Brazil Mid-Air Survivor

[say again]

I know the two pilots personally and hope for their safe return home soon!! It's a tough posistion, and I'm not going to speculate until the final truth comes out. God Bless all aboard the 737 as well as their families. A tragedy for all involved.

 

[HS125]

Thanks for the example of the wedding dress maker, and for proofing my post! I guess you don't have any examples of any pilots being tried for homicide in relation to an aircraft accident? Oh well, have a nice day watching Law and Order!! ."

July 08 2006 at 05:00PM
By Rachel d'Oro
Anchorage, Alaska - The pilot in a plane crash that led to a the drowning death of a teen from South Africa was charged with manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide.
Kurt Stenehjem of Anchorage was arrested on Thursday in connection with the felony charges stemming from the July 7, 2005, death of 17-year-old Mark Schroeder of Durban, South Africa.
Stenehjem, 55, and Schroeder were among five people on board the floatplane that crashed in calm weather into Johnstone Lake on the Kenai Peninsula. A floatplane is a plane equipped with pontoons so it can land on water.
Not wearing a lifejacket
Schroeder, who was not wearing a lifejacket, slipped into the glacier-fed lake while the others made it to icebergs with minor injuries.
Schroeder's mother, Lesley Schroeder McLean, said she saw "something cosmic" in the timing of the arrest - a day before the year anniversary of the crash.
Stenehjem is a longtime associate of the family. McLean's husband, Chris, is a former Alaska bush pilot and registered owner of the Maule M7-235 involved in the crash.
"From my heart, I just miss my son. I would rather have him back than have the pilot in jail," Lesley McLean said Friday from Durban. "But we do feel vindicated that justice has been served, although it's not a happy day for me."
State prosecutors could not be reached on Friday, but Alaska State Troopers and Federal Aviation Administration officials could not recall another an Alaska pilot involved in a fatal crash being criminally charged.
'Justice has been served'
Nationally, such prosecutions are uncommon, but not unheard of, said Phil Kolczynski, a Santa Ana, California-based aviation law attorney and former FAA trial attorney. Convictions are even more unusual, he said, typically involving alcohol or drugs - factors not present in the Stenehjem case. Far more common are civil lawsuits claiming negligence.
"It depends on the weight of the evidence," Kolczynski said. "If it weighs a ton, a prosecutor is doing exactly what they should be doing. On the other hand, some cases are politicised."
In its own investigation, the FAA found enough to issue a rare emergency revocation of Stenehjem's commercial pilot license, saying his lack of care and judgment justified immediate action. Among factors noted, the plane was equipped with only four seats even though there were five people on board, it was overloaded and had not undergone an annual inspection. Schroeder had sat in the back where gear was stored.Stenehjem turned himself in to Anchorage authorities Thursday and was released less than two hours later after posting $50 000 bail. Stenehjem said Friday he has not been arraigned. -
Sapa-AP [from]
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?newsl...2R131&set_id=1

You're welcome FN FAL :laugh:

 

[miles otoole]

Unlike the United States, pilots can be criminally prosecuted for accidents.

What law says pilots can't be prosecuted for negligence? Didn't know pilots in the U.S. had legal immunity.

 

[bombinha]

Weasil are u a pilot?
If you were you would know about 2 important things.
1-> most of the airtraffic rules are not made by FAA and by ICAO for the entire WORLD and this is for all countries that accept ICAO that means 99% exmptions would be North Korea, Uganda to name a few.
2-> Brasil not Brazil is written with S and not Z and,
3-> Brasil has the second largest fleet of aircraft in the world including both airliners and private planes.
So next time measure your words.
Sharkey and all others were very lucky for those pilots tuning off the transponder trying to push a filght all the way from sao Jose dos Campos to Manaus in a Legacy non-stop to refuel and with low (if any) experience in international flights. Now they gonna face a process for negligence and USA and Brasil have no agreement for extradition that means if condemmned will face brasilian prisons and that is far worst than death penalty.

