Originally Posted by
_pudknocker_
Not sure about EASA regs these days but when I used to fly charter in pistons, it was always in a twin. Any length overwater always with life jackets and raft, immersion suits were always available if requested. Pilots were all current multi engine instrument rated. I doubt your flights were conducted under an AOC. You would not get me sat in the back of a piston single overwater with any pilot. The fact the pilot on flight two deemed it necessary to rush the departure due to incoming fog demonstrates a worrying lack of descion making and airmanship. I pose the question to him, what would you have done in the event of a technical malfunction with your aircraft that required you to land after your departure? With the fog rolling in, my estimate is that the only place to land would be in the drink. Unfortunately there are a lot of pilots out there carrying out these ‘moody’ charters, I would hazard a guess that the the majority seriously overestimate their own abilities. Under pressure they are unlikely to be able to perform, their knowledge base and exposure are likely to be lacking. I would say that you exposed yourself to a high level of risk on both flights just in the fact you travelled in an single engine piston overwater, never mind that the pilots more than likely we’re not overly experienced or competent.
Thanks for your (alarming!) answer.
It's an interesting insight from an SLF point of view that we don't perceive (or think much about) how particular factors change risk levels. I've flown in Trislanders to and from CI many times and from a layman's perspective, while it's clear there are more engines, the overall experience is similar compared to a larger aircraft.
Would any regular CI pilots like to comment on the above analysis?
My perception is that this kind of flying goes on there all the time. A few years ago I was on the same Cherokee with a senior French official (the decision to travel this way being due to industrial action at the nearest port and the imperative for them not remaining stuck outside French territory. He was a heavy guy, too.)
Also, can anybody offer further clarification about the regulatory differences between N- and G- aircraft in this airspace? I may count the engines, but I'd never attached any importance to the tail number when evaluating risk (just happened to have photos)!