First US Pilot Jailed for Aviation Accident

[KennyFlys]

I recall there was a thread on the original story but cannot for the life of me get it to come up on a search. Someone had posted something last summer even though the accident was almost four yeas ago.

I'll let you read for yourself. But, was it just? He pulled a very stupid stunt in an area not cleared for such maneuvers and killed a passenger in the process. She trusted his judgment. Obviously, it was badly placed.

U.S. pilot jailed after aircraft accident

 

[Dean]

This accident was preventable and was 100% the pilots fault. He got off too easy, he should have been charged with manslaughter.

 

[ScottM]

I am ok with criminal charges. Just like the Value Jet mechanics should have been charged for the mislabeling of the O2 cartridges.

 

[Dean]

I don't understand how two voted that suspending his license was good enough punishment. If that was your child or loved one, you would want him hung from the nearest tree. If he would have been driving a car and pulled a stupid stunt like that, he would have been charged with more. He should never be allowed to fly again and should be in jail for a long, long time.

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

I don't have a problem with criminal penalties for severe negligence like this.

At the same time, I question the point of locking somebody up. What's the point? Unless it's revenge, I don't see any. Generally, your average pilot is worth more to society outside of jail than inside.

And bluntly, negligence is not something that can be deterred. For "deterrence theory" to work, it has to involve an active choice. You don't usually choose to be negligent - it just happens.

 

[KennyFlys]

I don't have a problem with criminal penalties for severe negligence like this.

At the same time, I question the point of locking somebody up. What's the point? Unless it's revenge, I don't see any. Generally, your average pilot is worth more to society outside of jail than inside.

And bluntly, negligence is not something that can be deterred. For "deterrence theory" to work, it has to involve an active choice. You don't usually choose to be negligent - it just happens.

I think this is one of those times it's purely punishment. I think anything short would seem like a walk to the pilot. And, it's still not enough given the loss of life.

 

[Steve]

There may be more to the ValuJet story than has been reported in the mainstream media...

http://www.airworthy.us/

I am ok with criminal charges. Just like the Value Jet mechanics should have been charged for the mislabeling of the O2 cartridges.

 

[KennyFlys]

There may be more to the ValuJet story than has been reported in the mainstream media...

http://www.airworthy.us/

A former grad of my school told me a little more about that story...

A senior captain (former long-time captain for Eastern) had gone to Europe to pick up an airplane. He brought it back to Florida for refurbish for service. One of the things they did was swap out the oxygen generators. Many were not pinned. Boxes were marked improperly.

I wish I can remember more of the details he told me. There were some things how that happen that were not PC to place in the report. I can't recall that captain's name. I do recall he was a close friend to the female pilot who died.

Sabre Tech got away with a lot.

 

[gprellwitz]

I think this is one of those times it's purely punishment. I think anything short would seem like a walk to the pilot. And, it's still not enough given the loss of life.

I'm not sure about that. Any decent person (and most pilots I know are decent people) would be in agony about this for the rest of their lives, whether they were in jail or not, and would try to do positive things to give some measure of atonement. At least out of jail he'll have an opportunity to do some good with that guilt. The punishment would be to make the REST of us feel good!

 

[KennyFlys]

I'm not sure about that. Any decent person (and most pilots I know are decent people) would be in agony about this for the rest of their lives, whether they were in jail or not, and would try to do positive things to give some measure of atonement. At least out of jail he'll have an opportunity to do some good with that guilt. The punishment would be to make the REST of us feel good!

For some, that may be true. But given most would be punished it only seems proper to apply the same here. It won't go over well in society if the excuse for not doing so is "He's a pilot in our community." Class envy would be expanded yet again.

 

[wbarnhill]

I don't have a problem with criminal penalties for severe negligence like this.

At the same time, I question the point of locking somebody up. What's the point? Unless it's revenge, I don't see any. Generally, your average pilot is worth more to society outside of jail than inside.

And bluntly, negligence is not something that can be deterred. For "deterrence theory" to work, it has to involve an active choice. You don't usually choose to be negligent - it just happens.

[SIZE=-1]From Princeton Wordnet: "failure to act with the prudence that a reasonable person would exercise under the same circumstances"[/SIZE]

I have to disagree that you don't choose to be negligent. Unintended consequences, yes, but the act itself was deliberate. The pilot admits that he entered in the wrong location and was unaware of power lines. Now whether he knew he was entering the wrong location at the time is irrelevant, because a reasonable person would have verified their route and position. To not do so is to simply act with disregard to life and property.

Most average people are worth more to society outside of jail than inside, as most average people have jobs, families, etc. But there are penalties, and pilots are not immune from those penalties. The FAA penalties are wholly separate from criminal penalties, as they should be.

 

[wbarnhill]

I'm not sure about that. Any decent person (and most pilots I know are decent people) would be in agony about this for the rest of their lives, whether they were in jail or not, and would try to do positive things to give some measure of atonement. At least out of jail he'll have an opportunity to do some good with that guilt. The punishment would be to make the REST of us feel good!

