excuse a tortfeasor from what a jury could consider breach of a duty that resulted in damages to a tortfeasor. For example, let's hypothesize that current FAA regulations allow flight crew members to be on duty for 10 hours each day. Suppose airline X commisioned studies on attentiveness of flight crew members after 8 hours on duty. Further suppose that the studies concluded that flight crew members' cognitive recognition of dangerous conditions significantly decreased after 8 hours on duty. If one of airline X's planes crashed on landing, and the flight crew had been on duty for 9 hours that day when the crash occurred, airline X could be found liable.