http://www.aopa.org/members/files/pilot ... t0807.html

Read it and give your opinions. ????

His Quote

“All they can take is everything I own,” he said stoically. “I’ll always have sadness and remorse. I was the pilot in command, and the accident was my fault. If I had flown the entire flight above 1,000 feet, none of this would have happened.”

I think any moral man would feel just the way he does but I do question the criminal charges. It was clear he was not where he thought he was but was he in airspace that required 1000 to 2000 ft. ? I know the FAA said he was wrong. It sounds like he screwed up but the article was written in such a manner I wasn't sure?

Lost a freind last year who was flying a young lady....it just tears your heart out.
He loved to fly and she was student of his.
Very hard on both families.
HC

Since earning my private a few years ago, I have always tried to fly as though I'm a professional. I seem to be the kind of person that doesn't get away with foolish mistakes, so I fight the desire to have any.

I have had thoughts to buzz my friends out camping in the desert and even fly down through the green river gorge but I always over-rule the desires by thinking "I know I'm safe up here, down there, maybe, maybe not".

I feel sorry for this guy. He seems like a decent individual who has taken accountability for his actions. Justice should be served though, I'm not sure what justice is. The jail time won't hurt him like the financial recourse will.

I guess I would have to put myself in the shoes of the widowed husband. I would be happy to see that the pilot takes responsibility. I would forgive him positively. I don't think I would take any joy in seeing his life ruined. He was afterall, a friendly Biplane pilot that wanted to share his passion with others and give my wife the ride of her life. In this context, it was an accident.

Slapping everyone in the vicinity of the airport with a huge lawsuit is not an accident, its criminal in my view.

I have been to quite a few flying events over the years, I haven't ever given rides at any of them.

I think that the non flying public would assume that a person giving rides at an event such as this would be well qualified to do so, commercial certificate and a 135 also aerobatic.

Did he tell people he wasn't a commercial operation?

Also when I give a person a ride and they start feeling queasy I get them back to there comfort zone soon as possible. Not try some other adventure and see how they like that.

70' very poor judgment

My only sorry is for his pasenger and her family.

This day in age Its easy to see how, and why the prosecutor acted as he did.

Based on the information in the article, I'm surprised and disappointed that the DA pursued prosecution against him. With all the malicious crime that isn't prosecuted for lack of manpower, going after someone who made a mistake while otherwise acting responsibly doesn't agree with me.

Strub said he is bitter that the civil suit against him also names dozens of other people and organizations with little or no apparent connection to the accident. The Children’s Miracle Network is named in the suit as well as balloon rally organizers he says are blameless.

My feelings about our civil legal system verge on fanatical...we are a society which maintains at its most core level that someone else is always responsible for the things that happen to us. Don't want to run the risk of dying in a plane crash? DON'T GET IN THE FRICKING PLANE IN THE FIRST PLACE! Combine a society which won't take accountability for itself with a judicial system that has no sanctions for greedy, crooked lawyers who file bad suits, and it's a miracle that anyone who's not a lawyer even has a house to live in anymore.

Every month at our airport organized groups give rides to folks...mostly children. It's good PR for the airport, and it's great for the kids. The people who do it give freely of their time, aircraft, and $5.66 a gallon gas, and I admire them for it. But I will NEVER do it. In fact, I'll never be associated with the organizations that do it. It's a lawsuit waiting to happen, and I've been through the legal meatgrinder enough for one lifetime.

I've got friends at work who have told me they would love to go flying sometime. They are good people who I trust with my life, but honestly I worry about taking them in the air. They may not sue me if something goes wrong, but I can almost guarantee that their families will. Is sharing something I love to do with a casual friend worth exposing my family to the loathsome legal system we have? Most of the time the answer is no.

There's a real friendly guy on the field who has an absolutely immaculate Steerman that he flies all the time. He flys it alone, or with his wife up front, but he's never once given anyone else a ride in it. I've heard a couple people mention they're a little butt hurt that he's always taxing by with an empty seat while a half dozen of his friends are standing around in a circle kicking a tin can back and forth, but I don't mind it one bit. I know a little of the legal trouble he's had in the past, and I don't blame him for limiting his exposure to yet another stupid lawsuit or over zealous DA who thinks he's going to be tough on crime by going after an honest man.

It's too bad things are this way, but we've done it to ourselves.

I agree with Hammer unless you have a signed release from the entire DNA family it best not to give rides. Even if you have a release it is questionable. There is a legal monster out to get you.

Sojorrn wrote:I agree with Hammer unless you have a signed release from the entire DNA family it best not to give rides. Even if you have a release it is questionable. There is a legal monster out to get you.

