Helicopter engineer cleared of manslaughter after crash
As an aside, the CAA held a small helicopter safety seminar last year, and part of the trip involved a visit to the AAIB in Farnborough.. .. .The wreckage of this particular machine was still there. Sobering thought for a helicopter pilot, almost as much as the imposing wreckage of the Lockerbie Pan Am 747.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Things are different here, they are throwing away the key on some for vehicular manslaughter cases.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: the other America
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was accident here in Oz a couple of years back due the lower cluster/tailboom support failing.. .. .We had a H300 with the same fatigue type crack appear in the lower cluster. Options as told to us were to weld in a whole new cluster, or have an "approved" weld repair carried out.. .. .Having a little knowledge about these members and how welding can effect them, we elected to forgo the cheaper weld repair and replace the whole cluster.. .. .If an "approved" repair is undertaken you can only rely on the procedures to get it past the "approval" process.. .. .Even then you as the Pilot ought to keep a damn good eye on it.. .. .A very Sad case all round.. .. .fly safe. .Hone
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Escrick York england
Posts: 1,676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as i know Flying Lawyer defended him
g whizz
you must be a engineer. young dennis kenyon died because someone did not stick to the rules. you want to ring denis kenyon senior and tell him paul kenward has served his sentence of 2 years.
b sousa. pilots have to put there faith in engineers and the pilot did not know about it.
lu. the engineer is a caa not a faa.
nopaxthanx. apparently there has been seven accidents the same as this. ido hope that denis kenyon senior puts his point of view forward as there is lots to this that did not come out in court that the procicution lawyer omitted .
steve atherton my name as i do not want to be annon.
g whizz
you must be a engineer. young dennis kenyon died because someone did not stick to the rules. you want to ring denis kenyon senior and tell him paul kenward has served his sentence of 2 years.
b sousa. pilots have to put there faith in engineers and the pilot did not know about it.
lu. the engineer is a caa not a faa.
nopaxthanx. apparently there has been seven accidents the same as this. ido hope that denis kenyon senior puts his point of view forward as there is lots to this that did not come out in court that the procicution lawyer omitted .
steve atherton my name as i do not want to be annon.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There were no 'winners' in this case. It was a tragedy for the three people who lost their lives, a tragedy for their families and friends, and a tragedy for the engineer whose life has been shattered by one mistake.
The news report is inaccurate in one important respect. The engineer did not 'ignore' the manufacturer's instructions. He did what many of us do from time to time - he relied on his memory instead of going to the books to check. There but for the grace of God go many of us.
The clevis lug was already welded in course of manufacture, and further repair welds are permitted to one side of the cluster. Sadly, the engineer's memory re which side could be welded was incorrect.
It may not be generally known that, to his great credit, the engineer contacted the AAIB when he heard the crash was caused by a failed aft cluster, and told them he had authorised a weld repair. He provided all the evidence which led to him being charged with Manslaughter.
The engineer always admitted he was negligent. That was not in dispute. He pleaded Guilty to ANO offences which included negligently endangering the helicopter and its occupants. The sole issue for the jury to decide was whether his negligence was an so great that it amounted to Gross Negligence - Manslaughter.
The jury heard all the facts and considered the arguments by both sides. They found him Not Guilty of Manslaughter.
In addition to the engineer, who admitted what he had done, a number of other people behaved with great integrity and dignity.
The engineer's employer, Mr Chris Stepto, supported him throughout the long period between the crash and the trial - in circumstances where many employers might have distanced themselves.
Mr Rex Parkinson, the Senior AAIB Investigator who investigated the crash, remained totally professional and independent throughout, providing information fairly to prosecution and defence as required. (The CAA assisted the prosecution.) I have had extensive dealings with the AAIB over the years, and I never fail to be impressed by their impartial approach.
Above all, Mr Dennis Kenyon, a highly respected instructor and display pilot and father of one of those who died. Under cross-examination, Mr Kenyon told the jury he had known the engineer professionally for some years, and had always regarded him as conscientious and trustworthy. When asked whether he would trust him again despite the loss of his son, he paused to think about the question, and replied: "Yes. I suppose I would."
MD 600 driver
That may surprise you, given your comments. Let me surprise you a little more.
Mr Kenyon approached the engineer outside the court room. It was the first time they'd seen each other since the accident. He put his arm around the engineer's shoulders, asked him how he was bearing up under the strain, and wished him good luck with the manslaughter charges.
Dennis Kenyon is a far, far bigger man than you give him credit for, and earned the respect of those who heard him give evidence.
The news report is inaccurate in one important respect. The engineer did not 'ignore' the manufacturer's instructions. He did what many of us do from time to time - he relied on his memory instead of going to the books to check. There but for the grace of God go many of us.
The clevis lug was already welded in course of manufacture, and further repair welds are permitted to one side of the cluster. Sadly, the engineer's memory re which side could be welded was incorrect.
It may not be generally known that, to his great credit, the engineer contacted the AAIB when he heard the crash was caused by a failed aft cluster, and told them he had authorised a weld repair. He provided all the evidence which led to him being charged with Manslaughter.
