Feds: Cocaine a factor in Round Lake pilot's fatal 2014 crash

rk911

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Apr 26, 2015
Messages
1,103
Location
DuPage County IL
Display Name

Display name:
rk911
the following was in our local paper this morning. the link to the story is below. I wonder who "informed" him that he had enough fuel for the final leg.

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20160106/news/160109475/
__________________________________

Round Lake pilot Jeffrey Bronken's cocaine use was a contributing factor when he ran out of fuel and crashed near Tampa-St. Petersburg, killing himself and his daughter and injuring her friend two years ago, federal documents show.

"The FAA forbids the use of substances that could lead to impairment," Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman Elizabeth Isham Cory said.
related

Jeffrey Bronken, 53, was killed early in the morning of March 22, 2014, when the single-engine Piper PA-28-181 aircraft he was piloting crashed after running out of fuel a few miles north of St. Petersburg-Clearwater International Airport in Florida. Bronken's 15-year-old daughter, Katherine, who attended Grant Community High School in Fox Lake, died from injuries four days later.



Bronken's inadequate fuel planning, which resulted in a total loss of engine power due to fuel exhaustion, led to the crash, according to a National Transportation Safety Board probable cause report. The NTSB report states "the pilot's impairment due to cocaine use" contributed to the crash.
Disappointment in the NTSB report was reflected in a statement to the Daily Herald issued by Bronken family attorney Theodore Karavidas of Barrington. Karavidas has represented Bronken's widow and Katherine's mother, Susan, in matters.

"The family is further saddened by the conclusion of the NTSB that Jeff's judgment was impaired to any degree," the statement reads. "Jeff refueled in Nashville and was informed upon departure that he had enough fuel for 4 hours, 35 minutes of flight time. At the 4 hour 21 minute mark, he realized as he approached his destination airport that a highway landing was required.

"The blood level of cocaine reported by the NTSB was below the threshold needed to produce impairment or physiological effects. The family is disappointed by the questionable conclusion of the NTSB and asks the public to respect their privacy in this time of grief."

Katherine Bronken's friend, Keyana Linbo, survived spinal and other serious injuries in the crash. Linbo attends Grant High, where she's on the girls varsity basketball team.

Linbo's family learned of the NTSB report shortly after it was filed in late October, said their attorney, Thomas Lake of Libertyville.

"The NTSB concluded, generally, that there was impairment from cocaine use, along with inadequate fuel planning," Lake said. "I think the inadequate fuel planning was pretty obvious, but the impairment from cocaine use was not. It was surprising and very upsetting to the family."
NTSB officials used data from various sources for the crash findings, according to the probable cause report.

Jeffrey Bronken took off for Florida from Campbell Airport in Round Lake Park about 6:30 p.m. March 21, 2014. His intended destination of St. Petersburg-Clearwater is a full-service airport with commercial passenger service, cargo, military and general aviation operations.

Investigators found Bronken flew from Campbell Airport to John C. Tune Airport in Nashville, Tennessee, to refuel at 11:38 p.m. March 21, 2014. He departed Nashville for the final leg to Florida.

During the night cross-country flight, Bronken's plane had been airborne for 4 hours, 21 minutes and about 6 miles from his destination when he reported a fuel emergency to air traffic control about 4 a.m., according to the NTSB report.

Bronken stated he planned to land on a highway, but collided with 160-foot-tall power lines that crossed the road, the NTSB found. The report says an examination of the wreckage did not reveal any mechanical malfunctions of the airframe or engine before impact, and "only a few ounces of fuel" were recovered from the crash site.

"The pilot's toxicology results were positive for cocaine," according to the NTSB, "and impairment from cocaine likely affected his preflight fuel planning abilities and en route fuel management."
Toxicology testing was performed by the FAA's Civil Aerospace Medical Institute in Oklahoma City. Cocaine was detected in Bronken's cavity blood, urine and liver, according to the report.
 
