Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

CpnCrunch
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4228
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by CpnCrunch »

Sidebar wrote:
When her brother's loss floods over her, his sister asks herself "Why, why, why did you fly them?" she said.
http://www.timescolonist.com/Innocent+p ... id=5005943
Another interesting quote from that article:
Canadian Aviation Regulations prohibit aircraft operators from allowing anyone to board if there is a reasonable belief that they are impaired.

The pilot used his discretion and wasn't pressured to fly, but it was the "norm" to fly intoxicated people back to the reserve - the idea being that they are better off at home, York said.
---------- ADS -----------
 
snoopy
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1118
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 6:19 pm
Location: The Dog House

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by snoopy »

Alcohol or Drugs - Passengers

602.04 (1) In this section, "intoxicating liquor" means a beverage that contains more than 2.5 per cent proof spirits.

(2) No person shall consume on board an aircraft an intoxicating liquor unless the intoxicating liquor

(a) has been served to that person by the operator of the aircraft; or

(b) where no flight attendant is on board, has been provided by the operator of the aircraft.

(3) No operator of an aircraft shall provide or serve any intoxicating liquor to a person on board the aircraft, where there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person's faculties are impaired by alcohol or a drug to an extent that may present a hazard to the aircraft or to persons on board the aircraft.

(4) Subject to subsection (5), no operator of an aircraft shall allow a person to board the aircraft, where there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person's faculties are impaired by alcohol or a drug to an extent that may present a hazard to the aircraft or to persons on board the aircraft.

(5) The operator of an aircraft may allow a person whose faculties are impaired by a drug to board an aircraft, where the drug was administered in accordance with a medical authorization and the person is under the supervision of an attendant.


Some interesting reading:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/p ... abinsafety - scroll down to the last article: Cabin Safety: Alcohol Alert

Cheers,
Kirsten B.
---------- ADS -----------
 
“Never interrupt someone doing something you said couldn’t be done.” Amelia Earhart
Apollo
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 591
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 2:42 pm
Location: Ontario

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by Apollo »

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c ... suits.html
The families of three passengers killed in a May 2010 float plane crash off Vancouver Island are suing for damages in B.C. Supreme Court.

Samantha Mattersdorf, Edward Sam and his sister Katrina Sam-English hired the Cessna for the 20-kilometre, six-minute flight from Tofino to the native community of Ahousat.

The plane nosedived into the water not long after takeoff, killing all three passengers and pilot Damon York on impact.

A Transportation Safety Board investigation concluded the passengers were likely the reason the airplane crashed.

Toxicology tests later revealed all three were drunk and were arguing before they got on the aircraft.
They also took several bottles of liquor and a case of beer case aboard the plane after a water-taxi refused to take them to Ahousat, where alcohol is banned.

The TSB report said the position of the pilot’s seat suggested someone was kicking York from behind, likely pushing him into the instrument panel and forcing the plane into a dive.

The passengers' families filed suit this week against York's estate and the plane’s owner, Atleo River Air.

Two of the claims said the company failed to ensure the passengers were not impaired by alcohol or drugs and that York failed to wear a shoulder harness, "so as to prevent being jammed into the control panel."

The company did not return CBC News request for comment Friday.
Other thread was removed - but wanted to make sure we had a warning out there for us pilots. Don't let drunks on board, if they cause you to crash, they will sue your dead ass.
---------- ADS -----------
 
azimuthaviation
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1409
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 9:34 pm

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by azimuthaviation »

azimuthaviation wrote:How much you wanna bet that the relatives are going to use this information to sue the airline saying "they were at fault because they shouldnt have let them board in that drunken state". And how much do you wanna bet theyll probably win?
Posted this here the day the tsb report came out. Surprised only that they waited a whole year.
---------- ADS -----------
 
azimuthaviation
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1409
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 9:34 pm

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by azimuthaviation »

Actually looking back at the date of the crash May 29 2010 seems they waited until the very end of the two year window to file a civil claim from the day of the dispute. Waiting until the end could be a strategy by the litigants, banking on witnesses moving or forgetting, making it harder for the defendants to put up a successful defense. Hopefully the plaintiffs don't get a cent, people should not get rewarded for bad behavior.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Caracrane
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: Québec City

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by Caracrane »

Something very similar happened to me back in 1999 on board an amphib Caravan on a short flight to Roggan lake just north of CYGL. I had to punch him in the face with my elbow berfore his two cousins chocked him from behind to calm him down. He said that he "just wanted to play a bit"...

