Former Keystone Pilot Mark Tayfel Sentence

[Hedley]

Judge wrote:

If, for any reason, the aircraft cannot remain aloft, it falls to the ground and, almost with fail, all on board are killed or seriously injured. It is almost unheard of for there to be any survivors of a plane crash.

Q: What do you call a lawyer with an IQ of 50?
A: "Your Honour"

[carholme]

I have no problem with the word "No", especially in the case of fuel. My opinion about this case matters to no one as the judge has made her assessment and convicted on that basis.

However, for those on this site who wish to pontificate, I would suggest that the statement "There but for the grace of" applies to many. How many of you in the early days of your career or even recently have watched this case and in the back of your mind, clearly recalled the time when your ass was sucked up into your throat, low on fuel .. running over the trees or whatever and praying that a spot would open up.
How many of you know perfectly well you have been in a low fuel situation and were lucky? I doubt if too many will admit it, just as they won't admit to flying over gross, flying with known groundable defects, in weather below limits, shooting approaches to below minimums and every other rule breaking excercise that can be done.

Yes, saying "No" should be the standard regardless of what it costs you, but some of you might just reflect how lucky you are to be in the position you are, in spite of that time your ass was in your throat. Had the Keystone pilot had the luxury of another ten minutes of fuel six years ago, he might just now be finishing his second seat time at a major airline and be on the way to captaincy. Unfortunately, he didn't and he had to answer for his mistake.

For anybody who refutes that the culture that exists had anything to do with the problem is doing exactly what the regulator does, bury their head in the sand. Blame has been found and we are now safe again.

carholme

[snoopy]

The shape of things to come…

It is interesting to read with the various commentaries on the latest developments publicized regarding the Mark Tayfel case. It is particularly interesting to read this thread, in which various posters are particularly emphatic about Mr. Tayfel’s culpability with regard to his fuel related decisions.

The implication is that somehow, this CARS and airmanship violation, is somehow particularly heinous, over various other CARS and airmanship violations he could/may have committed. Why is operating with insufficient fuel reserves, any more or less wrong than breaking any other laws and risking safety of flight – overloading, reckless flying, pushing weather, busting minimums, low flying etc.?

Everyone is quick to crucify this pilot on this one point, yet what of all the other crimes that are committed regularly in this industry? Are you flying responsibly at all times? Do you fly overloaded? Do you fly with minimum/marginal fuel? Do you push the weather? Did you bust minimums to get in? Is your aircraft unserviceable/unairworthy, and are you still flying it? Did you ever fail to say no?

There is a lot of rah rah rah support to say no to shady operators, and lynch the bastards that break the rules and risk lives, but, like any other topic debated to death on these forums, support and interest seems to be directly proportional to the amount of media attention of the day. A week, two weeks, a month down the road, when this news has faded into obscurity, will each and every one of you still be preaching/practicing the same sermon? Will you support your fellow pilot/mechanic/other in their actions and speak up, say no, vote with your feet?

Will you?

Have you?

There is no need to justify to anyone on these forums, how you have, or intend to operate. In the end, it is your ACTIONS that speak volumes about the type of person, pilot, mechanic, whatever, you are. Think about it next time you walk out to the aircraft, prepare for your next flight, look at yourself in the mirror, or your colleagues and your passengers in the eye.

The law does not distinguish which laws are better or worse to break, particularly where an accident and/or loss of life occurs. So this precedent, that Mark Tayfel’s case has set, may apply to YOU in the future, if you are unfortunate enough to have things go wrong.

For those who are quick to say Tayfel got what he deserved, and well he may have, remember that any one of us, may now be placed under the media/legal microscope if we are unfortunate enough to have an accident. And heaven, or somebody, help us if we broke ANY laws – accidently or deliberately – because the door has been opened for jail terms for our mistakes. This is not a time to say ‘That couldn’t happen to me’. Think about it.

And what of the operator in all this? Without the support system of good management standing behind the good ethics and operating principles of their company and its staff; and backing their safety decisions, what a bleak future you potentially face should you decide not to buck the system and say no. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Say yes, go to jail. Say no, lose your job. That is the new reality. The operator and management alike must be held equally accountable for the role they play in cases like this. Yes, the pilot made some mistakes, and he is being punished for them. Yet the operator is left to carry on as before, until the next pilot/mechanic screws up and takes the blame. Or maybe they lose their job because they weren’t willing to put themselves in jeopardy, and another body takes their place. Because somebody will always be there to replace them, until the OPERATOR is made to stop.

For those who state that this pilot was the one holding the smoking gun, there is plenty of case law to support that the person holding the gun isn’t always necessarily the only one guilty of murder.

Some food for thought.

