US pilotcharged in crash that killed South African teen

[flyboy2]

July 08 2006 at 05:00PM
By Rachel d'Oro
Anchorage, Alaska - The pilot in a plane crash that led to a the drowning death of a teen from South Africa was charged with manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide.
Kurt Stenehjem of Anchorage was arrested on Thursday in connection with the felony charges stemming from the July 7, 2005, death of 17-year-old Mark Schroeder of Durban, South Africa.
Stenehjem, 55, and Schroeder were among five people on board the floatplane that crashed in calm weather into Johnstone Lake on the Kenai Peninsula. A floatplane is a plane equipped with pontoons so it can land on water.
Not wearing a lifejacket
Schroeder, who was not wearing a lifejacket, slipped into the glacier-fed lake while the others made it to icebergs with minor injuries.
Schroeder's mother, Lesley Schroeder McLean, said she saw "something cosmic" in the timing of the arrest - a day before the year anniversary of the crash.
Stenehjem is a longtime associate of the family. McLean's husband, Chris, is a former Alaska bush pilot and registered owner of the Maule M7-235 involved in the crash.
"From my heart, I just miss my son. I would rather have him back than have the pilot in jail," Lesley McLean said Friday from Durban. "But we do feel vindicated that justice has been served, although it's not a happy day for me."
State prosecutors could not be reached on Friday, but Alaska State Troopers and Federal Aviation Administration officials could not recall another an Alaska pilot involved in a fatal crash being criminally charged.
'Justice has been served'
Nationally, such prosecutions are uncommon, but not unheard of, said Phil Kolczynski, a Santa Ana, California-based aviation law attorney and former FAA trial attorney. Convictions are even more unusual, he said, typically involving alcohol or drugs - factors not present in the Stenehjem case. Far more common are civil lawsuits claiming negligence.
"It depends on the weight of the evidence," Kolczynski said. "If it weighs a ton, a prosecutor is doing exactly what they should be doing. On the other hand, some cases are politicised."
In its own investigation, the FAA found enough to issue a rare emergency revocation of Stenehjem's commercial pilot license, saying his lack of care and judgment justified immediate action. Among factors noted, the plane was equipped with only four seats even though there were five people on board, it was overloaded and had not undergone an annual inspection. Schroeder had sat in the back where gear was stored.Stenehjem turned himself in to Anchorage authorities Thursday and was released less than two hours later after posting $50 000 bail. Stenehjem said Friday he has not been arraigned. -
Sapa-AP [from]
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?newsl...2R131&set_id=1

[barit1]

I'll bet they didn't have parachutes either. :rolleyes:

[Permafrost_ATPL]

On a small float plane pilot salary, he probably hired the creme de la creme of lawyers :rolleyes:

Don´t know the exact details though. If the plane was indeed over max weight and had not passed its annual, it´s a tough one to defent (both in court and morally)

P

[jondc9]

4 seats, 5 people= wrong

though I understand that in alaska, planes may be operated 10percent over weight...this was to preclude not taking emergency survival gear.

not making any excuses

[jetjackel]

Probably some GS6 FAA type trying to upgrade his "cheap suit" AND get a raise.

Lifejackets aren't required to be worn any more than a parachute.

Spent a year flying out of Palmer and the FAA stayed away from Bush Pilots. Saw Bush planes with oversize car wheets on them parked at the airport.

Lots of stories about FAA types getting the s**t kicked out of them for screwing with bush pilots.

10% overload was allowed up there then but don't know about these days. As far as not having a seat, it wasn't a factor as he drowned due to not having a vest on.

FAA guy in a cheap suit looking for a raise. Wish the pilot luck because we all know he has to live with it and it certainly wasn't intentional.

Airplanes do crash.

[bafanguy]

No matter how you slice it, this is a bad precedent. This guy may have done some inappropriate things; that has yet to be determined/proven. One is "presumed" innocent until proven guilty in this country.

What's bad is criminal prosecution of a pilot involved in an accident ( I know other countries have a different slant on this...that's not what we're talking about ). This guy may have done bad stuff, but it's a very short jump for some government pencil monkey to paint all pilots in all accidents as criminally liable without regard to circumstances. The public loves a public hanging.

If they hang this guy, the camel's head is in the tent and this job will finally be not worth having.