The engineer always admitted he was negligent. That was not in dispute. He pleaded Guilty to ANO offences which included negligently endangering the helicopter and its occupants. The sole issue for the jury to decide was whether his negligence was an so great that it amounted to Gross Negligence - Manslaughter.
The jury heard all the facts and considered the arguments by both sides. They found him Not Guilty of Manslaughter.
In addition to the engineer, who admitted what he had done, a number of other people behaved with great integrity and dignity.
The engineer's employer, Mr Chris Stepto, supported him throughout the long period between the crash and the trial - in circumstances where many employers might have distanced themselves.
Mr Rex Parkinson, the Senior AAIB Investigator who investigated the crash, remained totally professional and independent throughout, providing information fairly to prosecution and defence as required. (The CAA assisted the prosecution.) I have had extensive dealings with the AAIB over the years, and I never fail to be impressed by their impartial approach.
Above all, Mr Dennis Kenyon, a highly respected instructor and display pilot and father of one of those who died. Under cross-examination, Mr Kenyon told the jury he had known the engineer professionally for some years, and had always regarded him as conscientious and trustworthy. When asked whether he would trust him again despite the loss of his son, he paused to think about the question, and replied: "Yes. I suppose I would."
MD 600 driver
That may surprise you, given your comments. Let me surprise you a little more.
Mr Kenyon approached the engineer outside the court room. It was the first time they'd seen each other since the accident. He put his arm around the engineer's shoulders, asked him how he was bearing up under the strain, and wished him good luck with the manslaughter charges.
Dennis Kenyon is a far, far bigger man than you give him credit for, and earned the respect of those who heard him give evidence.
Gatvol
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: KLAS/TIST/FAJS/KFAI
Posts: 4,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Presumably they still have to be found guilty first?. .The jury cleared this engineer of Manslaughter. ". .. .Heliport.....Get Real.....I understand what the jury did. Thats why I mentioned about having a good lawyer. OJ was cleared also.... .Time to dump this thread.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Ask the voices!
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying Lawyer,. .. .Thank you for your post. It has changed my feelings somewhat towards Mr Kenward, and from what you say I think that Dennis Kenyon Seniors' strength is to be admired and respected.. .. ."Some days you are the statue, some days you are the statue!"
Guest
Posts: n/a
For my two cents, sit down and strap in.. .. .This issue of criminal penalty for honest mistakes is the issue. Who among us wants to go to prison for overshooting an approach and landing hard? How about getting a bit lost and putting down in a rough spot?. .. .Consider that about 2/3 of all accidents are pilot error should make us think about this in a different way. The mechanic in this case flew his family in the machine after the repair, he stepped up to his mistake without hesitation, and he has expressed nothing but regret.. .. .He is no criminal, and retribution is not justice. Let he who has not made a mistake cast the first stone.
Hats off to Mr Dennis Kenyon snr, you are an inspiration sir.. .. .FL's article again demonstrates the appalling accuracy and use of emotive language of some (most!) sections of the media. Yet it still seems to suck some of us into believing the drivel.. .. .Cap'n Sousa, it's hard not to sympathise with your viewpoint on a "heat of the moment" emotive level of outrage at the loss of life, but after you consider the reality of the situation from FL's post it is clear that justice has indeed been achieved. . .. .Have I ever relied upon memory in making decisions only to find the book said something different? Yep. As said by many above - there, but for the grace of God....
Gatvol
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: KLAS/TIST/FAJS/KFAI
Posts: 4,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the Skids. .Heliport. . Its an Analogy. I have nothing against the guy whatsoever..... .You can equate the two trials. The man was charged criminally and found not guilty. So was OJ....No Difference.. Again, Im not talking of all the particulars, only the fact that one was "Charged Criminally" and found "Not Guilty". .Nick also mentioned "Criminal Penalties" for "Honest Mistakes".. Its a way of life here. Look for example of DUI in the states. A few years ago it was but a simple fine, or worse if someone was killed......maybe, just maybe probation and a fine....Today Prosecutors are seeking the Death Penalty/Life without Parole for the same offense. . .As with most similar situations the "Civil Process" not the "Criminal Process" resolves most of it in the old fashioned way......Money.. .Dont get so uptight...its a discussion not a fight.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Kings Caple, Ross-on-Wye.orPiccots End. Hertfordshire
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure if the correspondence on the Hughes 300C manslaughter case is still open, but I have just been directed to the site.
It is sad but understandable that there appears to be so little accurate information out there on this case. As the parent of the pilot, I have taken it upon myself to know every fact.
Yes a top lawyer represented the engineer and he didn't 'get him off' He accurately laid out the difficulties all engineers faced over this cracking proble, Even the CAA;'s own surveyor failed to detect the welded repair as he signed off the Certicate of Airworthiness four months before the accident. I believe the jury said to themselves. If the safety regulatory authority's own engineer made a mistake, why are we trying this engineer for manslaughter?