[Sasquash]

Snoopy is right. And what of the operator in all this? Back to the old s.21 of the Criminal Code;

Parties to Offences

21. (1) Every one is a party to an offence who

(a) actually commits it;
(b) does or omits to do anything for the purpose of aiding any person to commit it; or
(c) abets any person in committing it.

more food for thoughts...

[Wilbur]

I agree with much of what you say Snoopy, with one exception. Mr. Tayfel made only one possible mistake; his calculation of the fuel he had on board. But even that, the judge ruled, wasn't a really a mistake. He made concious decisions to fly with less than the legally required fuel, and to file a falsified flight plan. Those were not mistakes, they were deliberate choices to run fast and loose with the lives of his passengers and countless others in downtown Winnipeg.

Some, if not many in the aviation community could benefit by looking at these issues from a different perspective; that of the general public. The reality is that when you risk your passengers lives in this manner because of real or imagined consequences from your boss, you are making a callous choice to place your financial interest ahead of other's lives. You are in the same category as a trucker who hits the road knowing his brakes are faulty, the farm labour driver who crams 20 people in a 15 px van with bald tires, the drunk driver too cheap to pay for a cab, or the contractor you see highlighted on Holmes on homes who knowingly takes a family's money and destroys their home. It's all the same mentality, I'll do what benefits me and f... everyone else.

The aviation community has had a free ride from TC and the TSB for way too long in treating these crashes as "accidents," and that's why this risk taking is as endemic as it is claimed to be. Running out of fuel because you knowingly didn't take as much as the law says you have to isn't an accident - it's a crime.

[Doc]

Everybody (and rightly so) rags about company "culture", pressure on the poor pilot. But what happened here is far worse than the example of cramming 15 people into a van with bald tires. The van just may survive the trip. An aircraft with less than "bingo" fuel will not. This guy had (from what I hear) 3000 or so hours. Not all that "new" to the game.
It's been a while since I've flown a 'ho, and from what I remember, the ONLY way to really KNOW how much fuel you have on board, is to start with FULL fuel, and a watch! if somebody else flew the aircraft last, or if the mechanics were doing engine runs, then YOU do NOT know how much fuel is really in the tanks.
Bottom line. He is guilty as charged. But don't kid yourselves into thinking of this as a "mistake"....a mistake is forgetting to lower the gear. A mistake is landing at the wrong airport. A mistake is forgetting to pee before a five hour flight.

[bob sacamano]

A mistake is forgetting to pee before a five hour flight.

That's negligence.

[Donald]

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story ... ppeal.html

Pilot who crashed plane in Winnipeg intersection appeals conviction
1 passenger died and several other people were injured

The plane crash-landed in a busy Winnipeg intersection on June 11, 2002.

(CBC)An Alberta pilot found guilty of criminal negligence after crash-landing his small plane in Winnipeg is appealing his conviction.

Calgary-based commercial pilot Mark Tayfel was found guilty in November 2007 of four counts of criminal negligence causing bodily harm, and one count each of criminal negligence causing death and dangerous operation of an aircraft.

The conviction stemmed from an incident on June 11, 2002. Tayfel was flying six American fishermen from a remote Manitoba fishing lodge when his twin-engine Piper Navajo aircraft ran out of fuel.

Both engines cut out shortly after he missed the runway on his first attempt to land at Winnipeg's airport, and the plane eventually came down in the middle of McPhillips Street and Logan Avenue, a downtown Winnipeg intersection.

Passenger Chester Jones, 79, died from his injuries in hospital several weeks after the crash. Several other people were hurt.

In handing down her verdict, Justice Holly Beard rejected Tayfel's argument that it was simply an honest mistake. She concluded he made too many misjudgments and showed a reckless disregard for the lives of others.

Beard sentenced Tayfel last spring to a jail term to be served in the community. He had been hoping for an acquittal.

[crazy_aviator]

Okay, i have a little problem trying to understand how ANY pilot who properly calculates the fuel in the airplane THEN calculates the trip duration , then realizes that the aircraft will run out of fuel and glide BEFORE reaching the airport then continue to take off !!!!! Something MUST be missing here folks ! Did he miscalculate either the fuel on board or the trip length/fuel burn ? Was he told he had enough ?
Are we speculating here once again ? IF the pilot KNOWINGLY took off KNOWING that the plane was going to become a glider, then there is a real issue with the human mind here. Why blame Keystone for it ? HOWEVER, if the real truth turned out to be a combination of many factors ALONG with the pilots uncertaintly of the fuel load/ fuel reqd. , then , i would be more interested in seeing both Keystone AND the pilot punished in the proper manner .

[Cat Driver]

Could there be any subliminal or direct pressure to skimp on fuel with this company?