Since that time I never embarqued intoxicated paxs on board every time I was advised, thing that I used to tolerate, thing that we never should.
---------- ADS -----------
 
CID
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3544
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:43 am
Location: Canada

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by CID »

What a vile thing for the families to do. Operators should band together and blacklist that entire community. No more air service on the grounds that operators are risking false accusations and frivolous lawsuits.
---------- ADS -----------
 
CpnCrunch
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4228
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by CpnCrunch »

I notice the pilot's family hasn't brought a lawsuit against the drunks. EDITED
---------- ADS -----------
 
Liquid Charlie
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1461
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:40 am
Location: YXL
Contact:

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by Liquid Charlie »

No matter how drunk I could get, kicking the back of a pilots seat
-- are you sure ---- I've experienced drunk pilots in a small plane ---

I know that we all feel this is a bad deal but -- big but -- past history shows that they have a good chance in winning -- many examples of this with people drinking to excess at a bar - driving home and getting into an accident and successfully winning a law suit against the bartender and the establishment - I even know of one example where it happened at an office xmas party and individuals were sued for letting someone drive home drunk and there was a fatal accident and this was after they refused to give her the keys but after a cpl hours and helping clean up they were threatened with assault if they didn't relinquish the keys - which they did and are now likely still paying -- this is no different in the eyes of the law.

Years ago passengers were denied boarding in BOS - happens they were lawyers going back to Ottawa - they successfully sued the airline for denying the boarding - that might not happen today but shows how the legal system works.

As tragic as this accident was a very poor decision and obviously a tragic one was made - while I fell very sorry for all involved I still think this is just as bad as any decision that a pilot can make that creates an accident - this is no different from choosing to .. run and risk cfit or blast off in a navajo into freezing rain and severe icing --

A tragic lesson for us all - I hope the group becomes a little more wise and think before you go - I know -- not so easy but it's all about the professionalism we strive for --

It's also very apparent that there is a racial issue here - wonder what the reaction would be if there were 3 pilots in the back -- drunk is drunk at that point the colour of the skin does not enter into it -- I've seen it first hand along with the blood splatter and these guys were in federal service and wore uniforms -----
---------- ADS -----------
 
trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4766
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by trey kule »

Well, I am impressed that the toxology reports could tell they were arguing..quite amazing in fact.

And, while it is frivolous, I suspect they might have a good case.
1. An operator of a boat refused them passage..He did what was right, and I suspect he might be a bit miffed that a company and specifically , a pilot, would then agree to take them..
2. The pilot apparently knew they were drunk and transporting liquor illegally, and made the decision to take them.
Bad decision. cost him his life. But he was Captain of the plane and he did allow it to happen.
As hard as that sounds, it is a fact that the rules are rules, and safety is an issue.. And he chose to ignore it.

We can blame the company. Call it racist. Wail about the frivolity...But the Captain made the decision to take them.
Seems that he did not have the common sense the ferry captain did, despite all the excuses people here are going to make for him.

I think there is a real lesson to be learned here, particularily for some of the younger pilots in the north...You make a bad decision and you are going to have to own up to the responsability...tragic as this accident was, it would not have happened if the pilot had done was he was supposed to have done.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6618
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: A couple of meters away from others.

Post by Beefitarian »

I understand what you're intending Trey I know there is truth in your post, but as you age you tend to say, "I'm not doing (insert thing you learned not to do.) I did it when I was younger and it's just not worth it."

Sometimes when young people make a mistake it turns out tragic like this one.

Be Carefull ladies and gentlemen.
---------- ADS -----------
 
All Sides
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 11:21 am

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by All Sides »

The point is not whether the pilot should have taken the intoxicated passengers, he should not have. Having said that, how many of us have done so during our careers? During much of my early career (since 1985) flying intoxicated loggers, first nations, tourists, fisherman etc. etc. was pretty much in a days work. Although this may be shocking to the younger pilots or those who never flew in the north or the bush! :shock:

The point is that the passengers are not being held responsible for their part in the accident. To sue Atleo River Air and Damon
York's estate is to put the blame squarely on their shoulders, and no accountability on the passengers that in all likelihood were the main cause of all 4 deaths.

The racism card has been implicated, so I suggest that the First Nations Elders and Leaders instruct their band members to withdraw their case. This would disarm the suggestion of racism and show that the First Nations people are a reasonable and responsible people. This would demonstrate to the younger band members a sense of their own responsibilty and accountability.
There has been way to much tragedy for everyone involved already without dragging this into the courts. There are tough lessons for the band and the aviation industry, we should all learn from this.

