JUNEAU — The commander of Air Station Sitka testified Thursday he was prepared to recommend that allegations against the co-pilot in a fatal helicopter crash be dropped, but those plans were trumped by the new Coast Guard admiral in Alaska.
Cmdr. William Cameron testified Thursday in a hearing to help determine whether Lt. Lance Leone should face a court-martial in the July 2010 crash off the Washington coast, in which three others onboard died.
Cameron said he based his decision after reading the crash investigation report and hearing the best case against Leone from a Coast Guard attorney. Leone had been cleared for flight retraining by an evaluation board, and Cameron supported this move, which included probationary flight periods.
Cameron then said his decision was “somewhat overrun by events.”
In August, Cameron met with the new Coast Guard commander in Alaska, Rear Adm. Thomas Ostebo, at a memorial service for the crash victims.
Cameron said he told Ostebo he intended to take no action.
“He said, ‘Perhaps I had gotten too close emotionally to Lt. Leone or something like that,’” and lost objectivity, Cameron testified. He then wrote a detailed memo, spelling out the reasons for his conclusions.
Lt. Cmdr. Anita Scott, a defense attorney, asked if the conversation was confrontational. Cameron replied it was a “classic conversation” with Ostebo, whom he said can be aggressive and take charge of conversations.
Ostebo will ultimately decide what happens with the case.
Leone is the sole survivor of the crash. He is charged with negligent homicide and other violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
In testimony earlier Thursday, the accident’s lead investigator testified a 1,900-foot span of unmarked wires contributed to the crash, but there was no reason for the aircraft to be flying low enough to hit the wires.
Capt. Timothy Heitsch, under cross-examination, said that as an aviator, he did not believe the lines were marked in a way they could have been seen. The government stipulated that the lines, which spanned from LaPush, Wash., to James Island, descend from 190 feet to 36 feet and had red marker balls 20 inches in diameter. Heitsch testified the balls were pooled near the pole, above land, and not across the water.
The helicopter hit the wires, according to the record and testimony, at about 114 feet.
A Coast Guard prosecutor, Cmdr. Matthew Fay, maintained there is no requirement to mark the wires at that height. The wires were the responsibility of the Coast Guard.
Heitsch repeated his contention that the helicopter was flying too low, saying it should have been no lower than 2,000 feet when it flew over a wildlife refuge, and that Leone was “not actively navigating.”
Leone’s attorney, John Smith, said the pilot, Lt. Sean Krueger, shut off the autopilot, which was on for a portion of the flight, shortly before the crash. He said it was around 240 feet on autopilot. According to testimony, the helicopter banked and dropped in altitude after the function was shut off, about 40 seconds before the wire strike. Heitsch said he believed the autopilot was on for training purposes.
The investigating officer, Capt. Andrew Norris, asked Heitsch whether Leone should have been expected to spot the lines within 40 seconds. Heitsch said he would have expected “active navigating” along the way. When asked what Leone did wrong in the final 40 seconds, Heitsch said he didn’t question the pilot’s intentions or ask what he was doing. “Nothing was verbalized,” Heitsch said.
He said he stands by his report and still believes charges are warranted.
Leone faces charges of negligent homicide, dereliction of duty and destruction of government property. The charge sheet states that Leone failed to properly navigate the helicopter to avoid charted hazards and that he negligently failed to ensure it was flying at a higher altitude.
It also alleges that he did “without proper authority, through neglect, destroy by causing the crash of CG-6017,” an aircraft valued at $18.3 million.
The negligent homicide charges are related to the deaths of Brett Banks, 33, of Rock Springs, Wyo., and Adam C. Hoke, 40, of Great Falls, Mont. There is no charge related to the death of Krueger, 33, of Seymour, Conn.
Krueger’s widow, Kyla, attended the hearing Thursday.
She wasn’t surprised some type of charges were brought but was surprised the Coast Guard has gone to the measures it has to bring these charges against Leone.
“Our families have gone through enough,” she told The Associated Press. “It was a tragedy. I don’t feel as though the Coast Guard needs to push to make this more of a travesty than a tragedy.”
Cameron said he didn’t consider this a careless flight crew. In Alaska, it’s not uncommon to fly low along the coast, Cameron said, adding that he didn’t think it would have made a difference if Leone had questioned the drop in altitude. Krueger, who was also had extensive Coast Guard awards and accolades, was comfortable at lower altitudes, and Leone was the new guy, recently assigned to Sitka, Cameron said. Had Leone been at his prior station, he probably would have asked questions, he said.
He concluded Leone’s actions were consistent with what pilots of comparable experience or standing would have done, failed to do or understood.
Norris, a Coast Guard judge advocate stationed in Rhode Island, is the investigating officer during the Article 32 hearing. He will make eventual recommendations to Ostebo for the next course of action. Norris said Ostebo is not bound by any recommendations he makes.
