Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Non-Airline Forums > Accidents and Close Calls
Reload this Page >

Cardiff City Footballer Feared Missing after aircraft disappeared near Channel Island

Accidents and Close Calls Discussion on accidents, close calls, and other unplanned aviation events, so we can learn from them, and be better pilots ourselves.

Cardiff City Footballer Feared Missing after aircraft disappeared near Channel Island

Old 5th Feb 2019, 07:12
  #1081 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,580
Originally Posted by ChickenHouse View Post
On the contrast, by international regulations of the sea the scene of an accident on the oceans is a grave. If you want to recover the bodies, it is an exhumation. Somebody authorized has to demand for it, this why the question to the relatives, and in this case has to be authorized by the country on which territory the accident scene is. There are quite some countries where this is impossible and an offense against the deceased by national laws. Anybody here firm in French funeral law?
Thanks for the background. I wonder if that would then preclude raising of the wreck by the AAIB as part of the investigation, since at least one of the bodies appears to be still inside ?

That said, I would imagine that the family of Sala, and quite possibly also Ibbotson's, would wish to recover the remains of their loved ones. Very sad.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 07:26
  #1082 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,219
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
Thanks for the background. I wonder if that would then preclude raising of the wreck by the AAIB as part of the investigation, since at least one of the bodies appears to be still inside ?

That said, I would imagine that the family of Sala, and quite possibly also Ibbotson's, would wish to recover the remains of their loved ones. Very sad.
I guess it only means it will need the approval of a judge. Given the 'media high profile' attention (= media making money on it), adequacy will not serve as a reference.
ChickenHouse is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 07:28
  #1083 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: DORSET
Age: 62
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
Thanks for the background. I wonder if that would then preclude raising of the wreck by the AAIB as part of the investigation, since at least one of the bodies appears to be still inside ?

That said, I would imagine that the family of Sala, and quite possibly also Ibbotson's, would wish to recover the remains of their loved ones. Very sad.
Its all being decided now as reported from GCI in past 12 hours - Sala's family are demanding the wreck to be raised plus having discussions with the Pilots family,
I read earlier here the wreck site is just in UK waters (well on the border thereof)

AFAIK are the French very involved in recovery and investigation compared to the AAIB ? but please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks
rog747 is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 07:39
  #1084 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,493
Originally Posted by rog747 View Post
Its all being decided now as reported from GCI in past 12 hours - Sala's family are demanding the wreck to be raised plus having discussions with the Pilots family,
I read earlier here the wreck site is just in UK waters (well on the border thereof)

AFAIK are the French very involved in recovery and investigation compared to the AAIB ? but please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks
The position being given on AIS for GeoOcean over the last couple of days appears to be outside UK and CI territory. It looks also to be outside French territorial waters. I.e. it is outside 12 nm from both, indeed more than 24 nm from the French coast.

What this means Iím not sure but as it is a US registered aircraft does it default to US law or does it become something else?

Regarding a coroner, it depends on what, if any, remains are recovered. I doubt a British coroner has any jurisdiction for an Argentine citizen, in a US aircraft, in international waters.

Of course where the ship is and where the wreck is may be different... but not by miles in that depth of water.

Daysleeper is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 08:24
  #1085 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 364
Except for launch and recovery of the ROV the ship will be to all intents and purposes directly over the wreck. If they are looking for odd pieces of wreckage they will perform a grid survey and in that situation they will wander away from the main wreckage.
Oldpilot55 is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 08:50
  #1086 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 69
Posts: 2,601
on French radio this morning the former head of the BEA confirmed that for investigation purposes they would not need to be retrieving the aircraft. Inspecting visually the cockpit (e.g. if anti- icing was on a, which air source was selected, state of the propeller, etc.). , using an ROV would be enough.
He also said that normally a GA SEP on a VFR flight plan lost at sea would not cause a major investigation and definitively not retrieving the aircraft from the sea bed.
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 09:08
  #1087 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Craven Arms
Posts: 24
I would have thought a recovery would be necessary to assess the state of the engine at the time of the ditching. Irrespective of all the other speculation, if the fan quit prior to the descent, I would imagine the maintenance organisation would find themselves in the legal cross hairs. Regardless of the rest of the legal conjecture etc etc, the accident will have happened because of one or more of three factors: 1) Icing 2) Pilot malfunction of some sort or 3) Engine out. The last being pretty significant.
I cannot imagine why they weren't carrying an ELT in the aircraft ready to activate in situations where it all goes wrong...
ShropshirePilot is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 10:05
  #1088 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,227
I would hope that this accident would also have a police investigation, and possible criminal and civil case.