Another point here is not just the use alcohol intoxicating passengers, but all intoxicating substances. If this case goes ahead and the plaintiffs win, anytime an accident occurs in the future where substance abuse is a contributing factor the operators and pilots will be subject to legal action.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Liquid Charlie
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1461
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:40 am
Location: YXL
Contact:

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by Liquid Charlie »

The point is that the passengers are not being held responsible for their part in the accident
--

Unfortunately in the eyes of the law they are not responsible and that was what several posters are trying point out here -- no matter who they were there was a good chance a lawsuit would be filed - the problem is that there is no proof of what actually happened - was it someone being a stupid and trying to be funny - was someone pissed off and aggressive, suicidal or did that person pass out and push the seat ahead in a drunken stupor - the only fact that can be proved is that they were intoxicated when they got on the aeroplane. That drops the responsibility right in the pilot's and company's lap - sad but true and yes we can understand the bitterness here - it's a tough lesson to learn when it's happens like, especially if friends and acquaintances are involved. Hopefully, as echoed before, we learn from this hard lesson.

If this is getting to you - pls don't take it to work - take time to sort out your frame of mind before you jump in the saddle -- a lot of us here have been through this and it does affect judgment.
---------- ADS -----------
 
rubberboot
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 65
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 6:42 pm

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by rubberboot »

AJV wrote:Because there was no locking mechanism on the pilot’s seatback
not familiar with this seats construction, but could the seat have been designed without a forward locking mechanisim(locking is usually in the recline direction) as a safety feature? commercial airliner pax seats are designed to "break over" in a crash to prevent injury for the pax behind. are light aircraft seats built this way too, as there isn't a divider between crew and pax? i haven't read the report, but if the pax was holding the seat forward with their feet, wow, that is alot of force due to the leverage the pax would have. not sure if you need to actuate a handle to recline the seat out of the break over position, so if that is also the case, he had to overcome a hell of a lot. the pilots belly would have prevented the column from being pulled back, with one hand on the controls, he other trying to work the recline....

as for the sholder strap, where was it mounted? above the door (like a car) or as part of the seat back? if it was part of the seat back, it doesnt matter in this situation whether the pilot wore it or not. if it was part of the structure, and the inertial reel caught when the seat back moved forward, then it may have prevented being pinned to the glareshield, but still may not have prevented the accident.

awful accident, any way you look at it....

r/b
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Sulako
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 2433
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:01 pm

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by Sulako »

I made a similarly bad call about 15 years ago, when I was asked to transport 3 drunk passengers. I was only rewarded with a broken airplane rather than losing my life, for which I'm grateful. I wouldn't do that again though - drunk people are unpredictable and prone to violence. This is common to all human beings, no matter their ethnic background.

For those of you posting in this thread, I appreciate the civility you have shown thus far. Please keep it up.
---------- ADS -----------
 
azimuthaviation
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1409
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 9:34 pm

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by azimuthaviation »

CpnCrunch wrote:I notice the pilot's family hasn't brought a lawsuit against the drunks. EDITED
Another good reason to wait till the end of the two year limit, they can't countersue. Pretty shameful behavior, they should be looking for forgiveness from his family, not money.
---------- ADS -----------
 
N2
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1301
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 9:23 am
Location: Under witness protection!

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by N2 »

F'n lawyers... parasites of society.
---------- ADS -----------
 
lilflyboy262
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 167
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 4:35 am

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by lilflyboy262 »

rubberboot wrote:
AJV wrote:Because there was no locking mechanism on the pilot’s seatback
not familiar with this seats construction, but could the seat have been designed without a forward locking mechanisim(locking is usually in the recline direction) as a safety feature? commercial airliner pax seats are designed to "break over" in a crash to prevent injury for the pax behind. are light aircraft seats built this way too, as there isn't a divider between crew and pax? .....

as for the sholder strap, where was it mounted? .....
r/b
Most small Cessna's like do not have the forwards reclining lock mechanism purely for getting out of the aircraft in the event of an emergency. Should the seat not be able to slide forward, they have to still be able to get out of the door without having to fumble for controls on the seat.

As for the shoulder harness. It is mounted above the door and is an adjustable strap, not on a reel. Had he had the shoulder strap on, the seat would not have been able to move to far forward.

Defeats the purpose of having the seats being able to freely fold forwards does it not?
---------- ADS -----------
 
trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4766
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by trey kule »

Having said that, how many of us have done so during our careers
Well, me for one.. But that does not mean it was a smart thing to do, and that those behind us cannot learn the lesson without having to find out the hard way.

I do not think the question of pax responsability will arise as the Captain of the aircraft allowed them on knowing they were intoxicated..At that point he assumed total responsability for any outcome as a result of them being intoxicated.
What I see here is people trying to completely abdicate the pilot's responsability and role he willingly put himself and his pax in a dangerous situation...willingly!!..You cannot simply state...well he did that...now....having said that....I will totally ignore his role and focus on the lawsuit.

