Crash-Cork Airport
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: England
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gross negligence manslaughter
I wonder whether IOM/UK lawyers will consider whether the concept of a "controlling mind" was at work here?
Parkfell raised this in an earlier post. it deserves a measured response.
I have just finished the September 2007 OneTwoG0 Thai aircrash MD82 Phuket, Coroners Inquest in Lincoln. Not accidental death, but a narrative verdict that explicitly cited systemic failures at management level that permeated down to the line pilots, resulting in the deaths of 90, of which 8 were British.
Had the 2007 Corporate Manslaughter Act been in force, then a submission of unlawful killing would have been made. That 2007 Act takes away the need for a controlling mind. Now, all that needs to be demonstrated is "management failure" in the broader sense.
The Coroner's Inquest for this tragedy will be somewhat different from OneTwoGo, although both have common features.
Parkfell raised this in an earlier post. it deserves a measured response.
I have just finished the September 2007 OneTwoG0 Thai aircrash MD82 Phuket, Coroners Inquest in Lincoln. Not accidental death, but a narrative verdict that explicitly cited systemic failures at management level that permeated down to the line pilots, resulting in the deaths of 90, of which 8 were British.
Had the 2007 Corporate Manslaughter Act been in force, then a submission of unlawful killing would have been made. That 2007 Act takes away the need for a controlling mind. Now, all that needs to be demonstrated is "management failure" in the broader sense.
The Coroner's Inquest for this tragedy will be somewhat different from OneTwoGo, although both have common features.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Age: 61
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whatever the lawyers come up with, it will have little to do with reality and everything to do with what the contemptible homunculi can screw out of everyone in the name of 'justice' i.e. compensation. If they were forced to pursue justice and not money their opinion might be worth than the reek from one of my less satisfying farts. But they are not, and it is not.
What is more important is that it is clearly established in the minds of the travelling public that what these two arseholes did was very much against what every other pilot working in UK airspace would have done.
I don't accept the commercial pressure argument - what they did was enough to get them summarily dismissed from any normal UK airline, and I am sure it was clear to all at Cork at the time.
What is more important is that it is clearly established in the minds of the travelling public that what these two arseholes did was very much against what every other pilot working in UK airspace would have done.
I don't accept the commercial pressure argument - what they did was enough to get them summarily dismissed from any normal UK airline, and I am sure it was clear to all at Cork at the time.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: South East
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DB6
I find your post distasteful to say the least. This was no 'normal UK Airline'. The investigation needs to establish the reasons for their decisions before you can start referring to people in a derogatory manor. Not wishing to remove any blame from the pilots but I've a feeling that going to 100ft and ignoring the approach ban was SOP. Hopefully this operation will be ended and a few prison sentences dished out.
I find your post distasteful to say the least. This was no 'normal UK Airline'. The investigation needs to establish the reasons for their decisions before you can start referring to people in a derogatory manor. Not wishing to remove any blame from the pilots but I've a feeling that going to 100ft and ignoring the approach ban was SOP. Hopefully this operation will be ended and a few prison sentences dished out.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DB6 it is a bit ruff.
You would be suprised how many folk out there would bust mins given half the chance. I am not going to get into a which nationality thing but its way more common in certain country's.
It all comes down to how you started you career and the ethos which developed you as an FO.
The FO not enforcing the legal operation is nothing new and will happen again. Gaining an additional 1300 hours single pilot ops will not change this. Its the whole issue with the transfer to Multi crew ops they did try and do something about it with the MCC. But that got perverted away from the intention that it should be done by the company on intial type rating instead of the current tick in the box you need it before you can apply.
I have no doudt the skipper had busted mins before as an FO and I also have no doudt while in the RHS he was flying with mangment pilots when they busted mins.
It wasn't a UK airline or operation full stop.
You would be suprised how many folk out there would bust mins given half the chance. I am not going to get into a which nationality thing but its way more common in certain country's.
It all comes down to how you started you career and the ethos which developed you as an FO.
The FO not enforcing the legal operation is nothing new and will happen again. Gaining an additional 1300 hours single pilot ops will not change this. Its the whole issue with the transfer to Multi crew ops they did try and do something about it with the MCC. But that got perverted away from the intention that it should be done by the company on intial type rating instead of the current tick in the box you need it before you can apply.