"The family is further saddened by the conclusion of the NTSB that Jeff's judgment was impaired to any degree,"

It was obviously impared to some degree, cocaine or otherwise. He ran out of fuel.

"Jeff refueled in Nashville and was informed upon departure that he had enough fuel for 4 hours, 35 minutes of flight time.

Informed by whom? Is that a legalease way of saying that he calculated it and was wrong? No one at an FBO has ever told me how many hours of fuel I have onboard after filling me up.

14 CFR 91.3(a) is pretty clear.

At the 4 hour 21 minute mark, he realized as he approached his destination airport that a highway landing was required.

Funny that the lawyer mentions nothing about legal night VFR fuel reserves which were not legally met.

"The blood level of cocaine reported by the NTSB was below the threshold needed to produce impairment or physiological effects. The family is disappointed by the questionable conclusion of the NTSB and asks the public to respect their privacy in this time of grief."

Translated - they're upset he was outed for being a coke user.
 
It was obviously impared to some degree, cocaine or otherwise. He ran out of fuel.



Informed by whom? Is that a legalease way of saying that he calculated it and was wrong? No one at an FBO has ever told me how many hours of fuel I have onboard after filling me up.

14 CFR 91.3(a) is pretty clear.



Funny that the lawyer mentions nothing about legal night VFR fuel reserves which were not legally met.



Translated - they're upset he was outed for being a coke user.

Or that's going to significantly raise the stakes in the lawsuits.
 
"Jeff refueled in Nashville and was informed upon departure that he had enough fuel for 4 hours, 35 minutes of flight time. At the 4 hour 21 minute mark, he realized as he approached his destination airport that a highway landing was required.

Ditto. Informed by who?? I can't imagine a fueler, ATC, owner, or even an instructor ever telling a PIC how much fuel he has. How bizarre.
 
I doubt anyone informed him. It's lawyer speak, so the mis-planning isn't directly attributed to him...
 
It was obviously impared to some degree, cocaine or otherwise. He ran out of fuel.

Well, strictly speaking, it's obvious that he misplanned his fuel. That doesn't make it obvious that he was impaired (by cocaine or other substances) even though it is still possible. Unimpaired pilots can run their planes out of gas too.


Informed by whom? Is that a legalease way of saying that he calculated it and was wrong? No one at an FBO has ever told me how many hours of fuel I have onboard after filling me up.

14 CFR 91.3(a) is pretty clear.
The FBO likely told him how much fuel they added to his airplane. That is all they would likely know. Everything beyond that is the lawyer's interpretation.

Funny that the lawyer mentions nothing about legal night VFR fuel reserves which were not legally met.
Nor, indeed, day reserves even.

The family can be upset about the coke use all they want. Tough. It is possible, perhaps likely, that he was impaired by cocaine at the time he fueled the airplane and even before that, which is critical. And that's why it was considered a factor. What is obvious to us now is that this guy was reckless. As coke users will be.
 
We need a randomized double blind study to see if using cocaine affects fuel planning. Otherwise we are just guessing, guy might have been an idiot for all we know.
 
Ditto. Informed by who?? I can't imagine a fueler, ATC, owner, or even an instructor ever telling a PIC how much fuel he has. How bizarre.

My guess is that its goofy reporting, and he put 4:35 fuel when he filed his flight plan.
 
We need a randomized double blind study to see if using cocaine affects fuel planning. Otherwise we are just guessing, guy might have been an idiot for all we know.

If you're referring to my post, you're designing your double-blind study wrong. You would need a study to determine if running out of gas is indicative of cocaine usage. :D

The point is that just because he ran out of gas alone doesn't make it "obvious" that he was impaired even if he may have been.
 
Well, strictly speaking, it's obvious that he misplanned his fuel. That doesn't make it obvious that he was impaired (by cocaine or other substances) even though it is still possible. Unimpaired pilots can run their planes out of gas too.

