FL
Yes, we do know each other. Although I agree to a great extent rule 5 may be a “red herring” but lets just suppose that night the crew told the owner that they cannot meet the “land without danger to property requirement in event of engine failure” and the flight was delayed until the morning. That would be relevant wouldn’t it? We would not be having this discussion.
Now I am not now saying this is the case, but it could be, or alternatively the crew may have given other justification why they could not depart that night. That is also relevant? So far in this thread we do not seem to have a conclusion whether this flight was legal or sensible considering the conditions.
So it may be worth considering if there are legal reasons why the flight could not depart, because if so, the crew could have used these reason for justifying why they could not depart.
Not only that, this could be useful for other crews placed in the same situation on another occasion that will no doubt occur sooner or later.
Unfortunately all private sites need to be assessed for many factors including, Is this a congested area? Can I land without danger to persons and property on the ground in the event of a power failure? etc, etc. This is always relevant to me in case I am brought in front of a Judge.
When you tell an owner you cannot depart it always helps if you can back up your decision making. If you give an owner a good reason that they understand, you tend to get a better reaction than if you just say I don’t feel comfortable or you just cannot.
For example, one dark and foggy night a pilot who worked for one of my previous owners said he did not want to depart because he did not feel happy. This owner persuaded him to depart by taking the piss out of him in front of the other pax by saying ‘are you scared of the dark, what’s the matter with you, do you want to borrow my torch, etc, etc. The pilot was reminded of the story for months afterwards by the owner who took great delight in recounting the story again and again. Then on another occasion the pilot departed when he should not have, under pressure again because he could not clearly justify his reasons and they all had a near death experience!
My experience with the owner was entirely different. When I explained why we could not depart giving a good reason, the discussion was over and the decision was accepted.
So for example one could say "our departure this evening requires a TDP of 200ft due to the trees and obstacles and if we have an engine failure just prior to TDP, we would not be able to see sufficiently to avoid damage to property on the ground and we could end up damaging the aircraft or even you. This does not comply with rules of the air and so we need to delay until xxxx”
Now that may or may not apply to this site, but it is certainly a factor to consider in the decision making process regarding whether to depart or not, and may possibly have been a reason to give to the owner this night. I don’t know, but I would not rule it out entirely as a red herring. What TDP should have been used? Could one reject just prior to TDP with danger to property on surface? These issues have not been discussed and may well be relevant., but also there may be other justifications for not departing. Alternatively, perhaps it was perfectly ok to depart?
I noticed in the PB AAIB special accident report there was mention of the low flying rules, so if there are breaches of any regulations, it is likely they will appear in the final report for G-LBAL.
However FL, in my last post I did say "But in any case, my point is not intended to be a discussion about rules of the air, but rather the experience level of the crew."
I wanted to focus on experience levels as this is quite a long thread and the issue of experience seems relevant and has not been discussed.
The Captains total hours seem a little on the low side for the type of operation, so the relevance of those hours is important.
Many Operators consider the previous experience of a pilot for determining the suitability and minimum experience level for command. I would be interested to know the previous experience of the Captain to see if this meets normal industry criteria.
Experience does affect the handling ability and perhaps more importantly the decision making process and is a factor to consider in my view. For example a 20,000 hour North Sea Commander may not make the best AS350 charter pilot and vice-versa. If the Operator designated the Capt as P1 with insufficient experience then the Operator may well be negligent.
Unfortunately I know several Owners/ private Operators with Superman complexes, who think they are invincible. Many are used to taking risks in their business world and so become accustomed to risk and accept risk in their aviation departments. I have known several Owners who intentionally and wilfully break all manners of aviation law and common sense and guess what - they all get away with it most of the time.
If there is negligence on the part of the Operator, and for avoidance of doubt, I have no reason to say there is in this case, but if there is, then awarding of damages may well be a deterrent to prevent future negligence.
Rotorspeed
Yes the risk is negligible, and I agree with you - but 5(3)(a) does require you account for engine failure.
Last edited by G550 driver; 7th Apr 2014 at 07:00.