Possibilities include dismissal of the charges, administrative action or court-martial. Leone faces a possible maximum penalty that includes 7 1/2 years in prison if convicted on all counts at a court-martial.
Comments (22)
Add commentMirror, mirror on the wall!
Maybe this admiral should replace the commander of Air Station Sitka. Perhaps his District Legal officer knows how to run an air station?
seems to me that the admiral
seems to me that the admiral has his own agenda here....
Coasties
I have nothing but respect for our coasties. I am glad they are here. They do an awesome job.
But I watched a show on the Discovery Channel the other day about how Alaska coasties are trained by their superiors, and it really turned me off.
It was the typical uber-macho, degrading, condescending, hazing, overly testosterone bullying approach which I really, really feel is outdated and unnecessary.
One recruit was in a pool, training at the hands of an ubermacho trainer. The recruit injured his shoulder badly and was in excruciating pain. The sergeant chose to humiliate this kid and make him appear weak because he had an injury.
And I lost a lot of respect for the coasties' authority as a result. This sergeant really seemed to enjoy himself. It made me wonder how many good coasties are lost due to this really outdated military concept of how people should be trained.
@johnnyb
His agenda is likely to make someone pay for losing an $18 million aircraft to appease the Pentagon.
This lieutenant has to live with the pain of that crash and losing his crewmates. Any punishment his Admiral imposes on him will pale in comparison.
The charges should be dropped. He should be reprimanded. Nothing more. Too many variables. No one is perfect.
The Coast Guard should heed the words of one of the widows who said above that this doesn't need to be pushed. She is kind.
Confrontational?
Jo--You think there's a bullying approach in the CG? It seems that the boss "can be aggressive and take charge of a conversation". This whole matter should be moved up and out of Alaska where an obvious bias taints the proceedings.
This whole thing reaks.
This whole thing reaks. It states he "failed to properly navigate the helicopter to avoid charted hazards". Yesterday, the article said that the charts had the wires in the wrong place, and today we read that "Heitsch testified the balls were pooled near the pole, above land, and not across the water." We also read yesterday that the government has been sued about this batch of wires before as two aircraft have hit them in the past and it hasnt been fixed. Also odd, is the fact that he is being charged with negligent homicide for all the crewmembers except Krueger. Did his negligence not cause his death? Maybe he had a heart attack prior to the crash and therefore wasnt killed by the crash? Too many weird things for it to be a solid case. It looks like the Admiral is out to crucify someone. It also looks like the commander of the airstation knows more about leadership than an admiral. Moral of the story, if a Coastie is going down in a copter, better hope you dont survive, because the Guard will make your life hell!
It seems clear,
That the coast guard (Who Owns the wires) is attempting to affix blame on someone so that they can mitigate any liability issues they could otherwise expect as a result of having those wires improperly marked.
Jo...
Coming from a vet, yes, it is hazing. But guess what, that yelling, repeating actions over and over, more hazing, bullying, etc, has been proven for THOUSANDS of years to prepare men for combat as well as any other stressful environment successfully. Repeated action, just like in martial arts, makes responses automatic. The yelling and hazing, believe it or not, is a confidence booster. When you think you're done and some DS gets in your face, screams at you, tears you down, and you muster the strength to go on, you know in your heart what you are truly capable of if you just stop whining.
You can knock military training all you want, but guess what, when S hits the fan and people are shooting at you, I'll take one of those "hazed" military personnel over the average Jo to share a fox hole with any day of the week!
Please Jo, when people are shooting at you, make sure you have a print out of the post you just put up so these "crazy" Spartans know how you really feel about the military. "Great group of guys but they're all kinda crazy..."
Boils down to...
Why were they flying so low?
They said a lot of the point
They said a lot of the point of pairing this guy with Krueger was that he needed experience flying in AK conditions. They routinely fly at low levels near the coast up here. Plus I am sure there was some sight seeing going on, but so what? If they are supposed to ferry the bird up the coast and practice flying at low levels, so what if they check out the sights on the way. I am more concerned about an Admiral who is willing to crucify a Coastie for hitting improperly charted, improperly marked wires that were identified as such decades ago and never fixed.
Helo crash
Doesn't really matter to much what the out come of the article 32 hearing is, this guys career is over. He will never fly another military aircraft and most likely will never see the next higher pay grade.
I do not personally know Admiral Ostebo, but I kind of remember, he was stationed at Sitka's CG Airstation at one time.
It was always interesting to me why most flag officers, 07 and above in the CG were usually aviators. Never made sense to me to put pilots in charge of sailors.
Jo Mac, I saw that show as
Jo Mac, I saw that show as well, but we both obviously took away a different opinion of the program. In my opinion, the reason for the ASM Chief (CG doesn't have Sargents) was because this kid went into the program with a preexisting injury without notifying the command of the problem. It's fortunate that he reinjured the shoulder in training and not in an actual rescue situation where lives were at stake.