I have no doudt the skipper had busted mins before as an FO and I also have no doudt while in the RHS he was flying with mangment pilots when they busted mins.
It wasn't a UK airline or operation full stop.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: london
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aircrew will inevitably and correctly be blamed for this accident - had they lived, they would almost certainly now be facing manslaughter charges. But blaming the crew won't stop a recurrence. The appropriate legislation is already in place - the approach ban would surely have prevented this, had the crew not deliberately ignored it, not once, but 3 times.
It also appears the AOC holder failed to properly supervise & monitor the crew, and that the regulator failed to properly supervise & monitor the AOC. I note that these issues are specifically named as being part of the focus of the continuing investigation.
What about those responsible for the airspace in which the aircraft is flying? Should controllers be 'whistle-blowers' when they have good reason to suspect the rules are being broken?
I have no doubt whatsoever that the vast majority of commercial pilots are thoroughly professional & would never attempt a Cat1 approach in the accident Wx. I also have no doubt that any decent airline would take extremely strong action against any crew if they ever attempted to do so.
However, in the final analysis, rules & regulations will not adequately protect the public unless they are effectively enforced - and I am not convinced that, at the present time, that enforcement is sufficiently effective.
It also appears the AOC holder failed to properly supervise & monitor the crew, and that the regulator failed to properly supervise & monitor the AOC. I note that these issues are specifically named as being part of the focus of the continuing investigation.
What about those responsible for the airspace in which the aircraft is flying? Should controllers be 'whistle-blowers' when they have good reason to suspect the rules are being broken?
I have no doubt whatsoever that the vast majority of commercial pilots are thoroughly professional & would never attempt a Cat1 approach in the accident Wx. I also have no doubt that any decent airline would take extremely strong action against any crew if they ever attempted to do so.
However, in the final analysis, rules & regulations will not adequately protect the public unless they are effectively enforced - and I am not convinced that, at the present time, that enforcement is sufficiently effective.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Agde
Age: 75
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My instructor used to say "don't be so worried about the law, be more concerned by what the insurance company thinks".
He certainly wan't advocating breaking the law but drawing attention to the fact that insurance doesn't cover you when you are breaking the law (he was referring to taking off over weight, busting minima, ignoring flight and duty times, etc).
If, in fact, it is found that the pilots were acting ilegally, then it will be interesting to see what kind of claims there might be made against their estates!
Doctors and other professionals have malpractice insurance - not sure if there is any available for pilots!
He certainly wan't advocating breaking the law but drawing attention to the fact that insurance doesn't cover you when you are breaking the law (he was referring to taking off over weight, busting minima, ignoring flight and duty times, etc).
If, in fact, it is found that the pilots were acting ilegally, then it will be interesting to see what kind of claims there might be made against their estates!
Doctors and other professionals have malpractice insurance - not sure if there is any available for pilots!
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: us
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If, in fact, it is found that the pilots were acting ilegally, then it will be interesting to see what kind of claims there might be made against their estates!
What are they going to do fight over some can goods in the pantry?
How many slices are they going to get out of a can of spam?
Since the pilots never verbalised what they were seeing or that corporate culture was driving their decision to bust mins, then there is nothing left except speculation.
VFD
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: london
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not a lawyer either, but suspect that if the pilots were acting illegally in the course of their employment, then the liabilities of their employer could be very considerable indeed.
I hope these liabilities are adequately insured and that the companies concerned do not simply run into administration, leaving the claimants without effective recourse.
I hope these liabilities are adequately insured and that the companies concerned do not simply run into administration, leaving the claimants without effective recourse.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: london
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VFD, understanding what drove the pilots to fly in the way that they did may be the key to understanding this accident.
Also, ultimately I feel those responsible for managing the airspace must take some responsibility for what happens within that airspace - that is after all the final line of defence against slipshod operators & lax regulation.
The current UK ATC practice of informing the pilot that he will be reported if he continues an approach which the controller suspects will infringe the law would likely have prevented this. Perhaps we could take this a stage further, and give ATC the authority to refuse a clearance in such circumstances, unless the crew first declares an emergency?
I appreciate controllers cannot be expected to know the LV capabilities of every aircraft/operator & crew combination, but the approach to the Cat 1 RWY35 was clearly illegal for any non-emergency traffic, given the measured RVR.
