$50 Million Suit Alleges Early IFR Training 'Reckless And Irresponsible' | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-04.22.24

Airborne-Unlimited-04.16.24

Airborne-FlightTraining-04.17.24 Airborne-AffordableFlyers-04.18.24

Airborne-Unlimited-04.19.24

Join Us At 0900ET, Friday, 4/10, for the LIVE Morning Brief.
Watch It LIVE at
www.airborne-live.net

Fri, May 27, 2005

$50 Million Suit Alleges Early IFR Training 'Reckless And Irresponsible'

Pre-Solo Student Loses Life On 'Curious' IFR Flight

A recent law suit suggests that a fatal accident during an IFR flight training flight for a pre-solo private pilot candidate (who was undertaking a career pilot training program) may be the result of 'recklessness.' It may also cost a well-known flight training operation $50 million. The massive suit, just filed in NY State Supreme Court, asserts that a fatal crash in NY occurred because the instructor and student were 'negligently' flying in IFR conditions.

The suit was filed against American Flyers, Aviation Training Enterprises (AF's parent company and the aircraft's owner), and CFI Isaac Negron; by Paul Marx of the firm DelBello, Donnellan, Weingarten, Tartaglia, Wise and Wiederkehr.

The background of this tragedy is intriguing, if worrisome. According to NTSB reports, on April 23, 2005, about 1517 eastern daylight time, a Cessna 172R, N61AF, was destroyed when it impacted terrain in Armonk, New York; while on approach to the Westchester County Airport (HPN), White Plains, New York. The certificated flight instructor (CFI) and student pilot were fatally injured. Instrument meteorological conditions prevailed and an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan was filed for the flight that departed Albany International Airport (ALB), Albany, New York.

The April crash took the lives of student pilot Lev Naumov (23), and CFI Isaac Negron (45) on April 23rd, when the C172 "impacted trees and came to rest in a wooded area, about 1 mile from the approach end of runway 16."

The NTSB reports that, 'the pilot and student pilot departed HPN, at 1209, under an IFR flight plan, and flew to ALB. They then departed ALB at 1348, to return to HPN. According to the respective flight plans, the flights were for the purpose of "IFR training." At 1513:45, the airplane was on the ILS Runway 16 approach, when the pilot contacted the HPN air traffic control tower. The airplane was cleared to land at 1514:15. The controller also informed the accident pilot that the pilot of a landing Cessna Citation reported that he "broke out" at 200 feet. At 1517:25, the controller observed the airplane's radar target at 900 feet. He then issued the pilot a low altitude alert and provided the current altimeter setting. The pilot acknowledged the transmission, read back the altimeter setting, and reported that he was at an altitude of 800 feet. There were no further communications from the pilot, and the airplane's last radar target was observed at 1517:39, at an altitude of 600 feet.'

The airplane impacted trees and came to rest in a wooded area, about 1 mile from the approach end of runway 16. The terrain around the accident site sloped upward from the Kensico Reservoir, and contained trees that were about 75 feet tall. A debris path, which measured about 150 feet long, and was oriented on a magnetic course of about 145 degrees extended from a freshly broken tree. All major portions of the airplane were located at the accident site. The Westchester County Airport was located at a field elevation of 439 feet. A weather observation taken at the airport, at 1456, reported: wind from 190 degrees at 12 knots, gusting to 16 knots; visibility 1/2 statue mile in fog; ceiling 200 feet overcast; temperature and dew point both 12 degrees C; altimeter 29.51 in/hg.

Attorney Marx (an instrument rated pilot) is alleging that American Flyers 'required instructors to fly in conditions that were unsuitable for training,' and also contends that 'Negron failed to properly react to warnings from the control tower that he was flying too low.'

Marx does not appear to be the stereotypical GA-bashing lawyer, and we must note that he IS an 800 hour pilot. He went out of his way to qualify his suit's parameters by noting that, "We do not contend that flying in small planes is dangerous, rather that American Flyers failed to properly manage the risks in flying and in so doing cut short this young man's life... There is no defensible or logical reason for a primary flight student who was still learning how to fly in visual conditions to be receiving training in weather conditions that were at or below those minimally required for instrument flying. Doing so is simply reckless and irresponsible."

Negron had reportedly logged some 900 hours, total time, while Naumov had logged nearly 32 hours... a point in the curriculum in which "hood work" or IFR would not normally seem to be beyond proper conduct, but an exclusive interview with Marx paints a curious picture about Naumov's training.

Naumov had reportedly paid some $26K into an aggressive flight training program designed to qualify him, eventually, for a career as a commercial pilot.

According to records cited by Marx, Naumov had logged nearly all of his 32 hours over the course of some eight separate days of flight training and over a span of only 2 and a half weeks. The flight training regime was aggressive and (probably) tiring... and somewhat confusing. Several days featured as much as 4 or 5 hours of flying, on flights as long as 3.5 hours (and possibly longer). Naumov was run through the usual basic flight training chores... as well as several cross-countries, some Class B and uncontrolled field work, and limited navigation training -- but in all that time, Naumov had yet to solo, and the rationale for the fatal IFR training flight seems questionable.

Marx suggests that the flight that killed Naumov had no significant value, at that point in his training, and was conducted solely to keep him in the air and "on the meter." Marx opines that a flight with 200 feet and a half mile visibility probably did not allow for Naumov to do much, if any real flying... and couldn't be justified at that point in his training program.

Several calls to American Flyers have been placed, for comment and response, but are as yet unreturned. We'll keep you up to date. 

FMI: www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20050428X00521&key=1, www.ddwt.com. www.americanflyers.net

Advertisement

More News

Airbus Racer Helicopter Demonstrator First Flight Part of Clean Sky 2 Initiative

Airbus Racer Demonstrator Makes Inaugural Flight Airbus Helicopters' ambitious Racer demonstrator has achieved its inaugural flight as part of the Clean Sky 2 initiative, a corners>[...]

Diamond's Electric DA40 Finds Fans at Dübendorf

A little Bit Quieter, Said Testers, But in the End it's Still a DA40 Diamond Aircraft recently completed a little pilot project with Lufthansa Aviation Training, putting a pair of >[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (04.23.24): Line Up And Wait (LUAW)

Line Up And Wait (LUAW) Used by ATC to inform a pilot to taxi onto the departure runway to line up and wait. It is not authorization for takeoff. It is used when takeoff clearance >[...]

NTSB Final Report: Extra Flugzeugbau GMBH EA300/L

Contributing To The Accident Was The Pilot’s Use Of Methamphetamine... Analysis: The pilot departed on a local flight to perform low-altitude maneuvers in a nearby desert val>[...]

Classic Aero-TV: 'Never Give Up' - Advice From Two of FedEx's Female Captains

From 2015 (YouTube Version): Overcoming Obstacles To Achieve Their Dreams… At EAA AirVenture 2015, FedEx arrived with one of their Airbus freight-hauling aircraft and placed>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2024 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC