Thanks for the reply, Bob. Your "organic" retirement story rings true for me. And I'm not surprised that you punched out considering how far back your work went, apparently specific to aviation. But Mifnet really is a gaggle of old goats (myself included) who still love this aviation thing.
Since Kilroy Aviation got our ODA ticket I've been doing the same. I'm working from home, slowing down on certification work after 46 years with Boeing, FAA plus a fair amount of solo work but I'm still hooked. I'm also drifting into expert witness work, pretty successfully. So if your old firm needs help I'm available. Nothing like a bit of blatant self-promotion on Mifnet. Mike Borfitz Cell 206-714-8797 Kilroy Aviation LLC WWW.FAAODA.COM <http://www.faaoda.com/> Kilroy is available for aviation regulatory and safety issues - Type & Production Certification, Continued Operational Safety - International validation & safety matters - Program & system management - FAA STC ODA On Mon, Jan 19, 2026, 12:50 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > Mike, in response to your question, no, I am no longer practicing law. > At the end of 2020 I retired from my law firm, Holland & Knight. > Fifty-two years of practicing aviation law, product-liability law, and > non-profit law were probably enough. (I never had an uninteresting day, > but there were some days I would certainly like to forget.) As best I > could tell, I still had my wits about me, but it was a propitious time to > retire even though the pandemic precluded any parades, farewell tours, or > festive get-togethers to mark the event. > > > > I didn’t plan to stay at my firm that long; it just happened naturally > (“organically” is the word people use these days). The retirement also > happened naturally and seemed less like a watershed because in 2020 I was, > like everyone else, already chronologically disoriented. Having been > marooned in our home for so long, I found that retirement did not bring > much of a lifestyle change. > > > > In addition, I retired from decades-long positions as General Counsel (on > a pro bono basis) of The Wings Club (where my law-partner Rich Furey > replaced me) and the New York City Ballet (where I continue to be actively > involved on the Board as a Director Emeritus). > > > > Despite retirement, I still don’t have enough time to keep up with, much > less respond to, the Mifnet emails, so I submit comments only occasionally. > > > > Bob > > > > Randal Craft > > Email: randalrobertcraft@gmailcom > > Mobile: 646-226-2299 (USA) > > > > *From:* Mike Borfitz via Mifnet <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Saturday, January 17, 2026 4:03 PM > *To:* Mike Borfitz via Mifnet <[email protected]> > *Cc:* Mike Borfitz <[email protected]> > *Subject:* [Mifnet 🛰 75154] Re: AA Flight 191 DC-10 Crash at ORD > > > > > > My faith is restored: > > "...cracks in the engine pylon aft bulkhead (not a bearing)..." I thought > the bearing comment was a little odd. > > > > Still, Boeing is in trouble again. The public probably won't get spooled > up, however. No less a tragedy but freighter accidents tend to fade. > > > > My bet is that it was an error rather than a management push to cut > corners. Small fleet with many many cycles & hours; "Shouldn't be a > problem." > > > > Are you still practicing? My guess is no, ORD was a long time ago. > > > > Mike Borfitz > > Cell 206-714-8797 > > Kilroy Aviation LLC > > WWW.FAAODA.COM <http://www.faaoda.com/> > > > > Kilroy is available for aviation regulatory and safety issues > > - Type & Production Certification, Continued Operational Safety > > - International validation & safety matters > > - Program & system management > > - FAA STC ODA > > > > On Sat, Jan 17, 2026, 12:16 PM Randal Craft via Mifnet < > [email protected]> wrote: > > I was lead counsel to American Airlines in the NTSB investigation of the > 25 May 1979 DC-10 crash of Flight 191 at O’Hare and in the FAA > investigation and subsequent grounding of all DC-10 aircraft. In light of > the latest articles and emails referring to that crash, I probably should > repeat some points I’ve made previously. > > > > The MDC manuals were not dispositive on the use of a fork-lift > engine-replacement procedure, and there was some controversy about what had > been orally said (and meant) by MDC personnel to AA about the proposed > fork-lift procedure that was blamed for the cracks in the engine pylon aft > bulkhead (not a bearing) that led to the loss of the engine and, in turn, > the airplane. AA was under the impression that MDC thought the procedure > was acceptable, in part because, as reflected in the written record > described in the NTSB report, MDC was aware of AA's proposed fork-lift > procedure and, without objection, supplied requested C.G. data so AA could > use this procedure. MDC apparently also did not object to Continental's > use of this procedure. > > > > I tried three cases (one against lawyer/aviator F. Lee Bailey) in which > some details of the flight were at issue. The pilots followed the manual’s > engine-out procedure; they had no way of knowing that not only had they > lost power on the left engine but that they had also lost the nacelle, the > pylon, and part of the leading edge of the wing. All this damaged some > hydraulic lines and caused a loss of hydraulic pressure and retraction of > outboard leading-edge slats on the left wing, which increased the left > wing’s stall speed to a speed above the speed called for in the engine-out > procedure. > > > > Seconds after lift-off, the left wing started entering into a stall, > causing the airplane to begin rolling to the left. Impact with the