2unlimited is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 10:08
  #1089 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Belfast
Posts: 36
Originally Posted by Good Business Sense View Post
....... unfortunately, most are not going there anyway - most are offering any day, any time, any destination, overnights etc etc - "just ask" - to me that's a commercial charter but the UK CAA and EASA don't agree - after the first Wingly crash the courts will decide.
I would 100% agree with you in that case- "just ask" is basically an open invitation to potential customers. What is the point in paying all the additional insurance and regulation fees associated with Certification if they can just 'wing (ly) it'. Also, in the event of an accident, there'd be no formal structure to investigate- no directors going to prison for corporate manslaughter. The only paper trail would be £20 notes. Maybe this investigation will trigger a clamp down on cowboys flying commercially under the guise of GA.
positiverate20 is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 12:58
  #1090 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 513
‘The disappearance of Emiliano Sala is still being discussed around the world after his plane went missing en route from Nantes to Cardiff.

Maximiliano Duarte, a close friend of the footballer, has pointed the finger of blame at the player's representative.

"He is responsible," Duarte said of the representative to America Noticias.

"The great truth behind all this is that there is a culprit because Emiliano never decided to get on that plane.

"These are all obligations that one has and as a professional he accepted.

"Emi was forced to board the plane that night."

Willie McKay was the player's representative, who arranged the Piper Malibu to take him from Nantes to Cardiff.’

So, if we believe all the reports, we possibly have a pilot who didn’t want to fly at night and we have a passenger who didn’t want to fly at night meaning that the departure was forced by a person/persons who weren’t actually on board.
runway30 is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 13:02
  #1091 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: South of England
Posts: 1,062
[color=left=#000000]So, if we believe all the reports, we possibly have a pilot who didnít want to fly at night and we have a passenger who didnít want to fly at night meaning that the departure was forced by a person/persons who werenít actually on board.[/color]
At least we can rely on the AAIB to apply a bit more logic than that!

2 s
2 sheds is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 13:22
  #1092 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 513
Originally Posted by 2 sheds View Post
At least we can rely on the AAIB to apply a bit more logic than that!

2 s
If, and it is still an if, the pilot decided to depart in circumstances that contravened his licence/ratings then the external influences on his decision making must surely be important. Those external influences could have come from either Nantes Football Club, the agent representing them, Cardiff City Football Club, the person tasked with organising the flight or any combination of them. I am only suggesting that the pressure to depart wasnít coming from the passenger.
runway30 is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 13:33
  #1093 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 167
Originally Posted by Chronus View Post
The CAA would be greatly concerned in their role as a supervisory authority. Particularly given the fact that they may come under the light of public scrutiny and critisizim for permitting so called cost-sharing by PPL holders outside AOC operations and failing to effectively monitor activities within such operations. There is very little doubt that this accident, now featuring the headlines, since the event has attracted public attention. It will not be too long before the Secretary of State for Transport picks up his phone and invites the head of the CAA for a brief chat.
Cost sharing for PPL holders is permitted by the Regulations of EASA and the CAA who have published a guidance document CAP 1590 and, as discussed previously in this thread, it only applies to the direct operating costs of a flight. The pilot is required to make a contribution to the direct costs. As a result of this accident you imply that the CAA has in someway failed to effectively monitor activities within such operations. Considering that this flight was carried out by a USA registered aircraft from an airport in France I struggle to see how you could reach this conclusion. Regulators, including CAA, do not have unlimited resources and would not routinely monitor GA activities outside of their own State.

