Coast Guard pilot involved in crash to be charged with homicide

[sardaddy]

I disagree. Mainly because I'm a rotorhead, not a tacair guy. Those altitudes are not unusual for RW, and the 3710.7U says "shall" fly at 3000 ft, conditions permitting. But it also says "wildfowl". I may be sea lawyering here, but try flying on the east coast and avoid the Wildlife Refuges (or fly at 3000 ft)... It can be hard, especially considering some of our ranges are knee-deep in a wildlife refuge. There are no "Wildfowl" refuges on the chart.

What if they were doing a rescue? Are we to believe that they need to maintain a 3000 ft hover? Shit, the instruction doesn't say crap about that.

I really think this is a dick measuring contest more than anything else.

The CG 3710 specifically addresses what you are talking about and says the following:

Environmentally sensitive areas will be properly annotated on pilot’s charts as required.When it is necessary to fly over such areas, an altitude of 2000 feet AGL shall be maintained except during emergency operations (e.g., emergency SAR, law enforcement, spill response, or during those portions of non-emergency missions requiring surveillance and identification (reconnaissance) of vessels). The amount of time spent at low altitudes should be limited to what is necessary to accomplish the particular emergency or reconnaissance operation. Routine training in and transits through critical habitat and high use areas shall not be conducted below an altitude of 2000 feet.
Oh, and we can't hunt from the aircraft either.

 

[ChunksJR]

Fly The Ball All The Way To Touchdown

Good thing you used the acronym in the first place.

 

[MasterBates]

Nah. I used the ball, ball, ball, ramp, see the one, cut power method.

 

[BACONATOR]

Wouldn't the HACs signature on the A-sheet imply taking responsibility for everything that happened on that aircraft?

To echo what others have said: not necessarily. Aircraft Commander is a leadership role, and that often time includes a lot of delegation. So (devil's advocate alone: NO implications about this case), if you delegate navigation/chart prep to your copilot, and his job is less than par... you are responsible for the whole flight, but if you miss a mistake like that (and... you end up dead) and your at-fault crewmember is still living... I'm sure heads will roll.

Hopefully they find out the facts and vindicate/punish as appropriate.

 

[helolumpy]

To echo what others have said: not necessarily. Aircraft Commander is a leadership role, and that often time includes a lot of delegation.

3710 used to state that the duties of the HAC are:
1. Completion of the mission
2. Safety of the aircraft & crew
3. Train the crew.

If you sign for the aircraft, then your responsible for the conduct of the flight, to include the actions of the crew. If you delegate and they fu(k it away, you're still held accountable. Others may standing next to you while you do the carpet shuffle in front of the old man, but if you sign for the bird the you are ultimately responsible for what happens during the flight.

 

[C420sailor]

Nah. I used the ball, ball, ball, ramp, see the one, cut power method.

Is that the secret to your 100% boarding rate?

 

[MasterBates]

Yes

Sent from my PH44100 using Tapatalk

 

[Recovering LSO]

So if you delegate navigation/chart prep to your copilot, and his job is less than par... you are responsible for the whole flight, but if you miss a mistake like that (and... you end up dead) and your at-fault crewmember is still living... I'm sure heads will roll.

and what if you don't die - what if you (the hac) survive? the aircraft commander is accountable. i reject the idea that there is transference of accountability based on survivorship. the aircraft commander is accountable.

 

[phrogpilot73]

and what if you don't die - what if you (the hac) survive? the aircraft commander is accountable. i reject the idea that there is transference of accountability based on survivorship. the aircraft commander is accountable.

Welcome to the new generation of the Navy.

"Yeah, I signed for the plane but it's not my fault, I told him to nav!"

 

[squorch2]

Bullshit - I cannot think of a single other pilot I know that thinks this way.

 

[BACONATOR]

3710 used to state that the duties of the HAC are:
1. Completion of the mission
2. Safety of the aircraft & crew
3. Train the crew.

If you sign for the aircraft, then your responsible for the conduct of the flight, to include the actions of the crew. If you delegate and they fu(k it away, you're still held accountable. Others may standing next to you while you do the carpet shuffle in front of the old man, but if you sign for the bird the you are ultimately responsible for what happens during the flight.

So... everything is your fault up to and including dereliction of duty of a crewmember for legitimately NOT doing their job, at the risk of being called malicious?

 

[phrogpilot73]

So... everything is your fault up to and including dereliction of duty of a crewmember for legitimately NOT doing their job, at the risk of being called malicious?

You were the one that said it was merely a leadership position... That's the burden of command...

Dereliction of duty of the OOD who runs a ship aground? Ship's CO is relieved.

 

[scoolbubba]

3710 used to state that the duties of the HAC are:
1. Completion of the mission
2. Safety of the aircraft & crew
3. Train the crew.

If you sign for the aircraft, then your responsible for the conduct of the flight, to include the actions of the crew. If you delegate and they fu(k it away, you're still held accountable. Others may standing next to you while you do the carpet shuffle in front of the old man, but if you sign for the bird the you are ultimately responsible for what happens during the flight.

This is what I was getting at.

 

[Brunes]

You were the one that said it was merely a leadership position... That's the burden of command...

Dereliction of duty of the OOD who runs a ship aground? Ship's CO is relieved.

And if it's a malicious/gross negligence situation- The OOD is punished too. Maybe not as severely-but that depends on how they got into the situation.

Is that was happened here-No idea. But at some point there is a personal responsibility as well as the "I signed the line" responsibility.

You can't tell me you believe the President is responsible for this as CinC....but he is "ultimately" responsible for all armed forces actions.

 

[BACONATOR]

You were the one that said it was merely a leadership position... That's the burden of command...

Dereliction of duty of the OOD who runs a ship aground? Ship's CO is relieved.

So why is the HAC at fault? Just relieve the squadron CO...