 

[bombinha]

Networking... how many languages do u speak?
How do u say don't thrust brasilian press if you don't speak the language and only in USA the president has a bottom to shut down all press from TV and only in USA you have a 5min delay on life shows after the incident with Mrs. Jackson that for me she dind't show anything as she was wearing a big piercing that cover her nip...

 

[bombinha]

Sluggo it's taking so long because as per the american consulate and the pilots lawyer that should be taking to a neutral place. Only the 737 boxes will be taking to seatle due the bad conditions they are and afraid not all can be recovered. So Canada is considered neutral as not american neither brasilian and has equal relationship with both.
The biggest problem of this accident is the diplomatic side of it. As some people here that don't even know Brasil is bigger than US like to speculate and always think everione is wrong but americans.
We all humans and we all subject to mistakes.
For instance our Mr president that tought Iraq would be a walking on park. And still making the mistake to not get us out of there.
Who has the power to prosecute him for negligence increasing of terror threat and stratosferic crime rates plus inflation?

 

[Kharma Police]

July 08 2006 at 05:00PM
By Rachel d'Oro
Anchorage, Alaska - The pilot in a plane crash that led to a the drowning death of a teen from South Africa was charged with manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide.
Kurt Stenehjem of Anchorage was arrested on Thursday in connection with the felony charges stemming from the July 7, 2005, death of 17-year-old Mark Schroeder of Durban, South Africa.
Stenehjem, 55, and Schroeder were among five people on board the floatplane that crashed in calm weather into Johnstone Lake on the Kenai Peninsula. A floatplane is a plane equipped with pontoons so it can land on water.
Not wearing a lifejacket
Schroeder, who was not wearing a lifejacket, slipped into the glacier-fed lake while the others made it to icebergs with minor injuries.
Schroeder's mother, Lesley Schroeder McLean, said she saw "something cosmic" in the timing of the arrest - a day before the year anniversary of the crash.
Stenehjem is a longtime associate of the family. McLean's husband, Chris, is a former Alaska bush pilot and registered owner of the Maule M7-235 involved in the crash.
"From my heart, I just miss my son. I would rather have him back than have the pilot in jail," Lesley McLean said Friday from Durban. "But we do feel vindicated that justice has been served, although it's not a happy day for me."
State prosecutors could not be reached on Friday, but Alaska State Troopers and Federal Aviation Administration officials could not recall another an Alaska pilot involved in a fatal crash being criminally charged.
'Justice has been served'
Nationally, such prosecutions are uncommon, but not unheard of, said Phil Kolczynski, a Santa Ana, California-based aviation law attorney and former FAA trial attorney. Convictions are even more unusual, he said, typically involving alcohol or drugs - factors not present in the Stenehjem case. Far more common are civil lawsuits claiming negligence.
"It depends on the weight of the evidence," Kolczynski said. "If it weighs a ton, a prosecutor is doing exactly what they should be doing. On the other hand, some cases are politicised."
In its own investigation, the FAA found enough to issue a rare emergency revocation of Stenehjem's commercial pilot license, saying his lack of care and judgment justified immediate action. Among factors noted, the plane was equipped with only four seats even though there were five people on board, it was overloaded and had not undergone an annual inspection. Schroeder had sat in the back where gear was stored.Stenehjem turned himself in to Anchorage authorities Thursday and was released less than two hours later after posting $50 000 bail. Stenehjem said Friday he has not been arraigned. -
Sapa-AP [from]
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?newsl...2R131&set_id=1

You're welcome FN FAL :laugh:

Well there you go, I stand corrected, a new precedent. I guess the pilots from the SWA accident in MDW better call their lawyer (again), and once the Comair FO recovers, he should be prepared to stand trial.

 

[ackattacker]

Wow... this thread has gone downhill fast.

bombinha - you're posts are rambling, nonsensical, and just plain wrong.