Where people are prepared to operate illegal flights that should be carried under an AOC the Regulators are somewhat at a disadvantage because of the need to gather objective evidence that will stand scrutiny in a Court or at an appeal hearing. In such cases the pilot and passengers are highly unlikely to act as witnesses and I would not think that passenger tickets are issued! Post # 842 articulates some of the issues.
happybiker is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 14:23
  #1094 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Northants
Posts: 70
Originally Posted by happybiker View Post
Cost sharing for PPL holders is permitted by the Regulations of EASA and the CAA who have published a guidance document CAP 1590 and, as discussed previously in this thread, it only applies to the direct operating costs of a flight. The pilot is required to make a contribution to the direct costs. As a result of this accident you imply that the CAA has in someway failed to effectively monitor activities within such operations. Considering that this flight was carried out by a USA registered aircraft from an airport in France I struggle to see how you could reach this conclusion. Regulators, including CAA, do not have unlimited resources and would not routinely monitor GA activities outside of their own State.
The plane was UK based as was the pilot and the person who is alleged to have been organising these flights. They seem to have been taking place for a while. The flight appears to have been part of a roundtrip. How is the CAA not (at least partly) responsible for enforcement?
jecuk is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 14:30
  #1095 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 253
Does anyone know approx how many total hours the pilot had? If he had a valid FAA medical his total hours should be on his last medical application. It would be interesting to know his recent hours too and if he had done his 3 take off and landings in the last 90 days.
suninmyeyes is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 14:38
  #1096 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Age: 81
Posts: 699
Isn't the main problem here that people who take flights in conditions such as this are totally unaware that they are at risk. All they know is that this is a cheaper/more convenient way of getting from A to B and they trust the System to protect them.
funfly is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 14:51
  #1097 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Here
Posts: 1,786
If they recover the GPS it should answer a bunch of questions as it will have been recording position (every second, or even more?) until being submerged.

And the odds are that the data is okay.
Sam Rutherford is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 15:07
  #1098 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 46
Originally Posted by suninmyeyes View Post
Does anyone know approx how many total hours the pilot had? If he had a valid FAA medical his total hours should be on his last medical application. It would be interesting to know his recent hours too and if he had done his 3 take off and landings in the last 90 days.
An FAA medical is not required to exercise the privileges of an FAA issued PPL. "Basic Med" is an allowed alternative.

An application for an FAA medical allows entry of flight time but there is no requirement to enter any flight time.

In summary - there is no reason to assume total hours will be available on the last medical application.

Also, 3 takeoffs and landings does not necessarily meet currency requirements for carrying passengers at night while exercising the privileges of an FAA issued PPL. The requirement is 3 night takeoffs and 3 night landings to a full stop. Lots of people who are current to carry passengers in the day are not current to carry passengers at night. Even those who think they are current because they have logged 3 night full stop landings may not be current since 3 night takeoffs are also required.

Last edited by EXDAC; 5th Feb 2019 at 15:10. Reason: correct "issues" to "issued"
EXDAC is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 15:20
  #1099 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: NY
Posts: 27
Originally Posted by funfly View Post
Isn't the main problem here that people who take flights in conditions such as this are totally unaware that they are at risk. All they know is that this is a cheaper/more convenient way of getting from A to B and they trust the System to protect them.
Yes. It is absolutely shocking that this sort of thing is allowed in Europe. This is unwitting passengers thinking they are paying for a private, professional charter, and instead getting an HVAC guy with a private pilot's license. It's absolutely astounding to me that this is allowed. It will eventually be stopped once there are enough dead bodies. Mark my words. The FAA is spot-on about this nonsense.
mryan75 is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2019, 15:29
  #1100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 882
Originally Posted by mryan75 View Post
Yes. It is absolutely shocking that this sort of thing is allowed in Europe.
This is not allowed in Europe as has been written on every 5th post in this thread.

Last edited by what next; 5th Feb 2019 at 15:46.
what next is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.