A LITANY of errors ended in tragedy for a passenger in a helicopter that crashed into the sea off Lilli Pilli Beach on the night of April 24, 2011.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Charged with an offence under the Civil Aviation Act 1988, Victor Arthur Hansen was convicted of operating his aircraft recklessly and putting the life of another person in danger by Magistrate Doug Dick at the end of a seven-day hearing in Batemans Bay Local Court on Monday afternoon.
Mr Hansen, then 72, was winched to safety but his 70-year-old wife, the sole passenger, was pronounced dead at the crash site, which was not far from the couple’s Malua Bay home.
In his draft summing up, Mr Dick said the Crown had constructed an image of the flight — “like pieces of a jigsaw it builds a picture”.
“The facts showed that what Mr Hansen did was causally related from start to finish with the demise of his wife,” he said.
“Even though Mr Hansen knew the dangers he consistently stated that he never considered the circumstances had reached an emergency situation. This demonstrates that Mr Hansen was overconfident at a time when he needed to show self-discipline and not create or exacerbate a dangerous situation.”
Mr Dick said he was not satisfied the crash was caused by bad weather.
“I am satisfied that the crash was caused by Mr Hansen’s poor judgment and decision-making which amounted to recklessness,” he said.
Mr Dick said many aspects of Mr Hansen’s flying processes were found wanting.
He found that Mr Hansen made an error when calculating last light (which, on April 24, was officially at 5.50pm), and did not recheck his calculations or allow sufficient time for the flight to arrive 10 minutes before nightfall.
During the hearing, the Crown had alleged that Mr Hansen was not rated for night or instrument flying and that the helicopter was not equipped for night flying.
The court also found that Mr Hansen should not have continued to fly because he was aware of a fault in the primary instruments.
“Mr Hansen should have obtained up-to-date authorised weather forecasts . . . and should not have prolonged the flight by flying towards the storm front for a closer look, which resulted in a loss of visual reference to the ground,” he said.
Mr Hansen was also found to have dismissed possible emergency landing sites and had not radioed for help.
“Mr Hansen had a duty to land,” the magistrate said.
After considering the maximum penalties of jail and fines, Mr Dick placed Mr Hansen on a two-year good behaviour bond with a surety of $5000.