First off, Brazil is spelled Brazil in English. Look it up. It is only spelled "Brasil" in Portuguese. Since most of us are using English on this forum, don't go around correcting people for using proper English (something you have obviously not yet mastered).

Second... the distance from Sao Jose dos Campos to Manaus is less than 1500nm. The range of a Legacy is over 3000nm. Yet you seem to present as fact that they were pushing their fuel, and hence refused to descend from FL370 to FL360. This is beyond speculation, it's blatantly idiotic. Furthermore, the service ceiling is FL410 not FL370 as you posted.

Third... Brazil has just over 11,000 total registered aircraft. The US has over 225,000 registered aircraft. The UK has over 17,000 total registered aircraft. I picked those countries at random, and have already shown that your statement that Brazil has the "second largest fleet" is total B.S. I haven't even looked at Australia, Russia, etc. all of which certainly have larger fleets than Brazil.

Fourth and last... you seem to want to educate us all on ICAO rules and yet your profile shows that you hold both an "FAA ATP" and an "ICAO ATP". Surely then you know that an FAA ATP is an ICAO ATP...

 

[HS125]

Weasil are u a pilot?
If you were you would know about 2 important things.
1-> most of the airtraffic rules are not made by FAA and by ICAO for the entire WORLD and this is for all countries that accept ICAO that means 99% exmptions would be North Korea, Uganda to name a few.

And no matter where in the world you are, you don't change altitude unless authorized by ATC. Just because your flight plan shows that you will have a planned decent after a given fix, you stay at your present altitude until ATC says otherwise. If you don't hear or respond to ATC's instructions, as far as ATC is concerned, it's the same as ATC having not given those instructions.

I've been to Brazil a couple of times, you may have radar and VHF communications, but the quality of ACT communications over the middle of the Amazon are fair at best. More than once I've been given instructions by Brazilian ATC (especially Manaus) where they were next to impossible to understand, or I would go unanswered for quite sometime and need to make numerous calls just to get a response.

Sharkey and all others were very lucky for those pilots tuning off the transponder

How do you know that the pilots turned off the transponder? Maybe the transponder or ATC's equipment malfunctioned. It's the Brazilian press that is insisting that these pilots intentionally turned off the transponder. I don't buy it. This sounds more like someone in Brazil is putting out misinformation to take the focus of the investigation or public attention off of ATC.

trying to push a filght all the way from sao Jose dos Campos to Manaus in a Legacy non-stop to refuel

Sao Jose dos Campos is approximately 120 Km east of Sao Paulo. Embraer shows that the Range of the Legacy 600 with 8 passengers would allow the Legacy to fly easily from Sao Paulo to Bogota Columbia. Manaus is around the half way point, hardly a stretch for the Legacy 600.

and with low (if any) experience in international flights.

Even with Low to no International experience, this is not that difficult of a flight with proper preparation.

Now they gonna face a process for negligence and USA and Brasil have no agreement for extradition that means if condemmned will face brasilian prisons and that is far worst than death penalty.

In a country where the political and legal system is unbelievably corrupt and it looks like the deck is being stacked against them. God help them!

So next time measure your words.:uzi:

 

[RP 04]

Fourth and last... you seem to want to educate us all on ICAO rules and yet your profile shows that you hold both an "FAA ATP" and an "ICAO ATP". Surely then you know that an FAA ATP is an ICAO ATP...

He reminds me of a guy I met at MIA once. Running his big trap how he held both ICAO and FAA ATP's. Bet it's the same guy...

 

[Axel]

Thread creep alert

Criminal charges due to an aircraft accident, while not common. are not unheard of in the US. But they are not federal charges. The FAR is not criminal in nature so there is no federal criminal statute, only civil sanctions. However the states and localities do in fact have the authority and right to make laws and prosecute the pilot(s) under them if their actions, or results thereof, in that jurisdiction constitute a violation of those laws. That includes manslaughter, reckless endangerment, operating under the influence, etc.

