Cardiff City Footballer Feared Missing after aircraft disappeared near Channel Island
de minimus non curat lex
Alfaman sums up the situation in a clear & concise manner.
It is very unfortunate that CO poisoning occurred. The maintenance quality of the ac is clearly called into question.
The deadly Swiss Cheese model rears its ugly head…usually there are something like 10 events in the ‘chain’ leading to an accident. Break the chain at any point and the accident would not have occurred.
We await sentencing on 12 November, & the Inquest February 2022.
It is very unfortunate that CO poisoning occurred. The maintenance quality of the ac is clearly called into question.
The deadly Swiss Cheese model rears its ugly head…usually there are something like 10 events in the ‘chain’ leading to an accident. Break the chain at any point and the accident would not have occurred.
We await sentencing on 12 November, & the Inquest February 2022.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, OK now I think I'm with you: in that instance, I agree, it probably isn't dangerous for those two flights in isolation. But perhaps if we remove the IR element, both might be considered foolhardy?
But that said: see also the JFK junior accident:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jersey
JFK junior wasn’t being paid, but died (and killed his passengers) in an accident not completely dissimilar to this one (no CO poisoning but VFR Pilot, and SEP over water)
Last edited by Jonzarno; 3rd Nov 2021 at 21:51.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sala was NOT a friend of any of the people involved. He was a trusting innocent, betrayed by the system he trusted
That is a strong argument for intensifying enforcement against grey charters.
Alfaman sums up the situation in a clear & concise manner.
It is very unfortunate that CO poisoning occurred. The maintenance quality of the ac is clearly called into question.
The deadly Swiss Cheese model rears its ugly head…usually there are something like 10 events in the ‘chain’ leading to an accident. Break the chain at any point and the accident would not have occurred.
We await sentencing on 12 November, & the Inquest February 2022.
It is very unfortunate that CO poisoning occurred. The maintenance quality of the ac is clearly called into question.
The deadly Swiss Cheese model rears its ugly head…usually there are something like 10 events in the ‘chain’ leading to an accident. Break the chain at any point and the accident would not have occurred.
We await sentencing on 12 November, & the Inquest February 2022.
If you make the comparison specific to this flight, then yes, you are right! Paradoxically, if Mr Ibbotson had been a “plain vanilla” PPL with no instrument training at all, he might (should!) have declined the flight as obviously being beyond him.
But that said: see also the JFK junior accident:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jersey
JFK junior wasn’t being paid, but died in an accident not completely dissimilar to this one (no CO poisoning but VFR Pilot, and SEP over water)
But that said: see also the JFK junior accident:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jersey
JFK junior wasn’t being paid, but died in an accident not completely dissimilar to this one (no CO poisoning but VFR Pilot, and SEP over water)
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
My point is, Ibbotson wasn’t flying to Nantes and back because he simply wanted to do the flight. He only went because he was to be paid.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JFK jnr didn't break the law as such, but the flight was perhaps unwise in those changed circumstances without having previously attained sufficient training & experience to conduct the flight safely. Perhaps it shows that money isn't necessarily the only driver that can compromise sound decision making, rather than that money isn't one, though?
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My point is, Ibbotson wasn’t flying to Nantes and back because he simply wanted to do the flight. He only went because he was to be paid.
That’s quite right, but my earlier posts weren’t about his motivations, but about whether the fact that he was being paid for an illegal flight IN AND OF ITSELF made that flight more dangerous than if he - the same pilot in the same aircraft - was not being paid for that specific flight.
OK: one last try.
A PPL/IR Pilot WITHOUT a commercial licence (CPL) flies a friend from Nantes to Cardiff in a SEP. He is not paid anything. Although the flight carries a level of risk associated with flying in a SEP over water, this flight is perfectly legal.
A few days later, the same pilot, in the same aircraft, flies a different passenger on the same route in identical weather conditions but this time he is operating a grey charter and charges his passenger Ł500 for the flight. This flight is illegal because the pilot is not allowed to charge for it.
Although it is clearly illegal: why is the second flight inherently more dangerous than the first?
A PPL/IR Pilot WITHOUT a commercial licence (CPL) flies a friend from Nantes to Cardiff in a SEP. He is not paid anything. Although the flight carries a level of risk associated with flying in a SEP over water, this flight is perfectly legal.
A few days later, the same pilot, in the same aircraft, flies a different passenger on the same route in identical weather conditions but this time he is operating a grey charter and charges his passenger Ł500 for the flight. This flight is illegal because the pilot is not allowed to charge for it.
