Denny wrote:

PVD is minutes away.

Mother nature and the laws of physics do not care if you are a hot
shot trial lawyer, apparently...

What will cause lawsuits in this case is leaving the ILS transmitter
on when notamed out of service...

Well the deceased brother is a lawyer and he already seems to know the
cause. (See Globe article below).

I'm still fuzzy on exactly what lights they were claiming were not
working. The ALS has been NOTAMed out for months. But I keep seeing
reports of "runway lights" or even "runway edge lights" not working Are
all of those reports wrong?

If the ALS was not working, that is only part of the ILS, not part of
the NDB or GPS approaches (although it sure is a nice to have).

So, was the plane doing an ILS approach? If so, was it cleared for an
ILS approach? (I sincerely doubt that, given the NOTAMs).

If the pilot needed the ALS to do his NDB or GPS approach, why initiate
the approach? What happened on the first approach that gave the pilot
reason to believe a second approach would be more successful on such an
awful night weather-wise?

I'm sure investigators will take a close look at the tapes, the weather
briefing, the approach clearances, the ATIS letter read back etc. I
will be interested in hearing those facts.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/art...l_plane_crash/

Funny thing about Massachusetts is they feel the need to have some
little state agency run around and "investigate" airplane accidents.
This despite the NTSB (and/or FAA as needed) already does that anyway.