I noticed this on another thread today.

My friends that worked their recently said they are still asked to do IFR trips on VFR fuel.

Naw, the pilots are just troublemakers and not real " Team players "

That has to be the answer.

[Ogee]

Could anyone else have stopped him? Was anyone else responsible to ensure regulations were being followed?

If the answer to those question is "no", then Mr. Tayfel would be solely responsible. He IS ultimately responsible, but not solely so. Because someone else could have stopped him, and someone else should have stopped him

.

Wow. That is possibly the most ridiculous statement I've read on this issue. I guess airlines like this only need two pilots. That's because the CF needs to fly in the right seat holding hands with the pilot in command to prevent him from flying the airplane upside-down or landing with his eyes closed or taking off while asleep.

Widow, the operations people are responsible for alot of things. However, once the airplane is released, the pilot is responsible to determine if the airplane is equipped and fueled appropriately for the trip. These are not subtle or difficult decisions. They are fundamental knowledge that every pilot needs to know. If they don't they have no business in the cockpit.

The pilot in question not only failed to have enough fuel on the airplane, he failed to declare an emergency or even minimum fuel which would have invoked ATC to give him landing priority and prevented them from directing the flight out over the city. This guy had plenty of chances to come clean and do the right thing but he failed to follow fundamental principals.

I am totally on board with the theory of promoting a safe company culture and I'm aware of the dangers of negative company cultures that fail to promote safety. In my opinion, the fundamental mistakes the pilot made are not the result of the company culture.

Watch you don't smack your head ridin' that high horse into the barn, Cowboy.

If you have an argument to make, make it like a man. If you think a comment like this is a winning argument, then you need somebody to be holding your wee hand while you type crap like this...

That's because the CF needs to fly in the right seat holding hands with the pilot in command to prevent him from flying the airplane upside-down or landing with his eyes closed or taking off while asleep.

For some pilots, the type D dispatch system isn't enough. I think the sentence was appropriate. The pilot did have a high degree of culpability. And the talk from wise minds about company culture is entirely on the mark.

[Doc]

Heard a funny north of YPM the other day....."Hey Keystone. Got Gas?"

[Finn47]

Another day, another article:

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/ ... 22622.html

[Cat Driver]

Defence lawyer Balfour Der suggested Tayfel's employer at the time of the crash, Keystone Air, should have also been held liable and that his client has been made the "whipping boy" for an industry fraught with problems.

"They're not here in court supporting Mr. Tayfel. They headed for the hills. These young pilots are really being forced into a tough situation," he said.

[The Old Fogducker]

I think it will be interesting to see what forms the basis of Mr. Tayfel's appeal.

Appeals to rulings can only be granted based upon a procedural or legal error made by the presiding Judge, or some party to the proceeding. After that is the actual appeal process before a higher court, and then awaiting the outcome of that proceeding.

Further, being given Leave For Appeal isn't something granted just because the aggrieved party doesn't agree with the court's finding.....although it makes for great TV interviews on the courthouse steps after a conviction when the guilty party's lawyer expresses mock shock and moral outrage about the legal system having run roughshod of his clients civil rights.

Fogducker

Update ... I notice Cat posted the basis of the appeal while I was typing ... they maintain the company should also have been charged in addition to Mr. Tayfel... looking at this dispassionately, .... who was or was not charged is not the problem of the court or the Judge who made the ruling in the original case. As I understand it, and going by memory, it was Winnipeg City Police and the Crown Prosecutor who made the decision to proceed with the investigation, and decided who was ...in their opinion, culpable and should be charged.

That "new defence" to the conviction is like saying the driver of a speeding car shouldn't go to court alone because the passenger (who owned the car) urged him to go faster.

Judge Judy wouldn't be impressed with defence counsel's motion.

My prediction ... the appeal is going nowhere and the cynic in me says Mr. Tayfel's legal representative was able to find another way to generate some billable hours.

[Ogee]

My prediction ... the appeal is going nowhere and the cynic in me says Mr. Tayfel's legal representative was able to find another way to generate some billable hours.

Eeeeyep!

[Cat Driver]

Unfortunately I also am a cynic about this appeal.

What really bothers me is if this pilot was convicted there should be hundreds of other pilots in the same boat as this guy.

[Doc]

What really bothers me is if this pilot was convicted there should be hundreds of other pilots in the same boat as this guy.

You may see more charges laid in the future.
I know there is some sympathy on the web for this turkey. It ain't from me though. He did what he did with TOTAL disregard for his passenger's safety!

In a side note. Keystone should have had their doors permanently nailed shut. From the young pilots I've talked to, this going with VFR fuel bull shit still goes on. You guys really need to learn to say "NO" to this company.....the next sentence will be served behind bars. You go in, a tight end, and you'll cum out, a wide receiver!