My son's accident was the eighth, yes the eighth failure of the centre frame, aft left hand cluster. You might think a more responsible regulatory authority would have mandated the fitment of the later redesignerd cluster after the firstt occurence. They still have not done that even now, so fellow 300C pilots, there are perhaps 400 helicopters out there wthat may have the same defect. The AD's, SB's and LTO's are already there to guide engineers, but in one case in England the crack could not be detected with paint on or WITH PAINT OFF!!
The airframe broke in two allowing the M/R blades to disentegrate the ship in flight, so please make 100% checks on this suspect component on your future flying of the type.
Two more factors. Had the CAA's own inspector been made aware of the previous history of the type, he may well have conducted a more specialist inspection, lives would not have been lost. Had the welder been required to inspect a conformity, lives would not have been lost. Had I been made aware of the type's history, I would have required fitment of the later 'dash three' cluster or not purchased the model at all.
Unfortunately these sad facts go on and on.
I believe what has happened is an object lesson in lack of information and over reliance on the CAA strategy of repetitive inspections. They did not work and I won't fly the pre dash three type until the authorities mandate the obvious modification.
I also believe the engineer was only some 20-30% responsible. You judge where the balance of the blame lies. The AAIB report should be out in the next few weeks.
Thanks for all your interest. Dennis Kenyon Snr.
It is sad but understandable that there appears to be so little accurate information out there on this case. As the parent of the pilot, I have taken it upon myself to know every fact.
Yes a top lawyer represented the engineer and he didn't 'get him off' He accurately laid out the difficulties all engineers faced over this cracking proble, Even the CAA;'s own surveyor failed to detect the welded repair as he signed off the Certicate of Airworthiness four months before the accident. I believe the jury said to themselves. If the safety regulatory authority's own engineer made a mistake, why are we trying this engineer for manslaughter?
My son's accident was the eighth, yes the eighth failure of the centre frame, aft left hand cluster. You might think a more responsible regulatory authority would have mandated the fitment of the later redesignerd cluster after the firstt occurence. They still have not done that even now, so fellow 300C pilots, there are perhaps 400 helicopters out there wthat may have the same defect. The AD's, SB's and LTO's are already there to guide engineers, but in one case in England the crack could not be detected with paint on or WITH PAINT OFF!!
The airframe broke in two allowing the M/R blades to disentegrate the ship in flight, so please make 100% checks on this suspect component on your future flying of the type.
Two more factors. Had the CAA's own inspector been made aware of the previous history of the type, he may well have conducted a more specialist inspection, lives would not have been lost. Had the welder been required to inspect a conformity, lives would not have been lost. Had I been made aware of the type's history, I would have required fitment of the later 'dash three' cluster or not purchased the model at all.
Unfortunately these sad facts go on and on.
I believe what has happened is an object lesson in lack of information and over reliance on the CAA strategy of repetitive inspections. They did not work and I won't fly the pre dash three type until the authorities mandate the obvious modification.
I also believe the engineer was only some 20-30% responsible. You judge where the balance of the blame lies. The AAIB report should be out in the next few weeks.
Thanks for all your interest. Dennis Kenyon Snr.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Daylight Saving Free Zone
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you for sharing that information DennisK.
There are no winners in these situations, but we can use what has been learnt in this case to help eliminate future tragedies of this kind.
There are no winners in these situations, but we can use what has been learnt in this case to help eliminate future tragedies of this kind.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: metz, france
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The main question on my mind is "Did the unauthorized repair directly cause the crash"? If it did then he should be jailed and the key thrown away. If the repair failed due to circumstances say, beyond flight parameters, then he is a "scapegoat".
Hard to judge without further details.....
Hard to judge without further details.....
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Beyond Stonehenge
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fail to see how sending the guy to jail could make him feel any worse than he does already, or what benefit a custodial sentence can bring to the community at large. We have already heard from those in the know that he put his hand up and cooperated fully with AIB and others. His personal grief and pain will be with him forever and 8 months inside will be as nothing to the ongoing nightmare for him. I understand it was a simple mistake and, as said many times before, there but for the grace etc.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A very difficult but important question. Obviously affected by the facts of the case, and we only have a brief idea of these. I don't disagree with the sentiments of the last two posts exactly, but I am not sure that nothing should be done, and that the error should go unmarked by the authorities.
The aspect that concerns me is the need for a deterrent for others in the future.
It is, of course, complicated because there is at least an argument that part of the problem lay with the regulator (i.e. the CAA) according to previous posts. I am worried if there is a suggestion that an individual is being used as a fall-guy or scapegoat.
I tend to agree with the view that a prison sentence would be of little point (in respect of the individual). Like in so many legal areas it is often difficult to find a suitable "punishment".
But I think that something probably needed to be done.
The aspect that concerns me is the need for a deterrent for others in the future.
It is, of course, complicated because there is at least an argument that part of the problem lay with the regulator (i.e. the CAA) according to previous posts. I am worried if there is a suggestion that an individual is being used as a fall-guy or scapegoat.
I tend to agree with the view that a prison sentence would be of little point (in respect of the individual). Like in so many legal areas it is often difficult to find a suitable "punishment".
But I think that something probably needed to be done.