Criminal Charges Laid Against Pilot In Keystone Crash

planett · Post by **planett** » Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:37 am

This thread got me thinking, I wonder if more murders have been justified by religion or by the quest for profits? Sometimes "God is on our side" sounds a lot like "Have to make a buck somehow".

Pindunder Jeep · Post by **Pindunder Jeep** » Sat Oct 23, 2004 12:14 pm

Rebel wrote:Doc is perfectly correct in his assertion that this charge is without precedent in the Western World. To the best of my knowledge this has never happened before. Regardless if the pilot is completely in the wrong this is not the way that we should let the profession precede.

Hey TC where are you in this regard?

Actually this has happened before. Anyone remember the story about a British Airways 747 lining up to land on the M5 mistaking it for the runway? He did a missed and barely cleared the roof of a hotel.

His F/O and engineer were both incapacitated at the time and had been removed from the flight deck. He did a single pilot approach to minimums and had been vectored too close for the auto pilot to capture the localizer.

Anyway, he landed on the second approach, was charged with criminal negligence, convicted and he committed suicide before his sentencing.

Tragic!

southbound · Post by **southbound** » Sat Oct 23, 2004 2:36 pm

Once again, the pilot should definately not do down alone.....absolutely not....!

Just becuse the guylanded in the middle of Winnipeg,is what he did anymore tragic or lawless than the ho' pilot who went below mins in Fort Liard two yrs ago? Some of the passenegers died of exposure with himself narrowly escaping death??? Both events were conducted with the respective crews 100% cognitive of their environment and the risks yet chose to proceed. The pilot of the ho crash in FT Liard is still 75% F--ked up for pete's sake.

We are all liable and responsible for the decisions we make....NO???

How about the American Eagle crew( I think) that were caught under the influence???? Huge penalty for them wouldn't you say??? I don't think the pilot should ever turn a prop again personally....and along with him should be the CP, OPS mngr because they knew the shit that was goung on yet played the game as well.

shitdisturber · Post by **shitdisturber** » Sat Oct 23, 2004 7:12 pm

cpt sweet'njuicy wrote:
It is because I have been busted that I am the way I am..you could learn a thing or 9 from my fuk ups. I am no longer ashamed of them..its just the past and hard lessons. I never even came close to killing anyone..wasnt that type of fuk up.

No I'm not stupid enough to bust regs repeatedly.

You know Im a convicted fuk up because I decided to tell you I was...to turn and use that against me is shallow and ineffective...you remind me of a woman...gathering bits of personal info and then using it against you in front of your friends...truelly witless.....get new material. You are the type of person that stops people from sharing anything on this forum...nice work...you really Keystoned that reply

I did mention that you were an admitted fuk up did I not? I gather reading isn't one of your skills, certainly can't be compared to your ability to beak off and offend. The point I was trying to get through to your little pea brain is that you of all people should be somewhat sympathetic to the guy. Luckily for you there isn't the three strikes and you're out policy or you'd be flipping burgers at McBarf for a living. He only screwed up once; on the other hand, seem to take a little longer to learn from mistakes. Despite your vitriol to the contrary; that's what he made, a mistake. Granted, a stupid one; but still a mistake. Do you, from your all seeing all knowing position; honestly think he wouldn't take it back in a heartbeat if he couldn't? I'm not stopping anyone from sharing anything on this forum, myself included; but if you're going to be a hypocrite about it, bet your ass i'm going to call you on it!

...dont bring up the bible again ..if you are a believer of this"document" ill type things here that will make you so angry you will use a potato peeler to remove all your skin and jump out the fuking window ...try to leave "god" out of the general section please

I'll quote anything I please on the forum, from the bible to the Simpsons; who the hell are you to tell anybody what they can and can't quote? For the record, the last time I was in a church for any purpose other than the death of friends; either by natural causes or marriage, probably half the denizens of Avcanada weren't even born yet.

shimmydampner · Post by **shimmydampner** » Sat Oct 23, 2004 8:43 pm

S&J, you are one odd duck man. I can't say I agree with just about anything you post, but they have a certain entertainment value. Kinda on par with a traveling freak show.

luke · Post by **luke** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 7:05 am

hidesight is always 20/20

for those of you that have not seen it, some day it will come to you, for those of us who have, i hope we have learned from it.

safe flying friends

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 7:34 am

Shimmy...calling S&J an odd duck, is like calling "ebola" a bad "flu"!