What about a DUI driver who crashes into a crowd of people killing 2? The individual is truly remorseful. Should the person just have to perform community service? Where is the line drawn?

 

[gprellwitz]

What about a DUI driver who crashes into a crowd of people killing 2? The individual is truly remorseful. Should the person just have to perform community service? Where is the line drawn?

Actually, that's not necessarily a bad idea, IMHO. Note that I am NOT saying "just let bygones be bygones". Community service, though, can have many forms. x years working full-time in alcoholism rehab clinics, or teaching in the inner city, or... with subsistence pay (for housing and essentials, which we'd be doing anyway if they were in prison), seems like a much better deal for society than locking them away. Obviously there are a lot of caveats on this. I'm not writing this up as a plank in my election campaign! But I think it's worth considering in some cases. The question becomes where does bad judgment morph into criminal intent? Possibility of causing harm to others as opposed to probability of causing harm to others as opposed to intent to cause harm to others? It's a grey scale, with few clear demarcations.

 

[AdamZ]

I . If that was your child or loved one, you would want him hung from the nearest tree. If he would have been driving a car and pulled a stupid stunt like that, he would have been charged with more. He should never be allowed to fly again and should be in jail for a long, long time.

ABOSOLUTLY DEAN, but that is a natural and emotive response., I'd probably want him buried alive but thats where the rule of law comes in to prevent revenge killings etc. Truth be told this is a horribly tragic event. I previously saw the article Kenny posted and frankly it is devoid of any substantial information. Certainly not enough to make a decision.

I don't think you can compare the pilots actions to a Drunk Driver or a Car Accident. People buy these rides for thrills. You don't want your airport limo driver to be playing Dale Ernhardt on the Expressway but fact is a plane ride is different.

NOW CAVEAT!!!!!! I am wondering if this low level river flight was part of what was touted as the ride, I don't know. If it was simply a 15 min sight seeing ride in a stearman and the pilot pulled a "Hey Watch this manuver" then he is a schmuck and should be slammed but if it was a thrill ride and something happend I'm not sure there should be criminal penalties, not saying there shouldn't just not sure with the sparse information provided.

Kenny said the pilot was doing " stupid stunts in an area not cleared for such manuvers" ( acro box?) If so nail him but I didn't see that in the AOPA aritcle perhaps it is somewhere else.

Look either way the parents of the girl should sue the pilots pants off Sadly that won't accomplish anything but pay for a lifetime of grief counseling and they will still want to bury him alive.

I can't vote on this because I just don't have the needed info all I can say is G-d please give this little girls family comfort and healing.

 

[wbarnhill]

People buy these rides for SAFE thrills.

No one jumps in an acro ride and wants to get hurt. They do it because they believe it will be safe. If the area was cleared for such maneuvers, why exactly were the power lines there? Either he was outside of the area he was supposed to be in, or someone put up power lines where they shouldn't have. Assuming he had been giving these rides throughout the day, it makes sense to assume that it's the former.

 

[KennyFlys]

Kenny said the pilot was doing " stupid stunts in an area not cleared for such maneuvers" ( acro box?) If so nail him but I didn't see that in the AOPA aritcle perhaps it is somewhere else.

My statement there came from basic situational awareness. You don't begin an approach in IMC without absolute certainty of your known position. Likewise, you shouldn't descend into a low-level area without absolute certainly of an area cleared of obstacles or at least knowing where those obstacles are and maintaining a safe flight path accordingly; 91.119 not withstanding.

Here are a few more links on it from Aero News Network:

Stearman Pilot Talks About Fatal Accident (Emphasis mine)

"That's why I was there. How did that turn tragic? I have no real answer," Strub told the Daily Tribune. "We were flying along and ran into the wires. I knew there were wires across the river. There are wires that cross the river all over the place. Did I know at that moment (the wires were so close)? No, otherwise I wouldn't have been there."

Fellow Aviators Defend Wisconsin Pilot

Pilot In 2004 Biplane Accident To Be Charged With Negligent Homicide

NTSB Probable Cause

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:

The pilot's improper in-flight decision when he decided to fly at a low altitude over the river and failed to maintain clearance from the power lines. A factor was the wires.

Wisconsin Pilot Takes Plea Deal In Fatal Accident

FAA aviation safety inspector Karen Krueger testified in a criminal complaint Strub violated regs governing minimum safe altitude, as well as a regulation from a section titled "Careless or Reckless Operation of an Aircraft."

Pilot Sentenced To Six Months In Jail For 2004 Fatal

Wings Air Charter Where Strub Flew
Promo Page with Strub's Picture (About halfway down)

 

[AdamZ]

ok but none of that stuff was in the AOPA article.

 

[KennyFlys]

ok but none of that stuff was in the AOPA article.

I know. Please accept my apologies. Admittedly, I was being lazy at the time I made the original post. Today, I spent some 45 min reading through those and looking for more. But, ANN had the best material from a knowledgeable perspective.