Although it is clearly illegal: why is the second flight inherently more dangerous than the first?
Last edited by megan; 4th Nov 2021 at 03:38.
Moderator
^^^ What Megan said.
Remember that the regulator sees its responsibility first to regulate on behalf of the "public". Thereafter, and to a lesser degree, for "private" individuals. So, if a service is "publicly" available (meaning that the prospective passenger has no "private" relationship to the pilot), it'll be more heavily regulated as a "commercial" flight. The regulator can hardly account for every permutation of flights, so they draw a line. A PPL is taught which side of that line to stay on (pilot cannot be paid), CPL's are taught additional requirements associated with commercial operation expectations.
If a person is boarding a flight, does not know the pilot personally, and is paying for the flight, it's a commercial flight. The pilot is required to be at least a CPL. Other OC requirements may apply too - but it is not a "Private" flight.
Remember that the regulator sees its responsibility first to regulate on behalf of the "public". Thereafter, and to a lesser degree, for "private" individuals. So, if a service is "publicly" available (meaning that the prospective passenger has no "private" relationship to the pilot), it'll be more heavily regulated as a "commercial" flight. The regulator can hardly account for every permutation of flights, so they draw a line. A PPL is taught which side of that line to stay on (pilot cannot be paid), CPL's are taught additional requirements associated with commercial operation expectations.
If a person is boarding a flight, does not know the pilot personally, and is paying for the flight, it's a commercial flight. The pilot is required to be at least a CPL. Other OC requirements may apply too - but it is not a "Private" flight.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
Effective enforcement will only be possible if people are prepared to report what they see, hear and otherwise become aware of and then ultimately, be prepared to appear in court and give evidence. Just complaining that “They should do something about it” or “There should be a law against it” or the ultimate excuse for inaction “Is there a petition I can sign” just will not cut it.
YS
"I have said this earlier and make no apology for repeating it but it’s not the CAA’s job to catch these people, the onus is on the industry."
That would be crazy. It isn't the situation in other forms of transport. Roadside checks on commercial vehicles, and port checks on shipping, both for many years now. Perhaps the CAA need Police backup when checking, as with road transport. At least in the UK.
That would be crazy. It isn't the situation in other forms of transport. Roadside checks on commercial vehicles, and port checks on shipping, both for many years now. Perhaps the CAA need Police backup when checking, as with road transport. At least in the UK.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Froikheim
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely...
Hi all
I'm not a commercial pilot (but ex senior airline man with hundreds of hours in single engine aircraft and gliders).
..But surely the point is simply this:
Commercial licences are there for a reason - they indicate to the passenger that a pilot has undergone a higher level of training, so the passenger can choose to make that flight or not.
It's why I – boarding any commercial flight – don't need to ask the pilot if his actual profession is plumbing.
I'm not a commercial pilot (but ex senior airline man with hundreds of hours in single engine aircraft and gliders).
..But surely the point is simply this:
Commercial licences are there for a reason - they indicate to the passenger that a pilot has undergone a higher level of training, so the passenger can choose to make that flight or not.
It's why I – boarding any commercial flight – don't need to ask the pilot if his actual profession is plumbing.
Hi all
I'm not a commercial pilot (but ex senior airline man with hundreds of hours in single engine aircraft and gliders).
..But surely the point is simply this:
Commercial licences are there for a reason - they indicate to the passenger that a pilot has undergone a higher level of training, so the passenger can choose to make that flight or not.
It's why I – boarding any commercial flight – don't need to ask the pilot if his actual profession is plumbing.
I'm not a commercial pilot (but ex senior airline man with hundreds of hours in single engine aircraft and gliders).
..But surely the point is simply this:
Commercial licences are there for a reason - they indicate to the passenger that a pilot has undergone a higher level of training, so the passenger can choose to make that flight or not.
It's why I – boarding any commercial flight – don't need to ask the pilot if his actual profession is plumbing.
Example:
You have a special birthday treat sightseeing flight arranged for you and paid for by a friend, in an ‘executive’ light aircraft. You turn up and the neatly turned out pilot has four stripes on his shoulders, and the aircraft Navajo (for example) is clean and tidy.
How do you know it’s being run with professional, appropriate licensing?
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/w...trial-21887929
Today we find out how seriously the dangers of Grey Charters are taken
Today we find out how seriously the dangers of Grey Charters are taken
YS