[Barndweller]

Observation...
It seems a bit coincidental that all those properly seated and restrained survived the crash and swam to safety but the one person who was not seated and restrained - indeed was "sat in the rear with the gear" did not.
Did he suffer injuries during the accident that contibuted to his subsequent drowning that he might not have otherwise suffered if he had been properly seated and restrained
If this was a contributing factor to the guys death then the pilot is moraly as well as criminaly responsible! Simple as that.
The other overwhelming factor is... He's in aircraft taking off and landing on water... Why the hell was he not wearing a life-jacket? Could have saved his life and might have saved the pilots career.
Really sad

[ChrisVJ]

Hardly ever see anyone wearing a life jacket ( or PFD) when they come in to the dock here, in fact only one family plane load this year besides myself, (well you have to see my water landings.) Certainly none of the commercial passengers in Beavers ever do and I've never seen commercial passengers in 180's wear them either.

Interesting mention in the article that seems to have gone un-noticed. The plane belonged to the victims father. It is, in the end, the pilot's responsibility to make sure that the plane is both legal and properly loaded but I would not allow another pilot to fly my plane while it was out of annual and if I was around I wouldn't if it was overloaded.

Just for instance, you toddle off down to the FBO and rent your regular plane, did you check the plane was in annual? I never remember doing so. You have a minor incident and the suits arrive. Next thing you know you have a citation for flying a plane out of annual plus a couple for carelessness and negligence just to make sure.

None of this is to deny that we have particular duties to young people. Two of my kids go out every day to guide on a Zip Trek line and another is a lifeguard at a camp working in a sea situation. I wonder every time they go out if those responsible for running these places have taken every precaution and if the maintenance and training are all they could possibly be. (And I do quiz the boys about it all the time!)

[Barndweller]

When it comes down to it the Pilot is the first person to arrive at the crash and he is the first person of whom the "suits" will start asking questions.
It is his absoulute responsibility to check the servicability and certification of the aircraft - " i didn't know it was out of check" will not cut it with the authorities - and rightly so.
If i fly an aircraft, for the first time, i go through the documents with a microscope and then keep an aye on the re-val dates as time goes on. You have to, because you are the one who is protecting yourself, your passengers, your income & assets and your liberty (this guy could be going to jail).
Every time you think about doing something that is a little bit outside the rules (and we all do) you have to ask - "what's this going to look like if the suits arrive or if there is a prang". Then you have to ask "is it worth it". The answer is usually "NO".

Oh and "Jetjackal". It may or may not be true be true that Lifejackets are no more a requirement than parachutes, but would you jump out of an aeroplane without a parachute on? No! Nor should you take off and land on water without a Lifejacket. It's common sense and it really irritates me when people trivialise the wearing of LJ's or mock people for doing so. People continue to survive aeroplane accidnts and drown afterwards because they were not wearing LJ's. WHY!!!!!?????

Safe Flying Ladies and Gents

[wideman]

The NTSB report provides a significant amount of information:
Prior to the flight the pilot gave each passenger a personal flotation device (PFD), and briefed them on its use. The fourth/fatal passenger was seated in the aft cargo compartment atop kayak spray-skirts and gloves. The pilot and all four passengers survived the water impact with a few minor injuries. After the impact, the five survivors climbed onto the fuselage top and wings. The pilot and fatal passenger exited the airplane, leaving their PFD's behind. The other three passengers were wearing their PFD's when the accident occurred, and exited the airplane wearing them. The airplane was sinking, and all the survivors swam to a large, nearby iceberg, but were unable to climb out of the water onto the iceberg. The pilot, and the three passengers wearing PFD's, swam back to the airplane, and climbed out of the water onto the airplane. The pilot borrowed a PFD from one of the passengers, and swam back to the remaining passenger, but was unable to render aid because he'd lost all feeling in his hands due to the cold water. The remaining passenger, without aid of a PFD, slipped below the surface of the lake, and was not seen again. The survivors were able to cut through the fabric fuselage skin to retrieve extra clothing from the baggage compartment, which they gave to the pilot who, according to them, was showing signs of hypothermia. During the accident scenario, two of the passengers were dressed in layered clothing, including fleece, as suggested by the pilot. The other two passengers and the pilot were dressed in cotton levis and cotton shirts. As the airplane continued to slowly sink, two of the passengers swam to a smaller ice cake, which they were able to climb on, and the remaining passenger followed. Prior to the airplane sinking, using an inflated dry-bag, the pilot joined the others on the iceberg.
Full report is available here (http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20050721X01069&ntsbno=ANC05FA098&akey=1)

[buzeyga]

I am mixed on this. If the pilot actually did give everybody PFD's that is one story. However, if the individual that passed was seated inappropriatly.... if fact... i strongly disagree with that action by the pilot. I have to agree that there are some trying for the larger income. So the fact that i get back to...where he was seated..did that kill him upon impact? If yes then maybe he is respon.... if no..and a PFD was provided to him..then maybe not. When I drive I always force everybody to wear seatbelts... if somebody in the back takes a seatbelt off seconds before impact should I be held liable? When I fly the same..except I am always checking belts like instruments although of course not as often. Maybe all of my friends I take up should have chutes because lets face it... insurance companies and DA's with more power then the attorneys I can afford will prob. win as sad as it is :yuk: :ugh: .

