Originally Posted by
rammel
It's been a while since I've read the previous report, but this is the first that I've heard about the pilot not having a valid medical. If that's the case then how much actual oversight did the operator have of it's operations? If the operator had the pilot's medical expiry date in their crewing system, then the pilot should not have been asked to do the flight.
I know it was a multi crew aircraft and that the Captain is ultimately responsible, but I don't think that the first officers roles and actions were covered in enough detail for this accident.
As much as the Captain is responsible, it seems that there may have been many Swiss cheese holes aligning in this operation and this accident is the result.
@rammel, I think you are confusing the Seaview crash and the PelAir ditching. The single pilot of the Turbine Commander involved in the Seaview crash had an expired medical from memory. There was no such issue with the pilot of the PelAir aircraft.
You are quite right about the first officer's role. There was next to nothing about it in the first report and I will be interested to see whether there is any detail in the second report.