I'd Rather Be Flying · Sun Oct 24, 2004 9:55 am

Been reading through all the responses on this thread. Very interesting.

It's no secret that flying an airplane is mostly about decision making. I believe it also to be true, that flying, as in most of life, is 10% what happens to you, and 90% how you deal with it.

I don't know all of the circumstances around this particular accident, but I did personally know the pilot who flew the Navajo into the river bank of the Liard river on a night, non-precision approach, in hard IFR (as was alluded to earlier).

The bottom line as I see it in the Keystone accident and any other accident is that they mostly occur due to a chain of events and poor decision making. If the pilot makes a bad call, about fuel or weather, or whatever, and crashes or kills someone in the process, then he has failed at his duties, as has the company, and now the courts are going to decide their fate.

You're the PIC and have the final say. It's all up to you.

shitdisturber · Post by **shitdisturber** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 11:22 am

shimmydampener wrote:S&J, you are one odd duck man. I can't say I agree with just about anything you post, but they have a certain entertainment value. Kinda on par with a traveling freak show.

No he's not odd, he's just a pathetic excuse for a human being who can't add anything of value to a discussion so he shoots for controversy. Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on your point of view; he's not very good at that either.

southbound · Post by **southbound** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 4:48 pm

Unfortunately when we choose to make the decisions that where made that led to this accident, you role the dice my friends. When snake eyes appear you pay the piper whether you like it or not....often in more ways than one.

Bottom line is that he should never fly again. Period. There has to be accountability in the industry...NO. Lets not forget that this isn't the first time type of thing has happened for this operator. How many chances should they have anyway?????

I would F--king walk before I would fly with those guys.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:12 pm

So if this pilot should never fly again what about the many before him who killed passengers through making bad decisions, some of which are still flying?

Hot Fuel · Post by **Hot Fuel** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 6:33 pm

Cat Driver...I think we have to bear in mind that every situation is different. Huge difference between making a decision that after the benefit of hindsight was the wrong one, versus one that was negligent. i.e. you experience a double engine failure and you carry a little too much airspeed causing you to land long, you skid off the end and kill a passenger. Upon reflection you wouldn’t have come in as hot but should you end up in court? Was your speed decision negligent…No I think not. Compare that with a guy who decides he will cut back on the fuel to make sure that he is as light as possible coming out of short, soft gravel/mud strip loaded with 6 linebackers and a ton of gear. He works the numbers and takes just enough fuel to get to the lodge and back to his airport of departure…no alternate fuel, as a matter of fact no reserve fuel, if lands straight in on his homeward leg he might have enough fuel if and when he gets on the ground to taxi back to the hanger. End result he misses the first approach and before he can turn a round and get lined-up with another runway the tanks fill with air and you’re parked in the middle of the city. You survived, one of your passengers didn’t…you have the benefit of hindsight, upon reflection you would have taken more fuel but should you end up in court? Was your fuel management decision negligent…I think so.

At the time of your decision, skidding off the end was not foreseeable, but in the other scenario running out of fuel before you were safe and sound on the ground was predictable and your decision to trade fuel for safety is what makes you negligent and puts you in court.

shitdisturber · Post by **shitdisturber** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 6:36 pm

Snj, don't flatter yourself; although I can see where you would, since no one else on this forum has anything good to say about you. Take my word for it, i've been dishing it out for a long time; the difference between us is that I intersperse my sarcasm with opinions that are actually thought out and once in a while even helpful.

southbound · Post by **southbound** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 6:45 pm

Cat driver.

The premis that I am operating under is that we only get so many chances before we run out of lives.....if you know what I mean. We have an obligation to ourselves and our employers who we represent, not to mention the moral obligation we have to the customer sitting in the back. These paying travelers who are by and large fairly ignorant to the goings on behind the scenes and underlying stresses... assume their flight will be uneventfull barring any unforseen circumstances.

Assuming accidents will happen in and of themselves dare we tempt fate yet again by willing of our own volition make decisions that put ourselves and others at greater risk than we are already under???

