|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||
Jury Finds GE Had
Culpability In Crash Of Sikorsky Helicopter That Killed 9 By Mike Mitchell |
||||
March 29, 2012 - A Portland, Oregon jury ruled on lawsuit Tuesday that the Sikorsky S-61N helicopter, N612AZ, that crashed killing the pilot-in-command, the safety crewmember, and seven firefighters during a wildfire in Shasta-Trinity National Forest near Weaverville, California on August 5, 2008, had a design flaw making the equipment unsafe.
The lawsuit, brought by a serving pilot and a widow of
one who had died as a result of the crash, alleged
General Electric knew the engine GE CT58-140 a turbo
shaft engine had a design flaw making the equipment
unsafe. GE countered and stated the aircraft was over
its gross weight. The jury blamed GE (57 percent), the
operator (Carson Helicopters) and the manufacture.
Roark Schwanenberg was pilot-in-command and William
Coultas was co-pilot. Four people survived the crash one
of which was the co-pilot. The jury on Tuesday awarded
$28.4 million to the estate. Coultas was awarded $37
million and his wife $4.3 million by the jury.
On
August 5, 2008, about 7:40 PM a Sikorsky S-61N
helicopter, N612AZ, impacted trees and terrain during
the initial climb after takeoff (about one minute after
takeoff) from Helispot 44 (H-44), located at an
elevation of about 6,000 feet in mountainous terrain
near Weaverville, California.
|
||||
Impact
forces and a postcrash fire destroyed the helicopter, which was
being operated by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) as a public
flight to transport firefighters from H-44 to another helispot.
The USFS had contracted with Carson Helicopters, Inc. (CHI) of
Grants Pass, Oregon, for the services of the helicopter, which
was registered to CHI and leased to Carson Helicopter Services,
Inc. of Grants Pass.
The
National Transportation Safety Board determined the probable
causes of this accident were as follows: The following actions
by Carson Helicopters: 1) the intentional understatement of the
helicopter's empty weight, 2) the alteration of the power
available chart to exaggerate the helicopter's lift capability,
and 3) the practice of using unapproved above-minimum
specification torque in performance calculations that,
collectively, resulted in the pilots relying on performance
calculations that significantly overestimated the helicopter's
load-carrying capacity and did not provide an adequate
performance margin for a successful takeoff; and insufficient
oversight by the U.S. Forest Service and the Federal Aviation
Administration. |