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Am I to understand that some here think life jackets must be worn , or life jackets must be avaliable and the pilot must brief the passengers on their location and use?

There is a big difference.

C.E.

[pakeha-boy]

Flew Beavers on floats off lake Hood ,Anc,AK for 4 seasons,A/C were all equipped with lifejackets,and all pax were briefed on there use. Insurance required all the A/C were equipped......and NO .....we were not allowed to fly 10% over weight....thats stuff only happens during wartime:} .......
and most of all ,if you didnt get a seat,you didnt go....

After flying for 10 yrs in Alaska,these occurances are/were only to common.....just look at the accident statistics....crashed a couple meself:{ PB

[B Sousa]

BTDT and the water is F***in cold. So much so that sometimes one cannot get all the survival eqipment on in time.
I dont think the arrest passes the smell test in the sense there are those waiting to take something like this to court.
Alaska has always been loose in its observance of the rules and it was just a matter of time with someone in a nice uptown Anchorage office says "lets make an example out of this one"
Rules are rules and if you break them by hanging your A55 out then you had better be prepared to sing the song.
I had to say no to some folks up there on OAS stuff and I have a stack of nasty grams to prove it. Some of those Fed contracts will fly you into the ground. The "we have been doing it for years" still gets an ear.

[Fly Girl Blue Angel]

Manslaughter and Criminally Negligent Homicide is not about,"suits in big offices." It is about wrongful death. Pilots with integrity have a right to have their professions respected and protected;reckless tragedy reflects badly on all pilots,including those who diligently,honestly and conscientiously run businesses or fly planes. Passengers have legal rights and reasonable expectations that their lives will be protected, and that the Pilot in Command will not disregard rules and common sense. Just as with motor vehicle recklessness, there must be accountability to protect the innocent. It is important to preserve the integrity of the good Pilot's who deserve the respect and protection of the law; pilots who are negligent need to be held fully accountable.

[B Sousa]

FGBA Who grabbed your thong? Aircraft Deaths have been going on for sometime and many far worse than this one dont even get a look from Criminal Courts, usually settled out in a Wrongful Death Suit.
If you have been there you will know its about "Suits in big offices"
Speaking of Auto Accidents, its only been stylish in the last 10-15 years to take things criminally.
I do agree on the accountability end, but as I said maybe you better go up North and look around...Lots of scrap Aluminum on the hills and nobody in jail...

[Fly Girl Blue Angel]

Welcome to the big league BS...rogue & cavalier mentality went-out with the barn-stormers. In Command Pilots want laws enforced and protection for passengers, this is common sense to those who fly with safety & integrity. Unregulated wreckless actions = time in jail.

[chandlers dad]

This could be an interesting one.

First, the 10% rule is still used in Alaska, I am an A&P, know lots of people flying up there and several Feds from the FSDO there. Now, the 10% rule is almost always used for ferry flights, as flying out of ANC is one way that people get airplanes to Hawaii.

They take airplanes to ANC where someone puts a "toyko tank" in the bird and the local FSDO signs it off for ferry to Hawaii at 10% over normal gross weight. Its not normally done for normal operation but usually on a one time or ferry flight. Thank God that I never had to resort to doing that to get flight time or crossings as its long boring flying and a long swim back should the engine cough.

Second, regarding the annual. If someone owned a plane and asked me to fly their family in it, do you think that the owner is going pull me aside to say "hey, its out of annual but everything is ok, just get in and fly!" The pilot was probably told that "its ok, everything's fine, have a good flight," so lets stop jumping on the pilot for the plane being out of annual. Unless he had been told that it was out of annual AND a witness heard it being done, then that one will be throw out by a first year lawyer.

He was not correct in having 5 people and only 4 seats but you know it was in Alaska and the rules involving flying get bent, much of the time. In a court of law the lawyers will eat him alive but the kid survived the impact. He then did not grab his life vest and complications from that is what cost him his life.

Years ago I was jumpseating on PanAm from Frankfurt to Berlin after having non-rev'ed across the pond on vacation. Captain had a group of non-revs standing at the gate. He asked how many were we? We came up with 12 people and there were only 4 pax seats available in the plane. It was the last flight of the night to Berlin. He said "I commute to work and no one is going to be left behind." Two of us got in the jumpseats in the cockpit, every extra flight attendent seat was filled and two lucky people sat in the potty for takeoff and landing. It was illegal as hell but done more often than we care to admit. Yes, I know it would probably not ever happen now but it did then. When nothing happens on the flight, everyone walks away happy, like should have happened in this flight.