The problem with a release is that you cannot waive the rights of a third party...ie the surviving family members. The surviving family still retains all their "rights" to a lawsuit even with a signed waiver for the deceased party.

By the way...your insurance liability coverage does not apply to criminal court, only the civil court. He was on his own to defend himself in criminal court with regard to court cost.

Hammer

Hammer wrote:Based on the information in the article, I'm surprised and disappointed that the DA pursued prosecution against him. With all the malicious crime that isn't prosecuted for lack of manpower, going after someone who made a mistake while otherwise acting responsibly doesn't agree with me.



My feelings about our civil legal system verge on fanatical...we are a society which maintains at its most core level that someone else is always responsible for the things that happen to us. Don't want to run the risk of dying in a plane crash? DON'T GET IN THE FRICKING PLANE IN THE FIRST PLACE! Combine a society which won't take accountability for itself with a judicial system that has no sanctions for greedy, crooked lawyers who file bad suits, and it's a miracle that anyone who's not a lawyer even has a house to live in anymore.
quote]

Just exactly where was he acting responsibly

He had no 135, no commercial certificate, he was at a social flying event giving rides and flying 70' AGL

Now it would be different if on a random day he invited someone to go for a ride with him, and something broke on the plane or had a bird strike etc. That would be an accident.

I am as much against BS lawsuits as anyone, but this guys seems to have been operating outside of both good judgment and rules.

I bought an airplane because of my passion for flying. That includes giving family and friends a ride and participating in the EAA Youngs Eagles program.

I am going to fly and I am going to take whomever I choose. I will fly as safely as I can. I will keep learning and be mindful of the mistakes of others. I am not going to worry about crossing the proverbial street and getting hit and killed.

I fly therefore I live.

mr scout wrote:Just exactly where was he acting responsibly

He had no 135, no commercial certificate, he was at a social flying event giving rides and flying 70' AGL

He did not need a 135 certificate to operate as he was doing...it falls under part 91 sightseeing even if he was making a charge to do so. He also did not need a CML rating unless he was charging for the ride...it is debatable that $8 can be considered charging for the ride as it does not even cover the fuel cost to start the engine. The only thing he really did irresponsible was to fly low over the river and who among us has not done that one before?

I fly Young Eagles and friends on a routine basis in both the Maule and a Stearman...it is a love of aviation that I intend to share with others as much as possible.

Jeeeez ....I agree with mr scout! As well intentioned as this guy might have been he should not have been flying at 70 ft agl taking an unknown passenger for a ride.

I vote for the system they employ in NZ. You buy your ticket (or volunteer) and it is assumed that you are smart enough to understand the risks of whatever endeavor you are undertaking. If things go south (airplane crashes or the bungie breaks) and you end up hurt or dead that's just the way it goes.

Now, show me where you can glide to a "landing" in many of the places we all fly. Many times gliding to the least hazardous crash site is the best you can do. I do agree though, low level thrill rides are not good judgement.

I'm with Mr. Scout and JrCubBuilder on this one.

I suspect we've all flown irresponsibly at one time or another. I'd bet most of us did our really stupid stuff alone, and that the old heads here have gotten past that phase long ago.

It's one thing to do yourself in, it's another to kill your passenger.

I do not disagree that he was irresponsible with his river run, however I do think criminal charges are a bit harsh...especially when the law was not broken and it was an obvious accident. He already has to live with the death of his passanger for the rest of his life. My great grandfather caused a man's death purely by accident while operating a wheat thresher when he was a young man...he is 98 now and still feels the guilt and does not talk about it.

LowFlyBye:

Well, I reckon we'd agree that the personal load this fellow carries now far outstrips any consequence of the criminal charges (rendering them somewhat moot.)

Yes, agreed and moot as it concerns this fellow. The problem for the rest of us is that due to the ruling in favor of guilty, this now becomes a statute law whereby any other similar "crime" can be judged. Yes, similar types of accidents can now be considered a crime based on statute law.

Be careful out there fellows.

lowflybye wrote:Yes, agreed and moot as it concerns this fellow. The problem for the rest of us is that due to the ruling in favor of guilty, this now becomes a statute law whereby any other similar "crime" can be judged. Yes, similar types of accidents can now be considered a crime based on statute law.

Be careful out there fellows.

This is troubling because we see the FAA/NTSB declare "Pilot Error" in almost 100% of accidents. If all accidents (aviation or otherwise) caused by a lapse in judgement merit prison/jail time, we need to build about 35,000,000 new cells.


Lookout Dirtbags! The common man is movin in!!!

Lowflybye, will our insurance save us in a civil court case? Wrongful death.

BTW, I hope you don't fly the way your screen name implies Just kidding

Fly any way you want, as long as you can afford it.

Rob