I believe the landmark case was in northern AZ in the early 80's when a flight instructor, who had a reputation as a wild-man, was screwing around during a formation flight and hit the other airplane. He and his student survived, but two of the four people on the other airplane were killed. He was prosecuted and convicted of negligent homicide by the county over which the collision occured and I think he did some time.

So, I don't know about Brazil (Brasil, whatever), but at least in the US, criminal charges would come from the state and/or local authorities. You would get a letter from the FAA about your license suspension in your cell at the county jail.

I attended an aircraft accident investigation "workshop" at a police academy in Virginia several years ago. Here is what I learned: Once the fire is out, the local and state authorities are YOUR WORST ENEMY. They go into "Lenny Briscoe" mode. THEY KNOW you have committed a crime; to them it's just a matter of finding out which one. All their investigative expertise goes into finding out what crime(s) you committed that resulted in you dropping aluminum onto their jurisdiction. For example: There was an hour long presentation by a Commonwealth's Attorney (DA) on how to obtain a search warrant for your blood. The term "hammer the pilot" came up more than once. This is a criminal investigation. They are treating it as such and so should you.

If they are unable to produce evidence you actually committed a violation of local and/or state law they will hand over, with relish, everything they have to the FAA so the FAA can hammer you even if they couldn't.

End of thread creep

 

[uba757]

How the hell did we go from this tragic accident to Mr. Bushy having the power to turn off the news.(Is this like a magic button that just gets rid of the news or what) By the way I think is a 10 second delay on the life stuff. Another thing that really pi$$es me off (Upfront I will say I don't like Mr. Bushy at all and I'm not one of those guys that drinks the cool-aid either) I don't know what types of freedom you have in BRAZIL but the ones here in the US are about the best I have seen anywhere I have traveled in the world, this is not to say we are perfect or the best or anything like that because our system is not perfect but again is about the best I have seen. And by the way if things are much better in BRAZIL don't let the door hit your A$$ on the way back down south. I hate people who always say how things are better where they came from but then are here in the US taking up our limited space. HAHA. UBA757

 

[crash-proof]

Bombinha: literally "little pump" in portguese. Not sure if it has another connotation though..

 

[Longhorn]

Guys and Gals,

Let please get the conversation back on track. It seems that the thread is starting to go downhill and lose its original point. If you all want to argue over petty things....use the PM function.

thanks

 

[Networ-King]

Wow... this thread has gone downhill fast.

bombinha - you're posts are rambling, nonsensical, and just plain wrong.

First off, Brazil is spelled Brazil in English. Look it up. It is only spelled "Brasil" in Portuguese. Since most of us are using English on this forum, don't go around correcting people for using proper English (something you have obviously not yet mastered).

Second... the distance from Sao Jose dos Campos to Manaus is less than 1500nm. The range of a Legacy is over 3000nm. Yet you seem to present as fact that they were pushing their fuel, and hence refused to descend from FL370 to FL360. This is beyond speculation, it's blatantly idiotic. Furthermore, the service ceiling is FL410 not FL370 as you posted.

Third... Brazil has just over 11,000 total registered aircraft. The US has over 225,000 registered aircraft. The UK has over 17,000 total registered aircraft. I picked those countries at random, and have already shown that your statement that Brazil has the "second largest fleet" is total B.S. I haven't even looked at Australia, Russia, etc. all of which certainly have larger fleets than Brazil.

Fourth and last... you seem to want to educate us all on ICAO rules and yet your profile shows that you hold both an "FAA ATP" and an "ICAO ATP". Surely then you know that an FAA ATP is an ICAO ATP...

Excellent post.....

And for the little pump dude....

I speak 3 different languages and I believe I have mastered english a little better then you. As for the rest of your post.... you freaking lost me after hello....and I couldn't care any less....

Now back to the topic at hand.....

I got my type on the 145 a few years ago and have only a few hundred hours in the darn thing, so I need some guys that are book smart and have a lot more time in the lawn dart.....<grin>.