Sorry to see something like this happen as everyone involved would much rather have had a good flight, landed at the dock, gone inside and had a sandwich and a pint. Sometimes it does not happen.

[B Sousa]

"Welcome to the big league BS...rogue & cavalier mentality went-out with the barn-stormers."

FGBA So nice you live in a world where you certainly dont get mud on your feet from flying.........You have a long way to go.....
Attitude is all over the place. I see it in the States and more so in Africa where I am currently.
Better take it easy and enjoy the Aviation magazines in the lounge.

Go for Post #3

[pakeha-boy]

chanderlers dad.....is that cow **********(Name Deleted by Admin) still working for the FEDS....all in all I recieved 8 violations in the 10 yrs I flew up there,5 of them were from her,and only one was deserved.....and even that one was a little shakey:* ......as a previous poster mentioned ...enforcement was tough ,especially when we covered up our N#,s......and for the little blue angel.......stay in the lower 48.:yuk: ... ...never once gambled with anyones life except for my own...and anyone who,s done solo night freight knows what I mean/.....pb

[chandlers dad]

chanderlers dad.....is that cow *********(Name Deleted by Admin) still working for the FEDS....all in all I recieved 8 violations in the 10 yrs I flew up there,5 of them were from her,and only one was deserved.....and even that one was a little shakey:* ......as a previous poster mentioned ...enforcement was tough ,especially when we covered up our N#,s......and for the little blue angel.......stay in the lower 48.:yuk: ... ...never once gambled with anyones life except for my own...and anyone who,s done solo night freight knows what I mean/.....pb

Nope, she got run out. She is a television whore and trying to get anyone to listen to her these days.

The lower 48 is a lot different but if you have a fed watching you then its going to be difficult. I have one watching me but the good thing for me is that he watches me from the other side of the dinner table when I BBQ some dead cow for a dinner party! Helps to have a friend in the local FSDO and he is a good guy.

Night freight... started there and did it for a very long time, from Piper Arrows to Lear 60's. At times miss that world.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

" --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Welcome to the big league BS...rogue & cavalier mentality went-out with the barn-stormers. In Command Pilots want laws enforced and protection for passengers, this is common sense to those who fly with safety & integrity. Unregulated wreckless actions = time in jail. "

Two questions Fly Girl..

Are you suggesting that evey passenger in all sea planes should wear life vests?

What do you mean by welcome to the big leagues? Are you referring to aviation being the big leagues?

[Sparks mom]

I have read your comments and am glad to see that there is interest in my son's death and the case which is obviously a precedent setting one.
Thank you Fly Girl Blue Angel and others for your comments. If any of you like I did, have the most vibrant talented young man on the verge of adulthood who wanted to live his life to the max, you will want to see all pilots being more responsible and not endangering people's lives needlessly. It might be helpful for you to view Mark's memorial website to get all the facts and put a face to him. It is www.mark-schroeder.memory-of.com (http://www.mark-schroeder.memory-of.com) I am not sure how to respond to one of the comments that there are many incidents that have been worse than this. Please tell me what is worse than losing the most beautiful son?

There is only one thing I want to add here and that is that the pilot knew that plane was out of annual. He had promised he would get it sorted out before the due date. We were neighbours on the lake where my son died and because he was so keen on his tourism business and we live far away, we had kindly loaned him the use of our plane after his plane was destroyed on a landing. He was also told under no circumstances to ever put more than three passengers in the plane and the plane was only insured to carry 3 passengers.

Thank you for your interest.

Lesley Schroeder, Mother of Mark, 17.

[B Sousa]

Lesley
Condolences on your loss. Whatever occurs to the pilot will not change that..
The controversy here is not that he shouldnt be charged, but that our justice system is so hit and miss that sometimes many fall through the cracks. Also as has been mentioned, many never go to criminal court but end up in Civil litigation.
Two that I know of in the lower 48 in the last few years, resulted in the deaths of over ten people and both went to civil action. Its not that your case is a "Precedent Setting One", so much as its a case which is going to trial, where others as serious may not.
Further, Alaska has always been on the edge when it comes to Aviation. It has one of the largest Aircraft to Population ratios in the world. Thus between, weather, terrain and other factors the exposure for problems is much higher.
You were a neighbor of his??. Knew his Aircraft had crashed?? Maybe knew he crashed it?? I dont know if that was the case. You lent him your aircraft that was out of annual??....... Story is a bit vague on those questions. If that is what I am hearing I dont know if I would have my family on board.
Not an excuse for a careless Pilot.......No question, the buck has to stop on his shoulders.
FGBA does not appear to have been exposed to the type of flying that occurs in places around the world where limits are pushed and accident ratios are higher. Thats where the little tiff begins... I dont think FGBA has a clue about the big leagues. Whatever that means.
Times are changing and as we see some pilots who still push the limits, for example alcohol, are being made to pay the price.... Its a good thing but it will take time.
As you live in South Africa, you should know the justice system is a bit better in the States and hopefully something good will come from this tragedy.