This is where I have to laugh at a lot of people who just don't understand the military. Even the CG, which only recently became truly "military". This isn't some desk job situation where you can afford to let a person fail over and over again, hoping one day they'll just "get it".
Bigdan, i suppose it all
Bigdan, i suppose it all depends on where you're stationed. My first CG unit was on a patrol boat on the west coast. With the exception of the few Lt pilots I met at the nearby air station, I never met an aviation based officer until I was at the district commcen here in Juneau. A lot of the O's there were aviators, which kind of makes sense seeing as how the first response in most cases here in Alaska seemed to be to get an aircraft on scene. The aviators seemed to get the chicks, but the best stories always came from the guys with the cutterman's pin.
blah blah blah
@wren: I've heard it all before. It's less about training and more about the testosterone. Hazing is never appropriate. It appears to be more of a bully mentality, "I was hazed and yelled at as a recruit, and by god, you will be too!"
The fact that our military supports torture and was less-than-receptive about the DADT repeal speaks volumes at just how outdated a lot of their thinking is.
@guru: if you noticed, the kid with the shoulder injury said something to the effect that he thought his injury was healed. Therefore it's not an injury, it's a former injury. My point wasn't that he failed to report it, my point was, the dude training him humiliated him for having an injury (for whatever reason) and that was wrong. I also tend to believe that these ubermachos were 'turning it up a notch' for the cameras that were on them.
@bigdan57 Your memory is
@bigdan57
Your memory is correct, Admiral Ostebo used to be at Sitka Air Station... As a former aircrew I am puzzled about the charges. Low flying was the norm in my day as well.
@Jo Mac
You'll understand if you're ever in need of a water rescue...
@Jo...humiliated him? man,
@Jo...humiliated him? man, you've got to be on sensitive dude. the kid was taken to task for not being honest about his physical condition. that rescue swimmer program is a seriously intensive training program when it comes to physical and mental demands. they try to weed out as many people who are likely to fail before they even get into the program. perhaps it would have been better for him to give the young man a hug and a cookie, and thank him for wasting his time.
Jo...
And real men will always be out there getting shot at defending your right to sit at home and smoke your reefer...
@wren: no one has gotten shot
@wren: no one has gotten shot at for that particular "right" ever. And no one has gotten shot at defending rights in America since the Civil War (although I'd accept WW2 as an answer, even though it's not entirely correct).
Good god. I wonder how you can believe the government is this big entity out to get us all but then expect everyone to blindly accept whatever the military does.
Jo
It seems clear that you are opining about something that you are never going to understand. Military operations are generally done in a very harsh and unforgiving environment where your first failure can get you killed or even worse your first failure can get someone else killed. Part of the training process is to accomplish two things, first prepare the trainee to survive and perform in such an environment and second teach the trainee through first hand experience that he or she can in fact survive and perform the mission in such an environment.
Can you imagine how humiliating it is to have someone die because you were not able to complete a task when others did complete such tasks?
(yawn)
@AH HA: So, by your 'logic' above, someone in the Taliban will haze a soldier, humiliate him, make him do push ups and repeatedly call him a POS before he shoots at him?
That's a bit of a stretch.
To summarize what I've been saying:
1. I have immense respect for our coasties, including this one under current scrutiny.
2. I don't believe this man is guilty of the things he is accused of; I believe it is a witch hunt. Too many variables.
3. Although I respect our coasties, I lost a lot of respect for their leadership when I saw that TV show and saw the bullying, hazing tactics they use which I view as outdated. Positive reinforcement gets better results than negative reinforcement and there is always more than one method of doing anything.
4. The fact that one commanding officer wants to drop charges where another CO wants to nail him to the wall shows decidedly differing and contrasting command styles. This implies personalities or ego might be involved and this is an injustice.
5. And because of #1-4, I have lost some respect for the CG leadership, but not the Coast Guard itself, just their leadership.
The facts support USCG actions
The aircraft was flying 1,885 below the minimum altitude required by FAA flight regulations. The aircraft was way off course. The intended trackline would have taken the aircraft about a quarter mile off the other side of the island where there was nothing but open ocean. It was the hot-dogging and frolic of buzzing the USCG boat that got them in trouble. Buzzing boats is not part of the mission. If the pilot was still alive, he'd be sitting next to the co-pilot in the courtroom, facing the same charges. A co-pilot is not a "potted plant." His duties include navigation (i.e., keeping the pilot on course and clear of charted hazards) and safety (i.e., telling the pilot he was violating regulations). The two gentlemen in the back of the aircraft were counting on the pilot and co-pilot to do their duty, which they failed to do. Their unnecessary deaths--the result of negligence and Tom-foolery--demand justice.
Sorrowful
My heart goes out to the families and friends of the crew members that died and to Leone's family.
I think the lesson has been learned, if that was the point here. Stop this public flogging of this brave young man.