PDA

View Full Version : Is Fuel Exhaustion A Criminal Act?


Larry Dighera
November 5th 07, 06:42 PM
Is Fuel Exhaustion A Criminal Act?

CANADIAN PILOT GUILTY IN CRASH
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/990-full.html#196511)
A Canadian court has found an Alberta pilot guilty of criminal
negligence and unsafe operation of an aircraft for a 2002 accident
that led to the death of a Kansas man. Mark Tayfel admitted he
misjudged the amount of fuel required for the round trip from
Winnipeg, Manitoba to Gunisao Lake Lodge to pick up six American
tourists on a fishing trip. He initially made it to Winnipeg
International Airport, but for reasons that aren't clear had to
abort the landing. Both engines on the Piper Chieftain quit on the
go-around, and the aircraft crash-landed in a Winnipeg
intersection. Kansas resident Chester Jones, 79, died three months
later from injuries suffered in the crash, and four others were
injured. In his defense, Tayfel said running out of gas was an
honest mistake and not a criminal act.

If it was an arithmetical mistake, perhaps that is so. I can see an
inadvertent fuel leak resulting in fuel exhaustion as being an
accident. But this pilot seems to have violated several regulations:




http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2007/11/02/winnipeg-crash.html
Calgary-based commercial pilot Mark Tayfel was found guilty on
Thursday of four counts of criminal negligence causing bodily
harm, one count of criminal negligence causing death and dangerous
operation of an aircraft. ...

Counter to Tayfel's claims that he should not have been held
responsible for what happened, Beard concluded he made too many
misjudgments and showed a reckless disregard for the lives of
others.

He miscalculated the amount of fuel needed given the weather
conditions and also decided to press on with the flight despite
being aware of the possibility that the Piper Navajo aircraft was
not equipped with a mandatory auto-pilot system, she ruled. ...

The defence argued that the flight operator, Keystone Air, should
take the blame because Tayfel's bosses pressured him to go ahead
with the flight as scheduled. ...



http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2007/04/25/crash-pilot.html
In a telephone call after the crash, Gaudry said, Tayfel admitted
knowingly breaking Canadian aeronautic rules by flying without an
autopilot instrument, and said it was accepted practice at
Keystone Air at the time. ...

The pilot of a plane that crash-landed on a Winnipeg street
admitted in interviews with Transport Canada officials that he
broke aeronautic rules, according to testimony in a Winnipeg
courtroom Wednesday.

The Piper Navajo, operated by Keystone Air, ran out of fuel on a
flight from a fishing lodge in northern Manitoba in June 2002. It
crashed in north Winnipeg, near the intersection of McPhillips
Street and Logan Avenue.

Six American fishermen were on the flight; one died months later
of the injuries he sustained in the crash.

The pilot, Mark Tayfel, faces charges of criminal negligence
causing death.

Joseph Gaudry, a civil aviation safety inspector with Transport
Canada, testified Wednesday about the investigation he conducted
in the aftermath of the crash.

In a telephone call after the crash, Gaudry said, Tayfel admitted
knowingly breaking Canadian aeronautic rules by flying without an
autopilot instrument, and said it was accepted practice at
Keystone Air at the time.

Tayfel also admitted to flying the plane without necessary fuel on
board to make the flight from the fishing lodge to Winnipeg and
have sufficient reserve, Gaudry said.

Tayfel told Gaudry in a subsequent letter, which was entered into
evidence at the trial, "I know I broke those two regulations."
...

In the spring of 2003, the Transportation Safety Board said its
investigation had determined the pilot was flying too high and too
fast to make a successful landing at the Winnipeg airport. The
pilot also miscalculated how much fuel was needed for the flight,
officials said.

The TSB's report said the pilot didn't tell air traffic
controllers about his critical situation soon enough, and the
aircraft did not meet regulations for the flight because it did
not have an autopilot system.




http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Pilot_Said_He_Was_Sure_He_Had_Enough_Fuel_195900-1.html
August 12, 2007

Pilot Said He Was "Sure" He Had Enough Fuel Email this article
By Russ Niles, Contributing Editor