I was being a little facetious in my use of the word impaired. I realize that he may or may not have been impaired by strict definition. My point is that he was careless/wreckless which is an impairment by itself even if it doesn't meet the actual definition.


The family can be upset about the coke use all they want. Tough. It is possible, perhaps likely, that he was impaired by cocaine at the time he fueled the airplane and even before that, which is critical. And that's why it was considered a factor. What is obvious to us now is that this guy was reckless. As coke users will be.

I had a phone conversation a little while ago. I vaguely remembered a friend telling me about a guy that crashed killing his daughter and suspected it was the same guy.

This guy started a fight with 4 of my friends in a Three Lakes bar a few years ago and nearly choked one of them to death. Can't say I have any sympathy for the exposure of his drug habit either.
 
Informed by whom? Is that a legalease way of saying that he calculated it and was wrong? No one at an FBO has ever told me how many hours of fuel I have onboard after filling me up.

Even if he were "informed", how'd he tell anybody that he was informed? I'm sure the passengers would have probably found a different way to travel if they knew the pilot had a cocaine habit.
 
Lawyers love to absolve the deceased of blame. I'm sure it's lawsuit prep.
 
Ditto. Informed by who?? I can't imagine a fueler, ATC, owner, or even an instructor ever telling a PIC how much fuel he has. How bizarre.

I had the same thought. I do my own calculations and am pretty conservative. I don't fly at night (sport pilot) but my own personal std is 60-minutes of fuel reserve on a XC just cuz. even putting the best possible spin on the lawyer's statement the pilot cut it waaaaay too close. it's tragic that he paid for his error with his and his daughter's life.
 
According to the NTSB report, he took on 44 gallons before the flight. That means he finished the preceding leg with a fuel reserve of about 24 minutes. He clearly had a pattern of cutting fuel reserves short that night.
 
According to the NTSB report, he took on 44 gallons before the flight. That means he finished the preceding leg with a fuel reserve of about 24 minutes. He clearly had a pattern of cutting fuel reserves short that night.

Saves time! Fuel stops cost you precious minutes when you are screaming along at 110 knots!! :mad2::mad2:
I know it is all hindsight, but making two stops instead of one, would have made the trip more comfortable, not to mention survivable! :nono:
 
A strange coincidence I find is that while he was "informed" that he had 4:35 in his tanks, he had 4.35 in his tanks (which translates exactly into 4:21, his exact flight time). Again, strange mathematical coincidence.

And of course while the natural selection won this round and managed to take one druggie out of the gene pool, it won't stop the wife from suing the aircraft manufacturer, fuel provider, power company etc. Let's see how far she gets before she is silenced with a few million.
 
A strange coincidence I find is that while he was "informed" that he had 4:35 in his tanks, he had 4.35 in his tanks (which translates exactly into 4:21, his exact flight time). Again, strange mathematical coincidence.

And of course while the natural selection won this round and managed to take one druggie out of the gene pool, it won't stop the wife from suing the aircraft manufacturer, fuel provider, power company etc. Let's see how far she gets before she is silenced with a few million.

You are smoking too much Nancy Reagan dude. Fellow pilot and his daughter are dead, not cool. Plenty of recreational coke snorters that are productive members of society(own airplanes n stuff.) Some people have self control, not everyone with trace amounts of coke is full Scarface. Alcohol is far worse for people and society then all the illegal stuff, except meth. Meth is bad, hey man got any meth?:rolleyes::lol:
 
You are smoking too much Nancy Reagan dude. Fellow pilot and his daughter are dead, not cool. Plenty of recreational coke snorters that are productive members of society(own airplanes n stuff.) Some people have self control, not everyone with trace amounts of coke is full Scarface. Alcohol is far worse for people and society then all the illegal stuff, except meth. Meth is bad, hey man got any meth?:rolleyes::lol:

Sorry, never seen a casual user of cocaine. Ganja certainly, but not coke. Not saying it factored into the crash (stupidity is reason enough for this one). Not even saying he was under the influence, metabolites from cocaine can be found long after the drug's effects.