And I will say it again.....because people have done it before does not make it smart...or right......to those new pilots in the north there is a big lesson to learn here...As long as pilots can justify their actions it will happen again, and again we can expect people to want to justify (or excuse) the pilot's role in this...Maybe the law suit will get the message across to some of you better than old guys ranting.. But first we have to stop excusing the pilot's behavior here..It played a pivotal role. Get that in your brain and maybe we wont have another one like this. Believe that it is OK becasue everyone does it...and we will.. Maybe the ferry captain should be giving lessons on common sense and ethics to pilots.
---------- ADS -----------
 
All Sides
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 11:21 am

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by All Sides »

So you agree with the lawsuit being launched then?
---------- ADS -----------
 
trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4766
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by trey kule »

I do not have the facts available to me to make any sort of an informed judgement on the merit of the lawsuit.

My comments were only for those who try to explain away or excuse a pilot from doing what he is legally supposed to do, what common sense would dictate, and what others, such as the ferry Captain, did.

The lesson here is not to allow drunk pax on a plane when you are the Captain. No "everyone does it"

Lets be real honest here. If the Captain had done his job we would not be discussing the merits of the lawsuit would we?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by Cat Driver »


Lets be real honest here. If the Captain had done his job we would not be discussing the merits of the lawsuit would we?

No we would not.

Drunks going back home to Apartheid isolation are a cancer on Canada and allowing a obvious drunk on your airplane is beyond poor decision making.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Apollo
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 591
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 2:42 pm
Location: Ontario

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by Apollo »

You know what, maybe the captain made a poor choice allowing those pax on board - maybe he thought he was doing the company a favour, or just being an all-around nice guy and helping a few pax get a ride home who would otherwise spend the night in an expensive hotel. Either way, it's sickening to think that the families want to place the blame solely on the shoulders of the company... the pilot for what happened. It bothers me that they refuse to take any responsibility upon themselves for what happened - what about the family of the pilot, do they not have feelings? Do they not matter because he was the guy flying the plane?

It seems to be a bit of a problem, always blaming others, and refusing to accept that you may be part of the problem itself. From now on, I will refuse to take intoxicated passengers on board, be it one drink, or a dozen. It's not worth it, especially if they are going to sue me because of your own bad decisions. Should we go after the bars, and liquor stores for supplying the alcohol to begin with? That would be the next logical step it seems. At some point, you have to realize that you may be the problem, and only you can change that, and blaming others will only make things much much worse. Personal responsibility is something that has to be learned and respected, and not passed on to anybody else but yourself.
---------- ADS -----------
 
trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4766
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by trey kule »

It seems to be a bit of a problem, always blaming others, and refusing to accept that you may be part of the problem itself.
Very true..give a bit of thought to that when you describe the Captain of the aircraft as having made a "poor choice"

I shall get on my soapbox here, and with the full acknowledgement that I too, have committed this sin in the past.
(I was lucky..not smart.....)

As the Captain of an aircraft. whether it be a 757 or a C206, you have certain responsabilities. One is not to allow drunk pax on the plane. It is that simple. If you choose, for whatever reason you decide upon, to ignore this responsbility, and something happens, as it appears to have done here, you are.....well.... responsable...
Now go back to the quote from above....That applies to the pilot of the aircraft.
Unfortunately or not, Apollo, there is, or at least used to be something along the line of diminsihed responsability as a result of alcohol intake.. Bar owners, have, in fact being successfully sued for continuing to sell people liquior when they are intoxicated.

What is most glaring to me, if it is correct , is the fact that a ferry Captain had previously refused them .
I expect if that is correct, it will have a pivotal influence. For if this is the case, one could rightly argue that the Captain of the aircraft failed in his duty. (Are you listening yet?)

A fellow aviation died, and I do not intend to make it harder for his family or friends, but lets stop pretending it was a poor choice. It was a wilful decsion to abdicate his responsability. He maybe paid for it with his life.......and the lives of three others

You should not be worried about whether or not someone will sue you..You should be shouldering your responsability because it is the right and proper thing to do. Or for no other reason than you have a better chance at a good career and a long life by relying on smart...not lucky)

This is such a simple, but oh so important lesson for young pilots. I hope some will get it..Rant over.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
The Weasel
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:53 pm

Re: Drunk passengers implicated in B.C. plane crash

Post by The Weasel »

The passengers' families filed suit this week against York's estate and the plane’s owner, Atleo River Air.
This pisses me off. The guy's gone, so they essentially sue his family, as if it's their fault? And how can a dead person defend themselves in court? Doesn't seem fair. They could've gone about this in a way that maybe changes the system, industry practices, or company policy, but instead they go for the money...
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”