[...]

This is such a brilliant post...

And as a pilot group have we learned anything from this??? From some of the threads I read I would have to say no, as it seems we still have folks lining up for the shit jobs with the two bit operators and TC still burying their heads instead of jumping all over these companies. Then we argue on here justifying why we did what we did in order to get the job done rather than just saying NO in the first place!!! And so it goes!!!

We've engaged ourselves in a life of constant study. Every 6 months to a year our jobs are on the line with PPC's. Let's forget the fact the type of work we do...everytime we go to work...we are preparing for the worst case scenario, surviving catastrophic disaster.

In spite of that, if everything goes well with study, yearly & bi-yearly training, surviving the day to day issues of such a complex set of variables as flying an airplane, these are things we have control over....HOWEVER....
-IF our heart skips a beat during a routine ECG...we're done.
-IF you become a diabetic...we're done.
-IF anything is slightly medically wrong...we're done. Medical pulled. Period.

So why is it we call ourselves professionals? We as a collective group don't fit the mold as professionals because we are continue to feed the 'unprofessional' environment?

I used to say "I'm livin' the dream!!!" However, I have to be asleep to believe it.

IABD


------------------------

Keystone should have had their doors permanently nailed shut. From the young pilots I've talked to, this going with VFR fuel bull shit still goes on. You guys really need to learn to say "NO" to this company.....the next sentence will be served behind bars.

What?

I'm think I'm going to be sick.

[dashx]

He is guilty as charged. But don't kid yourselves into thinking of this as a "mistake"....a mistake is forgetting to lower the gear. A mistake is landing at the wrong airport. A mistake is forgetting to pee before a five hour flight

Destiny perhaps?

Don't worry there are plenty of "professionals" out there making mistakes right now.

Now what was that case out east with the bad testing????????? cancer???? Anyone go to jail over that one? Anybody die??

How about the doctor in Ontario that testified (incorrectly) in court and was responsible for people (mothers.....) going to jail ????? Is he in jail? I believe he said he was sorry..... Oops there goes your life (well almost)

Anyone out there sign the waiver when their pet goes in for surgery??? No choice and if Fido happens to die well that couldn't possibly have been the Vet's fault ... could it?

Now I know pets and humans is a poor comparison but.... thought I'd throw that in...

Ah yes mistakes....... think of them as mistakes....

Poor Mark he was just unlucky. Had he been able to land the first time then none of this would be happening to him (probably somebody else)

Now the "cowboy" I used to fly with was a wee bit luckier in Dash X a few years back (5 I think). Went out over the ocean delivering a plane (trying to beat a storm...) and from what I heard turned around to land with fumes in the tanks. course that was hearing it from the AME who watched the repeaters all move to zero quantity....... Just lucky I guess..

Good luck Mark make peace with yourself and the family of the man and move on


http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2fb0f ... shortfilms


Enjoy some Van Halen....

[2R]

Does appealing the conviction open him up to jail time as requested by the Crown

[Ogee]

It does if the Crown files a cross-appeal against sentence. He'd be crazy to appeal his own sentence.

[iflyforpie]

I'm with Doc on this one. He made a conscious decision to break a law. He did not forget or fumble with numbers. He was given the correct fuel burn for the aircraft (verified by log entries and fuel uploads during the investigation). With thousands of hours of flight experience, he knew what was required for fuel. If your fuel load minus fuel required comes out to a negative number, you don't go flying until that number is equal or positive.

I rebuilt an aircraft where the previous owner made a series of conscious decisions that were wrong. He flew without a functioning fuel gauge and he did not verify the fuel quantity visually. When the fuel ran out just off shore of Long Island, rather than landing the amphibious aircraft in the water, he elected to land wheels up on the beach. He came out of the crash a paraplegic and there is no one to blame but himself.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_i ... 6065&key=1

Now in this case there wasn't an employer putting pressure on him. So is Keystone innocent? No. Especially if rumors are true that they are still 'encouraging' pilots to fly without sufficient fuel and hiding under a bogus SMS.

Maybe I have been blessed to work for good people. The thing that scares me the most is running out of fuel and if anybody told me to take less than required I would tell them to go to hell.

[Cat Driver]

Especially if rumors are true that they are still 'encouraging' pilots to fly without sufficient fuel and hiding under a bogus SMS.

What is a " bogus " SMS?

Is the TC approval process difficult enough that you would be better to get a consultant to write it and submit it for you?

[Widow]

Someone said to me recently, that SMS at Keystone was a P.R. stunt to save the business.

I'd call that a "bogus SMS".

Wasn't Keystone the first 703 op to implement SMS?