Perhaps the next time we get the scatter brained idea in our heads that we should break the rules, perhaps we should include the customer in our decisions and see what he/she thinks.

Soooooooo Cat driver, let bygones be bygones. What happened yesterday is done. We have to crank the accountability factor up abit I think. Unfortunately the decisions we make drctly effect whether people live or die.....therefore that must come with a hightened sense of responsibility and accountabity. So I do believe that his flying career should be over... and since crap flows uphill in this industry so should the CP and OPS MNGRs as well.

This isn't pointed at you Cat or anyone else out there. Those of us out there who take the risks are in essence F--king the customer over. They are being ripped off!!! Perhaps we should ask them if we should bust mins today????? I bet they will help us live another day.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 6:54 pm

Southbound :

I am on your side as far as this issue is concerned, there is zero excuse for deliberately endangering any flight.. No excuse period.

It is just that this case has caught everyone by suprise and it will take some time to sort out what is about to happen.

If anyone in aviation "Hates " crooked operators and management that enables these parisites to the break rules it is me....If I had my way I'd chain these pricke to rocks up in the high Arctic and they could fight the husky dogs for food.

Cat

LT · Post by LT » Sun Oct 24, 2004 7:43 pm

southbound wrote: Perhaps the next time we get the scatter brained idea in our heads that we should break the rules, perhaps we should include the customer in our decisions and see what he/she thinks.

Those of us out there who take the risks are in essence F--king the customer over. They are being ripped off!!! Perhaps we should ask them if we should bust mins today?????

In most cases the customer wants it their way. And their way is there.

The customer gets screwed over only when you are "too scared" to break mins, and they'll complain if you don't because they didn't get what was promised, arrival at point A in X hours.

And if you crash trying to please the customer you've screwed them.

So in the end the pilot is screwed.

The only question you need to ask yourself do you want to be an unemployed pilot or a dead pilot.

tailgunner · Post by **tailgunner** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:10 pm

LT: I don't really care what the rigger says or thinks about me. I could care less if they have a three hour drive from the airport, or if their load of pipe or valves arrives the next day or the next week when it comes to safety. Often Pilots push the weather, minimums , etc...for what? If they have to drive because I went to my alternate I DONT GIVE A SH*T!
I always leave it up to my customers BEFORE the flight. I tell them that I think we have a xx percent chance of getting in...our plan B is this, Do they want to try? If they say yes, and we divert I give them the I told you so... If they dont want to, then great , they just saved themselves a pile of money, and feel good about their decision.
The Keystone feller could have told the boys in the back " Chaps we are gonna have to land in xxx to get more fuel because the weather stinks , and you know we here at Keystone always value safety when it comes to fuel and the regulations"

Schlem · Post by **Schlem** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:21 pm

When I flew sked I had a young F/O who, after we did a missed approach in solid cloud, was upset that we missed and didn't get in and thought we should give it another go... I then... corrected him.

One thing I try to instill in my F/O's is that a missed approach is just another part of our job and is nothing to get excited about. If the Pax don't get in, they don't get in. Ultimately, 99% of the time, we always get back home at the end of the day so why worry about some Pax having to spend the night in a different community.

Doing medevacs we tell referal what our chances are of getting in and they make the call. If they send us to try an approach where the Wx is zero/zero, we go and try... we don't get in the comapny still gets paid.

centerstored · Post by **centerstored** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:50 pm

shitdisturber wrote: a human being who can't add anything of value to a discussion so he shoots for controversy

Sorry, but I found this comment quite ironic and humorous given YOUR name....SHITDISTURBER!?

Flying Newf · Post by **Flying Newf** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:56 pm

S& J you are a jack off!!!

First off, you can really tell that aviation is hurting. Who would have guessed that that many great pilots would be unemployed sitting at home bitching on a website about something that most of them know nothing about. Quit your bitching and go back to looking at porn!!

Yes that pilot has to be held responsible for his poor judgment, but by TC not the Winnipeg Police. Police don’t belong in Hockey or Aviation!!

Cat Driver -- I would donate too! But not to get him flying again, just to keep the police out of aviation…

For those of you who think that the pilots at Keystone don’t follow the rules, swing by some time and have a look, ask some questions. S&J you should drop by, and introduce yourself...I have this nagging feeling the guys would love to chat with you! Painting an entire company with the stroke of one brush seems kinda harsh.

