B206L3 Accident in PNG
He likes punctual - regardless of if it is an appropriate stage/time in questioning. A cup of tea must be a very important thing & time is not flexible even for a few minutes. We all cottoned on and counted down with our fingers to the next break folding one back into our palm each minute - the lawyers knew they dare not go past the break time. Clear it was not important on a trial being fair - just we knew who the boss was.
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Port Moresby - The beer is cold at the Aviat and Car Clubs
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
10 Posts
Hevilift PNG lodge third appeal against paying damages to pilot.
Hevilift has appealed the decision in the Cairns Court; yet again. [Towers v. Hevilift]
The probable basis would centre around just how long a victim may continue to live.
The appeal is proposed for mid July in Brisbane.
It has been 14 years since the accident; if you work for Hevilift, perhaps it might be best to review your contract and satisfy yourself your contract covers accidents and compensation.
The probable basis would centre around just how long a victim may continue to live.
The appeal is proposed for mid July in Brisbane.
It has been 14 years since the accident; if you work for Hevilift, perhaps it might be best to review your contract and satisfy yourself your contract covers accidents and compensation.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South of the Border
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a complete farce. Here is an accident that did not need to happen.The pilot now says he had no idea or wasn't told the weather goes off in seconds.( An excuse for his behaviour and costing the lives of others) Hello this is PNG. This country has a reputation that precedes itself for all things.
As for the company he worked for, I hope they seek a refund from their defence lawyers allowing the judge to make a silly ruling. "Gets what you pay for"
So those families that had their fathers,brothers,husbands killed, is there any more for them? Not likely. If the pilot ever gets paid,will he share some of the damages with those he killed?
As for an appeal for the length of the pilots life. Is that all they could come up with. That just guarantees this circus will continue for years to come. The only winners if you call it that,will be the (in this case) underrated defence laywer/s.
Stay tuned for the next episode of "how I mucked up but it was someone elses fault"
As for the company he worked for, I hope they seek a refund from their defence lawyers allowing the judge to make a silly ruling. "Gets what you pay for"
So those families that had their fathers,brothers,husbands killed, is there any more for them? Not likely. If the pilot ever gets paid,will he share some of the damages with those he killed?
As for an appeal for the length of the pilots life. Is that all they could come up with. That just guarantees this circus will continue for years to come. The only winners if you call it that,will be the (in this case) underrated defence laywer/s.
Stay tuned for the next episode of "how I mucked up but it was someone elses fault"
Last edited by Night Beetle; 29th May 2020 at 20:07.
I've been following this matter from the beginning, having been working for HL at the time of the accident, including a lot of time in the southern highlands of PNG. On the face of it the outcome is perplexing. But the case has been argued before a Court of summary jurisdiction, and before a Court of appeal, and respect to the Court must be due. Just need to take stock of that and accept the Court findings and adapt the hiring and training and operational and maintenance procedures to come into alignment with the Court decision. No axe to grind with HL here, but you shouldn't have pilots on their first tour in PNG, no matter how experienced, thrown in the deep end on their own without a thorough period of close supervision and indoctrination to the uniqueness of the country.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South of the Border
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No problems with the court.
It was the information given to them that was found wanting. ie What about distance from cloud? So the pilot was already operating illegally.
It was the information given to them that was found wanting. ie What about distance from cloud? So the pilot was already operating illegally.
That is the dilemma. If pilots strictly followed the weather rules in PNG you might as well park the whole VFR fleet for five months of the year. And the IFR fleet wouldn't fare much better because of alternate requirements.
What’s that say about the current rules/regs if no one adheres to them?
The rules/regs were mostly a cut and paste exercise from the New Zealand rules and regs. There is reliance on pilots applying sensibility with an ounce of operational flexibility on the strict reading of the rules/regs. It's only when there is a prang that it will come back to bite said people applying said operational flexibility.
The rules/regs were mostly a cut and paste exercise from the New Zealand rules and regs. There is reliance on pilots applying sensibility with an ounce of operational flexibility on the strict reading of the rules/regs. It's only when there is a prang that it will come back to bite said people applying said operational flexibility.
Not commenting specifically on this accident, just replying to your earlier post.
