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 27th Feb 2019, 06:15
  #1501 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Usually firmly on the ground
Posts: 62
Originally Posted by ShropshirePilot View Post
Eutychus (...) Certainly if I lived on an island, had a plane and flew it a lot, I'd want to fill the seats whether for a contribution or not BUT only with people that I knew and knew well.
Sure. I'm asking because I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that almost all of the flights I took were for the sole purpose of bringing pax (on all occasions, the aircraft flew out empty to get us and flew back empty immediately after returning us to our point of departure) and serious doubts, in view of what I've learned on this thread, as to their legality. On another occasion there were two pax (plus the pilot's spouse) on an N-registered Piper that had, as I understand it, made a stopover on a longer journey via our pickup airport for the sole purpose of picking us up. There was no common purpose whatsoever with the pilot and their spouse (who we did not know from Adam) apart from us all wanting to arrive on the same island. I would have thought this was pretty obvious to ground staff but nobody in the CI, or in France, seemed to find it odd.
Eutychus is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 06:16
  #1502 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,519
From someone who works in compliance (including legal contract compliance) and the software/finance industry, its pretty hard to think this discussion about logbooks and license validation is taking place in 2019...it sounds more like it belongs to 1979. Kinda ironic given the relentless technical advance in some aspects of aviation, that other parts seem mired in the dark ages and for no obvious reason.
The Old Fat One is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 06:44
  #1503 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Guernsey
Posts: 2
Further diving operations

The dive vessel 'Skindeep' has arrived in the area of the wreckage.
Touchez is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 11:41
  #1504 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Central UK
Posts: 283
If I had been invited to take a passenger seat on that journey I'd have declined on four seperate reasons.

1) I don't fly at my employer's behest except on a (minimum) twin turbine aircraft.
2) I don't fly at my employer's behest except on a Perf Cat A aircraft.
3) I don't fly at my employer's behest with less than a CPL (IR) at the controls.
4) I don't fly at my employer's behest if any of the flight is IMC/IFR without two pilots properly trained in 2 crew ops.

And I'd recommend anyone who values their own skin to do the same. But of course I only know that as a pilot. Joe public can't make judgements like that because he has no knowlege of how aviation works. That's why it is so important that the lesson that comes out of this sorry business is that the public must be made aware of what is acceptable practice charter-wise and what isn't.

Following that dreadful accident where an entire positioning crew was lost in a piston twin some time ago (Was it British Midland?) my last employer - a notoriosly stingy loco - didn't even try to argue when we got BALPA to ask them to stop piston twin transfers. Their duty of care was evidently explained by their lawyers to good effect.

Last edited by meleagertoo; 27th Feb 2019 at 12:04.
meleagertoo is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 12:15
  #1505 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vance, Belgium
Age: 57
Posts: 164
MelEager, It think you mean the Cessna 404 Titan G-ILGW accident, near Glasgow on September 3rd ,1999.
The positioning crew was from Airtours International Airways and was to fly a charter B757 from Aberdeen to Palma de Malorca.
https://assets.publishing.service.go...001_G-ILGW.pdf

By the way, what is a "Perf Cat A aircraft" ?
My understanding is that a CAT A aircraft is one having a final approach speed lower or equal to 90kt.
So, it's a small aircraft and it looks to conflict with your other criteria.
Luc Lion is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 13:15
  #1506 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hertfordshire
Age: 66
Posts: 276
I'm not in the aviation industry, just interested, and I would like to ask a couple of questions please.

1. In relation to VFR and IR flying, firstly, I presume it is reasonable to assume that a VFR only pilot will have a fair knowledge of the cockpit instruments and how to use them, but not so much of instrument landing techniques.

When flying over sea on a moonless night, is that still considered a VFR flight?

2. Not being a commercial pilot, he will be restricted to 6,000 feet. If there was an emergency would he be allowed to fly higher then 6,000 feet to deal with that emergency?

3. I've read the interim AAIB report and it says that 'at 1958 hrs, the controller asked the pilot to check if the aircraft’s altimeter pressure setting was correctly set to 1013 hPa, because the information on the radar indicated FL53. The pilot acknowledged and, shortly afterwards, the aircraft climbed to FL55'. I also notice wayward height movements of the aircraft as seen by radar in the last three minutes of flight.