By the way is this Lesley of PRAfrica??

[Fly Girl Blue Angel]

Criminal Negligence=Time in Jail.
What I am saying is that every passenger has a right to a seat,seatbelt, and reasonably safe passage. That goes for auto,boat,seaplane,or rail.
The lowest common denominator should not be the measure when it comes to flight safety. Because other idiots have crashed, or skirted prosectution of the law, or think it is somehow a mark of bravado, that is not the measure most pilots want to see used. Your disparraging remarks do not represent the earnest, disciplined Pilots in Command who work so diligently and daily for safety and for the integrity of the profession. Prison for the Pilot,Kurt Stenehjem, will not bring the innocent boy back( forensically he is kneeling at the bottom of a lake) but it will provide the punishment and justice that is deserved. As for flight conditions, Pilots all over the world fly in every imagineable condition, that is NO excuse for manslaughter and blatant negligence which causes unnecessary death. And the lame excuse of civil suit (it is not always about the $$$$ dears) is not the justice the serious Pilots want to see,negligence reflects badly on all Pilots. Criminal Negligence= time in jail.

[B Sousa]

OK.....FGBA, you have made your point....... I think We agree, but I certainly dont see what your stance has to do with reality of things.

"Your disparraging remarks do not represent the earnest, disciplined Pilots in Command who work so diligently and daily for safety and for the integrity of the profession"
Spare me this will you. What are you Non-Flying Management?? Most pilots who bust their butts today have gone through many times when had things gone to sh1t, they would have been in some kind of FAR violation. Im talking of those who have had to start out starving then doing low pay tasks such as instruction, freight dogs etc. They have all been pushed. Yes some have had the silver spoon and not been put in positions where if they tell the boss no, the kids wont eat until they get another job.


"Pilots all over the world fly in every imagineable condition, that is NO excuse for manslaughter and blatant negligence which causes unnecessary death"
That is certainly true, but its done daily....... under those imagineable conitions.

"And the lame excuse of civil suit (it is not always about the $$$$ dears)" OK, lame excuse?? Come on you think that if the guy in this picture is insured to his armpits or owns a multi-million dollar business that it will stop with criminal prosecution?? Did you eat stupid flakes for breakfast?? Civil Litigation is about the only justice that will come from this and if it goes to that, you can guarantee that everyone from the maker of the aircraft to the last poor kid who fueled the aircraft will be named.

If you are a pilot, heres hoping that someday when you get in a bind because your emlployer has pushed you up against the wall or the weather enroute goes to crap so bad that to get the job done you have the..... well lets just say you say no and go looking for another job.
What Big Leagues do you play in anyway??........If Im correct most of the majors guys get pushed by companies also...
Keep your own slate clean and maybe you wont have to room with Bubba in the Big House.

And also on the reality check..Criminal Negligence only equals time in jail if you cannot afford a good lawyer. You must have a beautiful view from that big Glass House.

[chandlers dad]

I did a flight on a corporate aircraft a few years ago. Landed outside of our country and then and only then received an email from the chief pilot saying for me to call him. I emailed him instead, as I smelled a rat and wanted whatever he was going to say in writing.

He informed me that he had sent me and my crew out of the country with an illegal airplane! The bird had been re-registered to another company name and the perm registration had not arrived yet. Flying an airplane like this out of the country is not legal, so he just put the old registration in the bird and said nothing before we left.

After this he faxed me a copy of the new registration. The jerk, he just put us in the hot seat in case customs did a registery check before we landed back in CONUS. Its only a $10,000 fine and black mark on your passport with Customs and Border Patrol, but he did not care, he was not the PIC!

I know first hand how its like to be handed an airplane that you believe is legal, and take it for a flight, only to find out afterwards that its not legal and that the powers that be knew beforehand.

As well I have had one flight where we had one person too many for the number of seats in the airplane one time. I went into the terminal to check on something, the FA shut the door and we started the engines. Seconds later the FA taps me on the shoulder and said "we have a pax hiding in the potty, what do you want to do?" I shut the LH engine down and we off loaded the "extra pax" to the security.

Sorry to see the flight ended in an accident, and as well sorry to see someone hurt or killed at anytime, but lets wait for the entire story to come out at the trial. True that he had one too many people on the plane and its also true that the plane was out of annual. Did either of these contribute to the accident? Lets see, but as my situations above show, not always does the PIC of the flight know the entire story all of the time. These are only from my background, but if they happened to me, they could happen to others.