The real tragedy here is he took an innocent young girl with him, and badly hurt another, not to mention the black mark he gave all of us. Not surprising, trying to do a three leg trip in two legs. Doing it in the dead of night didn't help either. Really, what kind of lifestyle do you lead when you think its OK to be out flying long cross country trips in the dead of night over unfamiliar terrain?
 
I am amazed at the number of people who screw with these drugs thinking they are the one who will not get addicted to it and spiral out of control at some point in their lives, that's a fool's errand. And yes, I include alcohol in that list.

It's pretty simple, you are not supposed to be under the influence of any illegal substance when flying, don't be selfish, respect the law, it may save your life.
 
I am amazed at the number of people who screw with these drugs thinking they are the one who will not get addicted to it and spiral out of control at some point in their lives, that's a fool's errand. And yes, I include alcohol in that list.

It's pretty simple, you are not supposed to be under the influence of any illegal substance when flying, don't be selfish, respect the law, it may save your life.

So you're amazed at the people who think they'll be the "one" who can drink alcohol occasionally without becoming addicted? Have you not noticed that the vast majority of them are correct?

No one established that this pilot was under the influence of any intoxicant (what difference does its legality make?) while he was flying.
 
I was being a little facetious in my use of the word impaired. I realize that he may or may not have been impaired by strict definition. My point is that he was careless/wreckless which is an impairment by itself even if it doesn't meet the actual definition.

Gotcha. I kinda wondered if that's what you were getting at. Agree.
 
So you're amazed at the people who think they'll be the "one" who can drink alcohol occasionally without becoming addicted? Have you not noticed that the vast majority of them are correct?

No one established that this pilot was under the influence of any intoxicant (what difference does its legality make?) while he was flying.

Whatever, having had a couple people close to me spiral out of control with alcoholism, and several more friends who are teetering on the edge I've seen it go bad more times then I ever would have imagined.

Yes I drink alcohol, occasionally, and yes I'm considering changing that.

That said, there is absolutely no excuse for having illegal drugs in your system when you start that airplane engine, no matter how immune you think you are.
 
That said, there is absolutely no excuse for having illegal drugs in your system when you start that airplane engine, no matter how immune you think you are.

Having drug traces "in your system" long after any actual influence has worn off has no bearing on how reasonable it is to fly.

It is seriously irresponsible to fly while impaired--by legal or illegal drugs, or by illness or sleep deprivation. But if you generalize to drug use that has nothing to do with flying, yet try to draw a moral about flying, you are misleadingly exploiting aviation-safety concerns in the service of an entirely different agenda.
 
Having drug traces "in your system" long after any actual influence has worn off has no bearing on how reasonable it is to fly.

It is seriously irresponsible to fly while impaired--by legal or illegal drugs, or by illness or sleep deprivation. But if you generalize to drug use that has nothing to do with flying, yet try to draw a moral about flying, you are misleadingly exploiting aviation-safety concerns in the service of an entirely different agenda.

That's what they all say, and I'm sure that's what this guy thought.

The report said he was impaired. I am exploiting nothing, just pointing out stupid behavior if indeed the report is true, which I see no reason to doubt it.
 
The report said he was impaired.

Yes, the NTSB report says that. And the lawyer's response says, "The blood level of cocaine reported by the NTSB was below the threshold needed to produce impairment or physiological effects".

Neither claim should be trusted without verification.
 
Last edited:
Yes, the NTSB report says that. And the lawyer's response says, "The blood level of cocaine reported by the NTSB was below the threshold needed to produce impairment or physiological effects".

Neither claim should be trusted without verification.