S&J -- I know most of the pilots at Keystone and they don’t bust mins and go VFR in IFR weather, I hear them IFR all the time. You are just sulking cause the small guys get in & you don’t (had you done any real flying instead of going direct into the right seat of a metro at perimeter) you would realize that a Navajo approaches quite a bit slower than the Metro and if you do it properly seat fwd, gear down, flaps out, you can be ready to get down in a mile or less. That’s why small guys get in and you don’t… I pity the day you get captain.

Southbound -- enjoy your walk!

Schlem-- maybe TC should look into Keewatin a little closer if you believe the weights that an agent for a lodge gives ya. Most experienced pilots don’t even ask what the weights are from an agent, they just weigh the bags themselves.

Finally, from what I have seen around the Peg, TC is all over Keystone, and from chatting with the pilots around the Esso, they seem like a good operation now…compare them to some of the other small operators around and they look pretty good…. from what I hear Pork Chop is still weighing himself in at his birth weight: 174 lbs.

scubasteve · Post by **scubasteve** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:58 pm

Just a question I want to throw out there for discussion. It was raised in an earlier post about taking less fuel in order to actually get off the ground...Now, lets say a pilot takes on the proper amount of fuel at a short strip with obstacles and doesnt clear a tower or some trees and a passenger dies...should this guy be charged??

or in the Pelee, Caravan episode...the pilot took off overweight..did he know?? surely he might have wondered with the load and the use of standard weights. Its been said in other forums that a caravan will fly overweight without much problems, so its possible that the pilot thought he could get away with a slightly heavy load. Then there was the freezing rain. Any pilot with a PPL knows freezing rain isnt a good thing and yet this guy took off. He as PIC made the decision in less than ideal conditions, all of which he was aware of...If the keystone guy is being charged for negligence, what stops the Van driver from charges as well (if he had survived)

I'm still not sure where I stand on this issue, but it is thought provoking.

Schlem · Post by **Schlem** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 9:16 pm

Flying Newf wrote: Schlem-- maybe TC should look into Keewatin a little closer if you believe the weights that an agent for a lodge gives ya. Most experienced pilots don’t even ask what the weights are from an agent, they just weigh the bags themselves.

When I first started at Keewatin, several years before this accident, and we did Gunisao charters, I handled all the frieght, bags, groceries, you name it, for the agent... I weighed all the pieces for the pilots that were doing the trips including Keystone and helped them load.

I assumed that when we stopped handling the baggage, the baggage would still be weighed for or by the Keystone pilots in the subsequent years.

When I was told to do this trip, which was our first into Gunisao in many years, I fully expected the agent to have weighed the bags prior to bringing them out to the plane seeing there was a scale in the Avitat.

At the time... the agent gave the bags to the pilots and the pilots threw them on... this agent hadn't seen bags weighed ever.

As for lodge agent weights... the other lodges we have flown for depart from apron 5 where bags are weighed and we make sure of it... I guess you haven't flown for a decent lodge yet? You think an agent would falsify weights and risk their neck if a related accident ever happened?

Should sked pilots also weigh all the bags themselves too?

tailgunner · Post by **tailgunner** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 10:13 pm

Flying Newf: "Painting the whole company" Correct me if I am wrong but didn't KEYSTONE have TWO accidents where their NAVAJO's ran out of fuel. It seems by the evidence that indeed we can paint the entire company. I have also witnessed " Keystone professionalism" in this regard when they were flying rigs in the winter in ALTA.

Flying Newf · Post by **Flying Newf** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:04 am

There is a big difference between running out of fuel, and fuel starvation due to ice in the tank. The first accident ice blocked the flapper valve, now there is an AD issued. He still had ¾ tanks when he crashed! If you are gona throw stones, at least get the facts!

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:45 am

Flying Newf. :

I would not donate money to get the pilot flying again, I would donate money to ensure this case does not set a precedent whereby charges can be randomly laid in any accident that occurs.

You say TC is all over Keystone, and they seem like a good operation "now".

I guess TC had no way of knowing they maybe were not so good until the news media got in on it?

Cat