[B Sousa]

FGBA has got my attention...........Chandlers dad has just told her one incident that occured to him and its one of many that occurs daily. I certainly wish she would bare her credentials as Im sure if she was a pilot, she has had to hang her whatever out at some point. Had she had problems that resulted in a tragedy such as this one her whatever would be in the slam. Of course as strong as her posts are that would never happen...

"The jerk, he just put us in the hot seat in case customs did a registery check before we landed back in CONUS. Its only a $10,000 fine and black mark on your passport with Customs and Border Patrol, but he did not care, he was not the PIC! "
Hey, Pilots responsibility to make sure ALL things are correct and as Pilots the problem is we have to trust others. In this case Chandlers Dad could have had his ass handed to him and once a blackmark with Customs/ Immigration your name will always showup on entry. It matters not who you know.
Let us not forget that this thread started off with a mistake. That mistake took a life. Now someone must atone for that. Certainly it will be the pilot.
It could be a lesson to other Pilots, but then again in the real world of Aviation, Pilots will continue to try and survive themselves.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

FGBA, what exactly is your point?
Are you suggesting that we in aviation do not understand basic airmanship and how to manage risk?
And in your opinion jail time is to be handed out before the facts are known?
Are you a pilot working for pay?

[Fly Girl Blue Angel]

Maybe 3 lefts need to figure out how to go right...a rookie knows the difference between accidental and lack of basic common sense; not to mention the breaking of the law... Reread the assignments boyz, the litany of errors is ridiculous. There is no place for the lowest common denom. in the sky. When a death is caused by negligence, there needs to be accountability to justice of the law. You defend? those that represent the worst of the profession, is that self-representative? like finds like. If you have really logged the hours with integrity, you wouldn't defend those that give it a bad name. Pilot negligence reflects badly on all...common sense, not too complicated. Operative word here being negligence. Not bad weather, mechanical problems not attributed to the Pilot, not unforseen circumstances...FAA emergency revocation, 2nd total wreck in 2 years, litany too long to list here...one has no right to take the life of another because of negligence. It reflects badly on all.

[B Sousa]

Talking to FGBA is like beating a dead horse.....It aint gonna happen.
Sure what she says is true on paper, but its not the real world.....Enough already.
Certainly would be more interesting to know where shes coming from. Pilot, Lawyer, Relative or just stirring the pot.

"Not bad weather, mechanical problems not attributed to the Pilot, not unforseen circumstances...FAA emergency revocation, 2nd total wreck in 2 years, litany too long to list here.."
Obviously some inside information here, if this is regards to the Pilot... May change a few opinions if it were known..

[chandlers dad]

Talking to FGBA is like beating a dead horse.....It aint gonna happen.
Sure what she says is true on paper, but its not the real world.....Enough already.
Certainly would be more interesting to know where shes coming from. Pilot, Lawyer, Relative or just stirring the pot.
"Not bad weather, mechanical problems not attributed to the Pilot, not unforseen circumstances...FAA emergency revocation, 2nd total wreck in 2 years, litany too long to list here.."
Obviously some inside information here, if this is regards to the Pilot... May change a few opinions if it were known..

Considering that she will not fess up and tell us if she is even in the aviation industry, not to mention what position if she is, would have to agree. Have to lean towards "stiring the pot" so far.

[Solid Rust Twotter]

Is it possible FGBA is a little closer to the story than we're led to believe? There appears to be an attempt to smear and convict the pilot here before the case has even been heard....:hmm:

[B Sousa]

"We were neighbours on the lake where my son died and because he was so keen on his tourism business and we live far away, we had kindly loaned him the use of our plane after his plane was destroyed on a landing."

"Airmen Database Search Result
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name : STENEHJEM, KURT WILLIS
Airman's Address : 200 W 34TH AVE # 96
ANCHORAGE, AK, 99503-3969
FAA Region : Alaskan
Date of Medical : Dec, 2004
Class of Medical : 2
Expiration of Class 2 : Dec, 2005
Airman Certificates : Private Pilot
Airplane Single Engine Land and Sea
Instrument Airplane


Things are not passing the smell test here. Was this a Commercial Flight. Was the pilot doing this for hire?? Or was it the neighbors lending him there out of annual aircraft for a Private flight.........
I can Guarantee I wouldnt "Lend" out my aircraft to anyone without a lot of other questions asked/answered...... but that will be part of the mitigation on the case Im sure.
NTSB site was down so when I can get the report I will post it. It may answer some questions which FGBA cant or wont answer.............

