Geez, just watched the video for the first time. That's pretty dark!
Bollocks! You could clearly see the hill and remember that was being filmed from inside a lit cabin, so from the cockpit it was probably even clearer.
There's nothing in that video that I would consider to be evidence of 'dangerous'.
I would like to know how the cross examination went with the so called 'expert witnesses' there would be much to challenge after looking at the video.
Can anyone find a transcript of the court case?
Interesting words from the judge.
Surely this wasn't about EFATO escape procedures as per the Otago Daily suggests....
The judge who sentenced a Pacific Blue pilot for his careless Queenstown take-off has concerns about industry pressure to keep aircraft ''off the ground''.
Auckland-based captain Roderick Gunn was yesterday fined $5100 for carelessly operating a Sydney-bound aircraft on June 22, 2010, in dark conditions and outside the airline's and Civil Aviation Authority flight rules.
The 55-year-old married father-of-two is still allowed to fly but must undertake extensive training before he renews his licence, which expired during his two-and-a-half-year stand-down following the incident.
Gunn must not operate as pilot-in-command on flights in and out of Queenstown - regarded as a ''category X'' aerodrome with the highest degree of difficulty - for 12 months. During sentencing in the Queenstown District Court, Judge Kevin Phillips said he held concerns about pilots feeling the urgency to keep aircraft moving.
''In my view, there appears to be some degree of either peer pressure or operator pressure to personnel, and I find that alarming that a person as experienced as you has come to need to get this aircraft off the ground, out of Queenstown, in these circumstances,'' he said.
''If there is the prevalent view among senior pilots that `the job has got to be done' then that has to be, in my view, denounced.''
Gunn's good character from his exemplary 30-year commercial flying career ''is now gone forever'' after a wilful disregard for the strict aviation rules, Judge Phillips said. Gunn took off from Queenstown with 64 passengers and six crew at 5.25pm, 11 minutes after the rules stipulated it was safe to do so at that time of year.
That, compounded by low cloud and high crosswinds, meant that a prudent and reasonable pilot would have left the plane grounded. During Gunn's lengthy trial last year, the prosecution case centred on the idea that if there was an engine failure during or immediately after take-off, the plane would not have been able to make it safely out of the mountainous basin and to another airport.
A transcript of an interview with Gunn following the incident showed he regarded flying on that day as ''just another day in the office''. Judge Phillips found that to be an aggravating comment.
''It was denouncing of your duties and denouncing of yourself.
''You seemed to ignore the fact that you had to maintain visibility - not only with the lake and the ground below - but also the mountainous terrain that you had to fly around.
''Somehow, you as pilot-in-command could make your own rules.''
Outside court, Gunn declined to comment, being contractually bound to not say anything. Defence counsel Matthew Muir said: ''I think that Mr Gunn will be delighted that the judge has given him another chance in his career.''
CAA director of civil aviation Graeme Harris welcomed the sentencing.
''Airlines in New Zealand are among the safest in the world and the vast majority of airline pilots are highly professional and focused on the safety of their passengers.
''While we prefer to work with airlines and pilots that share a common interest in safety, there is a threshold beyond which those involved in aviation must be held accountable for their actions.'
The pilot guilty of operating a commercial jet aircraft carelessly in Queenstown has been told his actions were arrogant and "increased the risk of tragedy occurring".
Auckland-based Roderick Gunn, 55, has escaped disqualification from flying but has been fined $5100 plus court costs during his sentence in Queenstown District Court today.
He must undertake extensive retraining, to be overseen by Air New Zealand captain and expert witness in the case Stu Julian. He is also barred from being a pilot-in-command of a flight in and out of Queenstown for 12 months.
Gunn, a pilot with more than 30 years' commercial flying experience, is the Pacific Blue captain who flew out of Queenstown Airport in dark, wintry conditions in his Sydney-bound Boeing 737-800 on June 22, 2010. He was found guilty two weeks ago by Judge Kevin Phillips. Interim name suppression was lifted at the conclusion of his sentence.
Gunn has been stood-down from flying since the incident.
During sentencing, Judge Kevin Phillips told Gunn that despite his exemplary career, he showed a "wilful disregard" for the aviation rules he was bound by.
"There was an arrogance in that your experience and abilities would overcome rules of law," Judge Phillips says.
"Your actions increased the risk on your crew and increased the risk of tragedy occurring in the Queenstown area. Any accident could have been catastrophic."
Lawyer for the Civil Aviation Authority, Fletcher Pilditch, argued prior to sentencing that Gunn should have been disqualified because that would denounce and deter any future incidents by pilots.
He also said Gunn failed to show any remorse or contrition for his offending.
Gunn's lawyer Matthew Muir argued that Gunn's conviction alone was a significant-enough deterrent for others in the aviation industry.
He also reasoned that Gunn has already been barred from flying for two-and-a-half years and would take a further 17 months to get a new licence. Gunn's employment contract also included an option for dismissal if he was disqualified.
Judge Phillips' guilty verdict follows a lengthy trial of Gunn last year.
Gunn took off from Queenstown with 64 passengers at 5.25pm, 11 minutes after the rules stipulated it was safe to do so at that time of year. That, compounded by low cloud and high cross-winds, meant that a prudent and reasonable pilot would have left the plane grounded, Judge Phillips found.
The prosecution case centred on the idea that if there was an engine failure during or immediately after take-off, the plane wouldn't have been able to make it safely out of the mountainous basin and on to another airport.