There is an AD out for the embraer 135/145 that has to be complied with by october 17th that has to do with the transponder going into the standby mode for no reason at all while in flight. Im hoping that my buddy posts the AD on here, but again thats me being lazy and hoping one of you 145 checkairmen type would have this already. The pilots have denied time and time again about having turned the thing off and with the DFDR I don't know how this has not been proven yet. Im thinking corrupt politics has something to do with it.... dunno. This little tid bit might be the thing that gets them home soon. I know the guy that found this out and helped get everything to those guys, eventhough he's a DB, he's still a great friend for doing that. Beers on me DB.

Anyone in the know please chime in would ya?

 

[zbwmy]

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulator...ac629452862571e70059100d/$FILE/2006-19-04.pdf



http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulator...62571e70059100d!OpenDocument&ExpandSection=-3

 

[zbwmy]

This AD applies to the Honeywell parts identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, approved under Technical Standard Order TSO-C112, installed on


EMBRAER Model EMB-135BJ, -135ER, -135KE, -135KL, and - 135LR airplanes; EMBRAER Model EMB-145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, - 145XR, -145MP, and -145EP airplanes;

This AD results from the transponder erroneously going into standby mode if the flightcrew takes longer than five seconds when using the rotary knob of the radio management unit to change the air traffic control code. We are issuing this AD to prevent the transponder of the COM unit from going into standby mode, which could increase the workload on the flightcrew and result in improper functioning of the traffic alert and collision avoidance system.

 

[zbwmy]

Which model above is the Legacy 600?

 

[tarp]

Just a bystander.

But, go back to the NY Times article. The author obviously wrote it minutes after reaching the ground and giving his newspaper a scoop on something that "just happened".

Now I personally dislike the NY Times and their biased reporting and proclivity to releasing "classified" information.... BUT this guy was kissing the ground, the pilots, the military guys and anyone else he could find for still being alive.

What were his comments about the flight BEFORE the crash? He was sat back relaxing in a leather chair reading and writing. He had visited the flight deck earlier and been shown the FL370 readout.

Now where were these "playing around" maneuvers the Brazilians are talking about? A jet moving from FL320 to FL370 with pilots playing with the transponder off would feel a little bit odd to a passenger riding in the back. If you are going to turn off the transponder and horse around over the jungle, then I would think the passengers would either have been told or they would have felt the "horsing".

Now if the NY Times had a reporter on board, the pilots had been horsing around and this accident occurred.....which do you think is more likely of our vaunted journalist - would he:

1.) hide the fact that the new owners and pilots decided to "do things" with the aircraft moments before the crash?

or

2.) bury the pilots? As in - "I couldn't believe these yahoos....there I was trapped aboard an aircraft as we went through a series of dives and climbs and suddenly - WHAM - we are hit by an airliner".

You know the NY Times wants story #2. There is no way they want to be out-scooped by O globo or some other news outlet.

My vote is propoganda. I feel sorry for the American pilots. The railroad is being built to take them directly to Brazil's version of Siberia - in this case, though, the time stamp on the NY Times author's recollections may be the only bit of clarity in this whole affair. Brazil wants to hang somebody for killing Brazilians and causing shame/embarassment to their ATC or Low-cost airline.

These guys need a good lawyer and a good "handler" to get them out of Brazil ASAP.

 

[NYRANGERS]

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulator...ac629452862571e70059100d/$FILE/2006-19-04.pdf



http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulator...62571e70059100d!OpenDocument&ExpandSection=-3

From the AD......

Request To Revise Compliance Time Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER) requests that we extend the compliance time for the AFM revision from 5 to 30 days. EMBRAER asserts that the loss of the transponder does not pose so great of a hazard to justify such an urgent compliance time. As justification for extending the compliance time, EMBRAER states that some of the affected airplanes might be on international trips, where it may not be possible to return an airplane to a convenient location and accomplish the AFM revision within 5 days after the effective date of this AD.

The compliance date of the AD is October 17, 2006. 11 days from now.