[B Sousa]

Here it is boys and girls, fresh from the horses mouth...........


ANC05FA098
HISTORY OF FLIGHT

On July 7, 2005, about 1100 Alaska daylight time, a float-equipped Maule M-7-235 airplane, N5661J, sustained substantial damage when it impacted water and sank, following an in-flight loss of control during final approach at Johnstone Lake, about 25 miles southeast of Seward, Alaska. The airplane was being operated by Glacier Air Adventures, of Anchorage, Alaska, as a visual flight rules (VFR) business flight under Title 14, CFR Part 91, when the accident occurred. The commercial certificated pilot/lodge operator and three passengers received minor injuries, a fourth passenger received fatal injuries. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and company flight following procedures were in effect. The flight originated at Bear Lake, 6 miles northeast of Seward, about 1030.

During an interview with the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigator-in-charge (IIC) on July 7, the pilot said the flight from Bear Lake to Johnstone Lake was to transport passengers for a kayaking adventure on Johnstone Lake at the foot of the Excelsior Glacier. He said the flight was uneventful until, about 25-50 feet above Johnstone Lake, during the final approach for landing on the lake, the airplane "quit flying." He said the airplane impacted the lake in a near-level attitude, with a high rate of descent. He and the four passengers exited the airplane, and stood on top of the wings and fuselage. He said the float's supporting structure had collapsed, and the wings were resting on the top of the floats on the water. He stated the airplane was more than a mile from shore, surrounded by icebergs, and slowly sinking. In an attempt to move from the sinking airplane to a large iceberg, the pilot said one of the passengers, who was not wearing a personal flotation device, drown. The pilot said that prior to the impact there were no known mechanical anomalies with the airplane, and the engine was running normally.

INJURIES TO PERSONS

The pilot and three passengers received minor injuries. The fourth passenger drown while trying to swim back to the floating airplane wreckage from an iceberg, and was not recovered from the lake.

DAMAGE TO AIRCRAFT

According to statements by the pilot and passengers, the airplane received substantial structural damage to the wings and fuselage during the accident. The airplane subsequently sank in water estimated to be 600-800 feet deep, and has not been recovered.

PERSONNEL INFORMATION

According to FAA records the pilot held a commercial pilot certificate with ratings for single-engine land, single-engine sea, and instrument airplane. According to an estimate by the pilot, he had accumulated about 1,738 total hours of flying experience, with 370 of those hours in the same make and model as the accident airplane. The pilot was issued an FAA class 2 medical certificate in December, 2004. The pilot did not present evidence of a current biennial flight review; however, he received an additional aeronautical rating April 21, 2005.

AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

The airplane was a model year 1997 Maule M-7-235, single-engine, float equipped airplane. The airplane had accumulated about 1,140 service hours on the airframe at the time of the last annual inspection, which was completed on June 27, 2004. The airplane did not have a current annual inspection at the time of the accident. The engine had accumulated 1,140 total service hours at the time of the annual inspection. An airframe log book entry indicated the floats were removed in November 2004. According to the mechanic who installed the floats in the spring of 2005, the installation was not completed under his signature because the pilot failed to provide the fuselage-mounted ventral fin necessary to complete the installation. According to the airplane and float manufacturers, the ventral fin provides additional in-flight yaw axis stability. The fifth seat configuration for the accident airplane requires a supplemental type certificate (STC) for the fifth seat installation in the aft baggage area. The manufacturer reported that their records disclosed that the airplane was delivered without the fifth seat. Federal Aviation Administration records do not record a fifth seat STC being issued for the accident airplane.

METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION

According to the pilot, visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and weather was not a factor in the accident.

WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION

The accident occurred on Johnstone Lake, Alaska. Johnstone Lake is a freshwater lake whose long axis is oriented approximately north-south, about 1 mile from the Gulf of Alaska, and is about 3.5 miles long, and averages about 1 mile wide. The south end of the lake is separated from the Gulf of Alaska by a rocky beach, about 1 mile wide, with a fresh water (stream-like) outlet. The north end of the lake is dominated by the Excelsior Glacier. The lake water is filled with glacial silt, is gray colored, and is reported to be 600-800 feet deep. The lake is populated with various-sized floating ice chunks, and large icebergs. According to the pilot and survivors, the airplane descended rapidly from about 25-50 feet above the surface, and impacted the lake in a level attitude. They reported that the floats spread apart, and collapsed against the underside of the wings. They said the floats maintained their longitudinal position with respect to the fuselage. The fuselage lay submerged, supported by the floats under the wings, until it subsequently sank. The airplane has not been recovered.

MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATION

The pilot and surviving passengers received minor impact and subsequent minor exposure injuries. The fatal passenger has not been recovered from the lake.