Also, ultimately I feel those responsible for managing the airspace must take some responsibility for what happens within that airspace - that is after all the final line of defence against slipshod operators & lax regulation.
The current UK ATC practice of informing the pilot that he will be reported if he continues an approach which the controller suspects will infringe the law would likely have prevented this. Perhaps we could take this a stage further, and give ATC the authority to refuse a clearance in such circumstances, unless the crew first declares an emergency?
I appreciate controllers cannot be expected to know the LV capabilities of every aircraft/operator & crew combination, but the approach to the Cat 1 RWY35 was clearly illegal for any non-emergency traffic, given the measured RVR.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: エリア88
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
understanding what drove the pilots to fly in the way that they did may be the key to understanding this accident.
It is just as possible that these guys wanted to be the 'company heros' as it is that they were under any commercial pressure more than what is normal for an airline crew.
All professional pilots know why you don't bust minima. Not to save time, not to save money and not even if the president of Poland tells you to, it's just not worth it.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Little Britain
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do think that an equivalent procedure to the UK ATC "Absolute minima" being applied in Irish airspace may well have prevented this accident.
If delivered clearly enough I would hope that the first approach would not have commenced.
Is anyone aware of the fact that a previous incarnation of this aircraft operator "Eurocontinental"
EURO CONTINENTAL AIR
had been withdrawn from operations in the UK for reasons unconfirmed.
They then reappeared in the UK under a new guise as FlightlineBCN (AOC holder subleasing from Air Lada), but using the same two airframes, EC-ITP and EC-GPS
It's interesting to note that both Eurocontinental and Air Lada show the metroliner available for charter, but Eurocontinentals site show only one available....
I'd be very interested to know what caused the first withdrawal, and what regulatory process took place in both Spain and the UK which allowed the re-emergence of those two arcraft under the new banner.
If delivered clearly enough I would hope that the first approach would not have commenced.
Is anyone aware of the fact that a previous incarnation of this aircraft operator "Eurocontinental"
EURO CONTINENTAL AIR
had been withdrawn from operations in the UK for reasons unconfirmed.
They then reappeared in the UK under a new guise as FlightlineBCN (AOC holder subleasing from Air Lada), but using the same two airframes, EC-ITP and EC-GPS
It's interesting to note that both Eurocontinental and Air Lada show the metroliner available for charter, but Eurocontinentals site show only one available....
I'd be very interested to know what caused the first withdrawal, and what regulatory process took place in both Spain and the UK which allowed the re-emergence of those two arcraft under the new banner.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saint Alled
I cannot be certain as to the registration (thus claiming not to be a spotter) but last Sunday there was a Spanish-registered Metro parked at Ronaldsway.
IOM is technically outside UK and European jurisdiction.
The worms are multiplying since the lid came off.
I cannot be certain as to the registration (thus claiming not to be a spotter) but last Sunday there was a Spanish-registered Metro parked at Ronaldsway.
IOM is technically outside UK and European jurisdiction.
The worms are multiplying since the lid came off.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: iom
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Photo of metro parked at IOM. Euro Continental Sweringen Metroliner EC-GPS
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mercenary Pilot, l guess you`ve cornered the issue. l suspect that l`ll regret this - how can l defend the indefensible ?
lt seems to me that it would be unlikely to have both a new captain and a new f/o trying to make a name for themselves.
Trying to keep their jobs - only my supposition - seems most likely to me.
Most of us have been lucky enough to have had proper direction in training via chief pilot/ops director normality. What those guys had is, l believe, still a mystery.
Six dead with an open airfield available, at whatever imagined cost of a diversion, is a heavy price to pay for a regular quick profit in my supposition.
l stress that is my supposition.
Nothing else, for me, fits.
lt seems to me that it would be unlikely to have both a new captain and a new f/o trying to make a name for themselves.
Trying to keep their jobs - only my supposition - seems most likely to me.
Most of us have been lucky enough to have had proper direction in training via chief pilot/ops director normality. What those guys had is, l believe, still a mystery.
Six dead with an open airfield available, at whatever imagined cost of a diversion, is a heavy price to pay for a regular quick profit in my supposition.
l stress that is my supposition.
Nothing else, for me, fits.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It saddens me that this "can-do" attitude still exists in what should be a professional operation defined by fairly clear & easy to understand limits.
Way back in the days when I was a "yoof" the company also had an Aztec available for charters.