The lawyer also said the pilot "was informed" that he had four hours and thirty-five minutes' worth of fuel onboard. Lawyers say lots of stuff. :goofy:What lawyer worth his/her salt is going to go on record saying, "Yeah, he was a coke fiend, and he was ripped while he was flying," regarding their own client? Come on, man! You can't believe anything you read/see in the media. Sure, there was an airplane crash and two fatalities, but that's about as far as you should be willing to blindly take as fact.
 
Sheesh, why are so many of you advocating drug use as a no big deal? Am I the only "crazy one" who thinks that drugs (including alcohol) should not be mixed with deadly weapons (cars, planes, firearms)?

No wonder the public gets the idea that all pilots are coke-snorting arrogant jerks. *shrug*

I would hope that we (pilots) would try to send a positive message that yes, airplane travel can be safe and these idiotic suicidal coke fiends are just very rare exceptions. So far it is not looking good for us.
 
Sheesh, why are so many of you advocating drug use as a no big deal?

Because in reality, most recreational drug use (including alcohol) is no big deal.

Am I the only "crazy one" who thinks that drugs (including alcohol) should not be mixed with deadly weapons (cars, planes, firearms)?

What are you talking about? Everyone in this thread has (strongly) agreed that no one should fly while impaired.
 
It doesn't matter really. I don't want a ****ing contest over this but I have to say this.

If you are using drugs and flying you are selfish and a danger, fly commercial.

Coke is a serious drug with long term effects if done chronically (not a doctor, so take this statement with a grain of salt, or better yet, read what I read here: http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/job185drugs/cocain.htm)
 
If you are using drugs and flying you are selfish and a danger, fly commercial.

Your statement seems intentionally ambiguous.

If you mean simultaneously, then of course that's true and no one here has remotely suggested otherwise.

If you mean regardless of the timing, then your statement is preposterous. It would apply to anyone who ever has a glass of wine with dinner, and ever pilots an airplane.
 
Having drug traces "in your system" long after any actual influence has worn off has no bearing on how reasonable it is to fly...

having trace amounts of cocaine in your system may have no bearing on how reasonable it is to fly, drive, go bowling or eat a pizza but it does speak to one's character, or more correctly lack thereof which may have some bearing on that person's ability to make good decisions. anyone can justify any behavior but until and unless the law is changed then the important thing to remember about "illegal drugs" is...they're illegal.
 
Your statement seems intentionally ambiguous.

If you mean simultaneously, then of course that's true and no one here has remotely suggested otherwise.

If you mean regardless of the timing, then your statement is preposterous. It would apply to anyone who ever has a glass of wine with dinner, and ever pilots an airplane.

Read the link I gave, some of the effects look like they last beyond when someone would consider themselves impaired.

If you have a glass of wine with dinner you should not fly for 8 hours.
 
having trace amounts of cocaine in your system may have no bearing on how reasonable it is to fly, drive, go bowling or eat a pizza but it does speak to one's character, or more correctly lack thereof

I disagree, but this question has nothing to do with aviation, so people of good character will not argue it on this forum.
 
Read the link I gave, some of the effects look like they last beyond when someone would consider themselves impaired.

Um, if you're saying that a person can "consider" themselves unimpaired when they're not, then no one disagrees. My only point is that it has not been established that this pilot was in fact impaired. The NTSB's detection of trace levels of coke does not establish impairment. No one has ruled out impairment, but no one has established it.
 
If you have a glass of wine with dinner you should not fly for 8 hours.

Everyone learns 8 hours bottle to throttle... It doesn't however apply to cans, therefore you can drink canned beer within 8 hours of flying as long as you're not intoxicated.

This also applies to cocaine as long as it's not in a glass bottle. So keep your blow in plastic bags or beer cans.
 
Everyone learns 8 hours bottle to throttle... It doesn't however apply to cans, therefore you can drink canned beer within 8 hours of flying as long as you're not intoxicated.

This also applies to cocaine as long as it's not in a glass bottle. So keep your blow in plastic bags or beer cans.

Loopholes.
 
The real tragedy is the dirty lawyers suing everybody, I assume.
 
Back
Top