SURVIVAL ASPECTS

The accident occurred while the four seat (pilot and three passenger), float-equipped airplane was on final approach to a glacier-fed, fresh water lake. The lake is estimated to be 600-800 feet deep with a surface temperature of 38-42 degrees F. The lake is populated by large icebergs, and smaller cakes of ice. The day of the accident was clear with relatively calm winds, and long hours of midsummer daylight.

Prior to the flight the pilot gave each passenger a personal flotation device (PFD), and briefed them on its use. The fourth/fatal passenger was seated in the aft cargo compartment atop kayak spray-skirts and gloves. The pilot and all four passengers survived the water impact with a few minor injuries. After the impact, the five survivors climbed onto the fuselage top and wings. The pilot and fatal passenger exited the airplane, leaving their PFD's behind. The other three passengers were wearing their PFD's when the accident occurred, and exited the airplane wearing them. The airplane was sinking, and all the survivors swam to a large, nearby iceberg, but were unable to climb out of the water onto the iceberg. The pilot, and the three passengers wearing PFD's, swam back to the airplane, and climbed out of the water onto the airplane. The pilot borrowed a PFD from one of the passengers, and swam back to the remaining passenger, but was unable to render aid because he'd lost all feeling in his hands due to the cold water. The remaining passenger, without aid of a PFD, slipped below the surface of the lake, and was not seen again. The survivors were able to cut through the fabric fuselage skin to retrieve extra clothing from the baggage compartment, which they gave to the pilot who, according to them, was showing signs of hypothermia. During the accident scenario, two of the passengers were dressed in layered clothing, including fleece, as suggested by the pilot. The other two passengers and the pilot were dressed in cotton levis and cotton shirts. As the airplane continued to slowly sink, two of the passengers swam to a smaller ice cake, which they were able to climb on, and the remaining passenger followed. Prior to the airplane sinking, using an inflated dry-bag, the pilot joined the others on the iceberg.

The flight used "company flight following" instead of an FAA flight plan. When the airplane did not return as scheduled, the person responsible for tracking the progress of the flight elected to contact other pilots in the area rather than report the airplane missing. After seeing several airplanes orbit the lake, presumably looking for the now submerged airplane, and then leave without seeing them, the survivors decided they had to make their own way to shore. The survivors were on an iceberg near the center of the lake, about a mile from shore. Two of the survivors boarded a cake of ice, and using makeshift paddles, paddled toward the shore where they knew there was a camp with kayaks and supplies. After paddling for about 2 hours, and within 100 yards of the shore, a State Trooper helicopter appeared, headed for the same camp as the paddlers. The helicopter recovered the paddlers, and the two remaining survivors on the iceberg. All four survivors were taken to the hospital, and treated for minor impact and exposure related injuries.

[chandlers dad]

Lots of unanswered questions here.

Why werent the floats installed correctly and following the STC information?

Why wasnt the 5th seat installed?

Annual was 10 days overdue. Not exactly the way it sounded at first.

Love the way the NTSB says that the pilot had no proof of a Bi-annual flight review, then says that he had gotten an additional rating in the meantime, which means that he did not need the Bi-annual. Typical Feds.

Pilot gave each pax a PFD and briefed them on its use. One elected not to use the PFD and was the only person not to survive.

The lawyers will have a field day with this one. Sure sounds like the owner and operator of the airplane (may be two different people or companies) may have a played a large part in this situation. The pilot should not have had an extra pax on board but had he worn the PFD as instructed it might have turned out differently.

Sad to see.

[B Sousa]

Seems FGBA has disappeared. Waiting to hear her comments with regards to the FEDs.

[Yossarian]

An extremely sad story all round. Seems to me that the lack of the flotation device was the crux here. Cannot imagine the trauma of losing a child. Condolences to the family involved.

Would a 5th seat, valid annual or better briefing have changed events here at all?

A real tragedy, and one that the pilot will have to try and live with for the rest of his life. I can't see how a jail term will improve matters.

[B Sousa]

"Would a 5th seat, valid annual or better briefing have changed events here at all?"
Typical of an accident, a long chain where had someone broken a link along the way, it may not have occured.

[chuks]

I seem to remember a trip for a high-ranking Nigerian General when we had 11seats and 13 pax. I guess they were both under two years old and just real big for their age... but it seemed best not to ask too many questions.

I wish our guardian angel had been there to explain the rules to that fellow. 'Now listen here, General...' That would have been enjoyable.

Things must seem a bit different when you are in Delaware compared to somewhere out in the bush. Still, it sure is good to see someone keeping up standards.

Welcome to Pprune and I bet that you will fit right in.