This was operated by our C.F.I. a bit of an ace with a distinguished military background, who eventually decades later may indeed have found the limit the hard way courtesy of a fatal accident. Sharing the air-taxi duties with him was another bright-eyed "yoof", an Instructor with a shiny new CPL.
Although I was not flying the "beast" as we viewed this twin engined wonder-plane, I was sufficiently close to the operation to be aware of the modus operandi if/when I was elevated to this status.
Basically, limits were for sissies, if you couldn't "hack it" and get the client to his chosen destination it was likely that A - he possibly wouldn't make another booking , & B - you could probably look forward to going back to instructing on the Cessna 152 again.
I doubt if this mentality, whether you explain it courtesy of ex-military fast jet 70's mentality of the CFI/youthful stupidity/cowboy outfit/poor example by dodgy leadership, or a combination of all the above, was not entirely representative of how, regretably, the great majority of companies in this sector conducted their business.
Perhaps these days the Mediterranean mentality is still a little more mucho macho than our N European equivalent, & the LHS occupant may have defined the mood in this unfortunate cockpit, particularly when alongside him was one, still , in aviation terms , in diapers. Certainly from what I have seen living here in Spain, their safety record in this category of aviation, fixed and rotary wing, is not exemplary, and for sure won't be better when operating far away from the eye of their regulator, whom if he behaves anything like the Italian version in ENAC, is sadly wholly devoid of teeth
Sad indeed that 30 years after I avoided it by going elsewhere, this mentality still exists, and is perpetrated so blatantly for all to see on 3 consecutive approaches, one of which could not have been legal for ANY operator due the lack of minimum RVR required for the 35 Cat1 only ILS.
It is indicative of the lack of fear of prosecution/repercussions, that they felt comfortable to accept 3 approaches with an RVR less than legally required, and the relevant regulator must also shoulder a part of the blame here.
Even if eventual responsibility rests solely with the Commander, the system should be robust enough , such that the crew would not even contemplate busting limits so publicaly/blatantly by accepting multiple approaches when the given RVR's were so obviously short of the required minimum.
Way back in the days when I was a "yoof" the company also had an Aztec available for charters.
This was operated by our C.F.I. a bit of an ace with a distinguished military background, who eventually decades later may indeed have found the limit the hard way courtesy of a fatal accident. Sharing the air-taxi duties with him was another bright-eyed "yoof", an Instructor with a shiny new CPL.
Although I was not flying the "beast" as we viewed this twin engined wonder-plane, I was sufficiently close to the operation to be aware of the modus operandi if/when I was elevated to this status.
Basically, limits were for sissies, if you couldn't "hack it" and get the client to his chosen destination it was likely that A - he possibly wouldn't make another booking , & B - you could probably look forward to going back to instructing on the Cessna 152 again.
I doubt if this mentality, whether you explain it courtesy of ex-military fast jet 70's mentality of the CFI/youthful stupidity/cowboy outfit/poor example by dodgy leadership, or a combination of all the above, was not entirely representative of how, regretably, the great majority of companies in this sector conducted their business.
Perhaps these days the Mediterranean mentality is still a little more mucho macho than our N European equivalent, & the LHS occupant may have defined the mood in this unfortunate cockpit, particularly when alongside him was one, still , in aviation terms , in diapers. Certainly from what I have seen living here in Spain, their safety record in this category of aviation, fixed and rotary wing, is not exemplary, and for sure won't be better when operating far away from the eye of their regulator, whom if he behaves anything like the Italian version in ENAC, is sadly wholly devoid of teeth
Sad indeed that 30 years after I avoided it by going elsewhere, this mentality still exists, and is perpetrated so blatantly for all to see on 3 consecutive approaches, one of which could not have been legal for ANY operator due the lack of minimum RVR required for the 35 Cat1 only ILS.
It is indicative of the lack of fear of prosecution/repercussions, that they felt comfortable to accept 3 approaches with an RVR less than legally required, and the relevant regulator must also shoulder a part of the blame here.
Even if eventual responsibility rests solely with the Commander, the system should be robust enough , such that the crew would not even contemplate busting limits so publicaly/blatantly by accepting multiple approaches when the given RVR's were so obviously short of the required minimum.
Last edited by captplaystation; 27th Mar 2011 at 12:32.