If flying into foul weather can the pressure as seen by the aircraft vary enough to give wrong readings?
Hipper is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 13:21
  #1507 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,085
That wasnt the rational of the call. The controller was politely suggesting he could see some gash height holding and it was a polite way of asking him to fix it
Pittsextra is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 13:31
  #1508 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Zulu Time Zone
Posts: 649
Originally Posted by Hipper View Post
I'm not in the aviation industry, just interested, and I would like to ask a couple of questions please.

1. In relation to VFR and IR flying, firstly, I presume it is reasonable to assume that a VFR only pilot will have a fair knowledge of the cockpit instruments and how to use them, but not so much of instrument landing techniques.

When flying over sea on a moonless night, is that still considered a VFR flight?

2. Not being a commercial pilot, he will be restricted to 6,000 feet. If there was an emergency would he be allowed to fly higher then 6,000 feet to deal with that emergency?

3. I've read the interim AAIB report and it says that 'at 1958 hrs, the controller asked the pilot to check if the aircraft’s altimeter pressure setting was correctly set to 1013 hPa, because the information on the radar indicated FL53. The pilot acknowledged and, shortly afterwards, the aircraft climbed to FL55'. I also notice wayward height movements of the aircraft as seen by radar in the last three minutes of flight.

If flying into foul weather can the pressure as seen by the aircraft vary enough to give wrong readings?
Hi,

1. Yes
2. Not restricted to 6000'. Ironically, a private flight could have been undertaken legally (although this wasn't) but a commercial flight with pax in that aircraft is illegal at night.
3. Yes sort of. But the reason for the instruction to check 1013 was because he was flying to a "flight level" eg he sets 1013 and then FL55 is when the altimeter reads 5500'. The controller could see he was either low or had the wrong setting. Above a certain altitude known as transition altitude, aircraft always fly flight levels. The height of the transition altitude varies from place to place.
oggers is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 13:36
  #1509 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: S.E.Asia
Posts: 1,774
I have it on good authority that David Ibbotson had an IMC rating.
Mike Flynn is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 13:39
  #1510 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Originally Posted by Mike Flynn View Post
I have it on good authority that David Ibbotson had an IMC rating.
I have heard it rumoured on similarly good authority that it had long since ceased to be valid for want of renewal.
2Donkeys is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 13:41
  #1511 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vance, Belgium
Age: 57
Posts: 164
Originally Posted by Hipper View Post
...assume that a VFR only pilot will have a fair knowledge of the cockpit instruments and how to use them, but not so much of instrument landing techniques.
That's correct

Originally Posted by Hipper View Post
When flying over sea on a moonless night, is that still considered a VFR flight?
It can be, but regulations put many limitations:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ...01:0066:EN:PDF
1. The flight must remain at least 1000 ft above terrain (2000 ft in designated mountainous ares)
2. The vertical distance from airplane to clouds must be at least 1000 ft (so a total ground cloud distance of 2000 ft)
OR the plane must be clear of clouds and with the surface in sight (which is not possible over the sea on a moonless night) and the clouds must be at least 1500 ft above the ground surface.
Practically, for flying legally over the sea at night, the cloud ceiling must be way above 2000 ft.
But "legal" doesn't mean "safe".

Originally Posted by Hipper View Post
Not being a commercial pilot, he will be restricted to 6,000 feet.
There is no altitude restriction on non-commercial flights.
However, VFR flights are restricted to altitudes lower or equal to 19,500 ft.
And VFR flights may not fly in controlled airspaces of class A.
In UK, the airways are class A airspaces.

Originally Posted by Hipper View Post
If flying into foul weather can the pressure as seen by the aircraft vary enough to give wrong readings?
Yes, but hardly more than 1 hPa at a time (1 hPa ~= 30 ft)
Luc Lion is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 14:15
  #1512 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: S.E.Asia
Posts: 1,774
Originally Posted by 2Donkeys View Post
I have heard it rumoured on similarly good authority that it had long since ceased to be valid for want of renewal.
That might be the reason he chose to post “a bit rusty on the ILS”
Mike Flynn is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 14:33
  #1513 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Even if that ILS were in France, where the IMC rating would not have been valid in any case!