ground > occurred eleven seconds or so after that roll began. > > > > As for the DC-10 grounding, it should be noted that the grounding was > based on the FAA’s mistaken conclusion that the cracks in the pylon aft > bulkhead that were discovered in a series of post-accident AD-directed > fleet inspections had actually grown during the inspection period. Before > the grounding, I spoke by telephone and met in person with the AA > inspection team that found the pylon bulkhead cracks, and their view was > that the bulkhead cracks had not developed or grown during the series of > post-accident inspections of the fleet. They pointed out that the cracks > in question had not been found in the earlier inspections because the > earlier ADs had not called for inspections in the area where these cracks > were later found. Indeed, a chief reason why there was a series of ADs was > that the areas to be inspected kept being clarified and expanded. It was a > later AD in the series that called for inspections of the location where > the cracks in question were found. My understanding was that this > information was passed on to the FAA but was discounted. The grounding > followed. > > > > A pre-grounding internal FAA inspection report indicated that the local > (SFO) FAA inspectors agreed with AA that the cracks in question were > pre-existing and were in a location that was not to be inspected in the > original rounds of post-accident inspections (and this was confirmed in > subsequent testimony of FAA personnel). I understand that AA's head of > maintenance also argued to Craig Beard of the FAA that the cracks were > pre-existing and not an appropriate basis for a grounding. I believe there > was even a much-later FAA report that concluded that the FAA's instructions > in the initial ADs were not adequate to reveal the cracks found later in > the pylon aft bulkhead. Accordingly, in my view the grounding of the DC-10 > was not justified. > > > > Bob > > > > Randal Craft > > Email: randalrobertcraft@gmailcom > > Mobile: 646-226-2299 (USA) > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Revised: 20250507 > > You are receiving The Mifnet because you requested to join this list. > > The Mifnet is largely a labor of love, however the infrastructure isn't > exactly cost-free. If you'd care to make a small contribution to the > effort, please know that it would be greatly appreciated: > https://wardell.us/url/mifbit > > All posts sent to the list should abide by these policies: > > 1) List members acknowledge that participation in Mifnet is a > privilege--not a right. > 2) Posts are always off the record, absent specific permission from the > author. > 3) The tone of discussions is collegial. > 4) Posts are expected to be in reasonably good taste. > 5) We discuss ideas and not personalities, and we don't speak ill of other > Mifnet members. > > * The Mifnet WEB SITE is: > https://www.mifnet.com/ > > * To UNSUBSCRIBE from this list at any time please visit: > https://lists.mifnet.com/ > OR: SEND THIS MESSAGE via email: > [email protected]?subject=leave > > * Send Mifnet mailing list POSTS/SUBMISSIONS to: > [email protected] > > * You may reach the person managing The Mifnet at: > [email protected] > > * Please consider the DIGEST version of The Mifnet, which consolidates all > list traffic into 1-3 > messages daily. See instructions at: > https://lists.mifnet.com/ > > * Manage your personal Mifnet SUBSCRIPTION at: > https://lists.mifnet.com/ > > * For a list of all available Mifnet commands, SEND THIS MESSAGE via email: > [email protected]?subject=help > > * View The Mifnet LIST POLICIES and PRIVACY POLICY at: > https://mifnet.com/index.php/policies > > * View instructions for Mifnet DELIVERY PROBLEMS at: > https://mifnet.com/index.php/delivery-problems > > * View The Mifnet LIST ARCHIVE at: > https://lists.mifnet.com/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/ > >
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised: 20250507 You are receiving The Mifnet because you requested to join this list. The Mifnet is largely a labor of love, however the infrastructure isn't exactly cost-free. If you'd care to make a small contribution to the effort, please know that it would be greatly appreciated: https://wardell.us/url/mifbit All posts sent to the list should abide by these policies: 1) List members acknowledge that participation in Mifnet is a privilege--not a right. 2) Posts are always off the record, absent specific permission from the author. 3) The tone of discussions is collegial. 4) Posts are expected to be in reasonably good taste. 5) We discuss ideas and not personalities, and we don't speak ill of other Mifnet members. * The Mifnet WEB SITE is: https://www.mifnet.com/ * To UNSUBSCRIBE from this list at any time please visit: https://lists.mifnet.com/ OR: SEND THIS MESSAGE via email: [email protected]?subject=leave * Send Mifnet mailing list POSTS/SUBMISSIONS to: [email protected] * You may reach the person managing The Mifnet at: [email protected] * Please consider the DIGEST version of The Mifnet, which consolidates all list traffic into 1-3 messages daily. See instructions at: https://lists.mifnet.com/ * Manage your personal Mifnet SUBSCRIPTION at: https://lists.mifnet.com/ * For a list of all available Mifnet commands, SEND THIS MESSAGE via email: [email protected]?subject=help * View The Mifnet LIST POLICIES and PRIVACY POLICY at: https://mifnet.com/index.php/policies * View instructions for Mifnet DELIVERY PROBLEMS at: https://mifnet.com/index.php/delivery-problems * View The Mifnet LIST ARCHIVE at: https://lists.mifnet.com/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/