A charter pilot who relied solely on fuel gauges to calculate his
fuel load and admits he "guesstimated" the weight of his
passengers said he was sure he had enough fuel to make it to
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, from a remote fishing lake in 2002.
The irony was that Mark Tayfel did make the field with one engine
running, but his Keystone Airlines Piper Navajo, with six
passengers aboard, was high and hot and he had to go around. His
second engine quit on the go-around and the aircraft bounced off a
bus, sliced the back off a truck and came to rest near a gas
station at a Winnipeg intersection. ... Tayfel told a
Winnipeg court that he found out later that there was a problem
with the fuel gauges and he would have taken "extra precautions"
had he known. The aircraft was loaded with 850 pounds of fuel for
the flight to Gunisao Lake Lodge, a round trip of about 300 miles
that Tayfel said normally takes about 720 pounds of fuel. Fuel is
available at the lodge but, against the advice of a pilot who
accompanied him there, Tayfel decided not to refuel for the return
trip. "In my mind there was a safe amount to get me there and back
with fuel to spare," he told Queen's Bench Justice Holly Beard.
The plane was also flying without an autopilot. The court was told
that on his approach to Winnipeg International Airport, the
aircraft came out of the clouds too high and too fast to make the
runway. Tayfel was initially hailed as a hero for guiding the
aircraft to an emergency landing with no immediate loss of life.
The airline, the fishing lodge and Transport Canada are being sued
by the survivors and the estate of the man who died, 79-year-old
Kansas resident Chester Jones. Meanwhile, Tayfel is currently in
court facing several criminal charges, including criminal
negligence causing death, four counts of criminal negligence
causing bodily harm and dangerous operation of an aircraft.

Stefan
November 5th 07, 07:27 PM
Laws differ a lot among different countries, and especially so when it
comes to negligence. And I have no idea of the Canadian law. That said:

> Is Fuel Exhaustion A Criminal Act?

No. But the question is completely wrong.

> A Canadian court has found an Alberta pilot guilty of criminal
> negligence and unsafe operation of an aircraft for a 2002 accident
> that led to the death of a Kansas man. Mark Tayfel admitted he
> misjudged the amount of fuel required for the round trip from

So he run out of fuel by negligence. Negligence in itself is no criminal
act. Had he just run out of fuel and forced landed somewhere, well, so
had he, end of story. Had he killed or injured himself in the process,
again, so he had, and end of story. (Maybe not in regard of insurances,
but that's a different question.)

But: He killed someone else in the process. And as different as
legislations in different countries are, most of them see killing
somebody by negligence as a criminal act.

So the answer to your question is: No, running out of fuel is no
criminal act. But killing somebody by negligence is. And the negligence
may be the fact that you miscalculated your fuel need and consequently
run out of fuel. BTW, not requesting a priority landing when you know
that you're short of fuel may also be negligence and so on.

Gig 601XL Builder
November 5th 07, 08:47 PM
Stefan wrote:
> Laws differ a lot among different countries, and especially so when it
> comes to negligence. And I have no idea of the Canadian law. That
> said:
>> Is Fuel Exhaustion A Criminal Act?
>
> No. But the question is completely wrong.
>
>> A Canadian court has found an Alberta pilot guilty of criminal
>> negligence and unsafe operation of an aircraft for a 2002 accident
>> that led to the death of a Kansas man. Mark Tayfel admitted he
>> misjudged the amount of fuel required for the round trip from
>
> So he run out of fuel by negligence. Negligence in itself is no
> criminal act. Had he just run out of fuel and forced landed
> somewhere, well, so had he, end of story. Had he killed or injured
> himself in the process, again, so he had, and end of story. (Maybe
> not in regard of insurances, but that's a different question.)
>
> But: He killed someone else in the process. And as different as
> legislations in different countries are, most of them see killing
> somebody by negligence as a criminal act.
>
> So the answer to your question is: No, running out of fuel is no
> criminal act. But killing somebody by negligence is. And the
> negligence may be the fact that you miscalculated your fuel need and
> consequently run out of fuel. BTW, not requesting a priority landing
> when you know that you're short of fuel may also be negligence and so
> on.

From a Goggled searched web page this from an appeal of a Criminal
Negligence case.

"in criminal negligence the Crown must prove that the accused showed a
wanton or reckless disregard for the life or safety of another. That which
the Crown must prove is described differently in respect of failing to
provide the necessaries of life. Namely, for that offence the Crown must
establish that the accused's failure endangered the life of the person to
whom he or she owed a duty or that the accused caused, or was likely to
cause, the health of that person to be endangered permanently."

Google