2Donkeys is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 15:01
  #1514 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Zulu Time Zone
Posts: 649
...furthermore he needed an IR on his FAA private which he didn't have. Nothing else would make his ILS into Nantes legal in an N reg.
oggers is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 15:35
  #1515 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: S.E.Asia
Posts: 1,774
I guess the elephant in the room question is who was the person between the football agent and David Ibbotson being contacted and assigned to fly that sortie?

Did that person know his capabilities and limitations.

More importantly did they know the flight would be illegal?
Mike Flynn is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 15:40
  #1516 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: WILTSHIRE
Posts: 82
Thats not an elephant in the room - we have been told that was D Henderson
red9 is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 16:08
  #1517 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: S.E.Asia
Posts: 1,774
With confirmation?

It is one thing to alledge but another to prove.

I have read newspaper reports that suggest the agent contacted David Henderson but can you prove he in turn assigned David Ibbotson?

The AAIB report suggests the aircraft was not registered with the FAA to carry out commercial flights.

Even if the pilot had an IMC did he also have a night rating?
N264DB was registered in the USA and could not be used for commercial operations without permission from the FAA and CAA. At the time of writing there was no evidence that such permission had been sought or granted.
To fly an aircraft registered in the USA between EASA Member States, a pilot must operate using the privileges of an FAA licence. This licence may be:
a. Issued based on the privileges of an existing EASA PPL. If the EASA PPL contains a night rating, the FAA PPL will have night flying privileges.
b. Issued by the FAA following the completion of an approved PPL course. The privileges of a licence gained in this way will include night flying.
Clearly the legal responsibility for the aircraft extend beyond just the pilot who happened to be flying it at the time of the accident.



Last edited by Mike Flynn; 27th Feb 2019 at 16:34.
Mike Flynn is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 16:19
  #1518 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cardiff
Age: 43
Posts: 93
Sad to say that David Mearns's search for Dave Ibbotson has proved fruitless . Mr Mearns has reported this afternoon on Twitter :-
"Returning to Guernsey having completed this morning a thorough search of the Piper Malibu wreckage, 2 highly experienced technical divers spent 20 mins searching & filming the plane, sadly there was absolutely no sign of the pilot David Ibbotson."
"Today we also organised a helicopter from the UK with two pilots and two trained observers to fly over the the Channel Islands to conduct an aerial search of the CI and French coastlines that are inaccessible. Sadly that search for David Ibbotson's body was also negative."
korrol is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 16:59
  #1519 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: High Wycombe
Posts: 12
Originally Posted by Hipper View Post
3. I've read the interim AAIB report and it says that 'at 1958 hrs, the controller asked the pilot to check if the aircraft’s altimeter pressure setting was correctly set to 1013 hPa, because the information on the radar indicated FL53. The pilot acknowledged and, shortly afterwards, the aircraft climbed to FL55'. I also notice wayward height movements of the aircraft as seen by radar in the last three minutes of flight.

If flying into foul weather can the pressure as seen by the aircraft vary enough to give wrong readings?
The reminder to the pilot to set 1013 could be seen as fairly sloppy cockpit procedures. When cleared to climb to a Flight Level a pilot would normally change the altimeter to 1013. The instruction "climb to flight level five five" has a full meaning of " Climb to five thousand five hundred feet with your altimeter set to 1013 mbs at a minimum rate of five hundred feet per minute and then maintain that level until cleared otherwise". Most ATC speak has official meanings far beyond the words spoken.

Originally Posted by Mike Flynn View Post
Clearly the legal responsibility for the aircraft extend beyond just the pilot who happened to be flying it at the time of the accident.

Actually, probably not. As there was no Air Operators Certificate in force (nor could there be) and as a result no responsible officers, under British law the commander of the aircraft makes the decisions and takes the responsibility. A licenced engineer takes responsibility for the serviceability of the aircraft, but it is up to the commander to confirm this.

Aircraft commanders have awesome authority, but equally awesome responsibilities.

Probably the same in France and who knows with the Americans.
VerdunLuck is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 18:13
  #1520 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 5,916
The reminder to the pilot to set 1013 could be seen as fairly sloppy cockpit procedures.
The pressure setting on the altimeter has no effect on the Mode C readout. The Mode C reference uses a seperate capsule that is calibrated to 1013. Either the reference capsule is faulty or the pilot is flying inaccurately.
Whopity 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.