Cardiff City Footballer Feared Missing after aircraft disappeared near Channel Island
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: London
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I’m apparently not allowed to post a link or picture with the entry but obviously anyone can find it.
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to correct, such a Malibu is Continental TSIO-520-BE, 310HP, built 404 pieces of PA46-310P before they discontinued in 1988 ('following a series of incidents and accidents attributed to engine failures', the early TCM TSIO-520 had a slightly too weak crankcase) and went for PA46-350P Malibu Mirage on Lycoming TIO-540-A2EA.
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Usually firmly on the ground
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
Not sure about EASA regs these days but when I used to fly charter in pistons, it was always in a twin. Any length overwater always with life jackets and raft, immersion suits were always available if requested. Pilots were all current multi engine instrument rated. I doubt your flights were conducted under an AOC. You would not get me sat in the back of a piston single overwater with any pilot. The fact the pilot on flight two deemed it necessary to rush the departure due to incoming fog demonstrates a worrying lack of descion making and airmanship. I pose the question to him, what would you have done in the event of a technical malfunction with your aircraft that required you to land after your departure? With the fog rolling in, my estimate is that the only place to land would be in the drink. Unfortunately there are a lot of pilots out there carrying out these ‘moody’ charters, I would hazard a guess that the the majority seriously overestimate their own abilities. Under pressure they are unlikely to be able to perform, their knowledge base and exposure are likely to be lacking. I would say that you exposed yourself to a high level of risk on both flights just in the fact you travelled in an single engine piston overwater, never mind that the pilots more than likely we’re not overly experienced or competent.
It's an interesting insight from an SLF point of view that we don't perceive (or think much about) how particular factors change risk levels. I've flown in Trislanders to and from CI many times and from a layman's perspective, while it's clear there are more engines, the overall experience is similar compared to a larger aircraft.
Would any regular CI pilots like to comment on the above analysis?
My perception is that this kind of flying goes on there all the time. A few years ago I was on the same Cherokee with a senior French official (the decision to travel this way being due to industrial action at the nearest port and the imperative for them not remaining stuck outside French territory. He was a heavy guy, too.)
Also, can anybody offer further clarification about the regulatory differences between N- and G- aircraft in this airspace? I may count the engines, but I'd never attached any importance to the tail number when evaluating risk (just happened to have photos)!
Except it’s wrong as the poster above says.
What is definitely correct is that to fly an N-reg aircraft outside of the state that issued your licence you need to have a valid FAA licence for that operation.
So flying a US aircraft IFR in France without a French-issued EASA licence with an IR, or having an IR on your FAA licence, is not valid.
What I am amazed by is how few people know these regulations for a professional pilots forum...
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: PommyLand - but I'll be back!
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Icaruss: an excellent, well reasoned and rational post at #248, without the hysteria which seems to be evident in much of this thread,
As to the FAA Airman Database, I have no idea as to how that operates, but I have searched it for various pilots I know, from highly experienced airline pilots (Fleet Managers, TRIs, TREs etc) as well as private pilots and most do not even appear on the database, so ChickenHouse is probably correct – even if I don’t fully understand his post! What’s a 61.75 piggyback? In short anything gleaned from that database appears to me to probably be completely inaccurate, at least for any non-FAA licensed pilot.
As to the FAA Airman Database, I have no idea as to how that operates, but I have searched it for various pilots I know, from highly experienced airline pilots (Fleet Managers, TRIs, TREs etc) as well as private pilots and most do not even appear on the database, so ChickenHouse is probably correct – even if I don’t fully understand his post! What’s a 61.75 piggyback? In short anything gleaned from that database appears to me to probably be completely inaccurate, at least for any non-FAA licensed pilot.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Girona
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Watford
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Accepting it looks the pilot had been ticking enough boxes for an incident to occur I have not spotted in this thread any real discussion on other safety aspects, I have only P2'd a Malibu a few times but dare I say there is a chance its so much like the feel of a "proper" executive aircraft rather than the overgrown Arrow i.e a single engine piston I fly they were probably both up front where you have to climb forward from the rear stepped door and having got to the incident phase were they putting the limited survival odds in their favour? Such as already wearing life jackets but then assuming the 88% chance of surviving the water landing in very good conditions which they clearly wern't would a footballer be confident of opening a pressurised rear door having clambered from the front possibly wet, in shock and with head injury in the dark and losing valuable time to exit, at least a P28 series you can wedge the door open in flight so it does not jam. Someone above said it probably was not equipped with ADSB etc because of its age, my aircraft is 40 years old and I have had mode s 330 for many years and more recently ADSB in and out and FLARM in and out and its not all just for collision avoidance its all part of a safety attitude so a tad unfair to assume all owners are the same but if you are going to become a needle in a haystack of sea getting an accurate position report out is crucial as is wearing your PLB in advance and any passenger faced with any of this would not have a clue of what to do for the best. Add all this together with the comments above and I cant see that anything was in their favour from the start and sadly they will have perished, probably within hours. The FAT one above has made safety comments elsewhere with links and they are worth a read as that aspect of planning is as important as anything else. I am not in the camp of don't fly a single piston over water, yes there is a risk and we cant all afford to fly a King Air but this is unlikely to be an engine failure and the aircraft does not know if its night or over water and they don't fail very often, the last tragic Alderney ditching I believe was a PA28 a few years back who ran out of fuel, his wife survived by clinging onto a tyre but sadly but it was a whole list of ticking error boxes in advance and as we all know flying is completely unforgiving if the human input is all wrong. Here's hoping everyone here manages to avoid the same mistakes and fly's safe as about the only good that can now come out of this one and those two poor chaps, RIP, is that a few learn something new and others like me are very clearly reminded of the risks and do everything possible to minimise them. All very sad 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to correct, such a Malibu is Continental TSIO-520-BE, 310HP, built 404 pieces of PA46-310P before they discontinued in 1988 ('following a series of incidents and accidents attributed to engine failures', the early TCM TSIO-520 had a slightly too weak crankcase) and went for PA46-350P Malibu Mirage on Lycoming TIO-540-A2EA.
Sorry correct - Continental, not Lycoming
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As to the FAA Airman Database, I have no idea as to how that operates, but I have searched it for various pilots I know, from highly experienced airline pilots (Fleet Managers, TRIs, TREs etc) as well as private pilots and most do not even appear on the database, so ChickenHouse is probably correct – even if I don’t fully understand his post! What’s a 61.75 piggyback? In short anything gleaned from that database appears to me to probably be completely inaccurate, at least for any non-FAA licensed pilot.
As a holder of a foreign license you can apply to get granted the rights of a FAA pilot license based on your existing = to let pilots from abroad fly N-reg aircraft on their license without having to do a full FAA pilot license. If you apply for a validation of your foreign license, its law base will be US legal under: CFR > Title 14 > Chapter I > Subchapter D > Part 61 > Subpart C > Section 61.75 > Private pilot certificate issued on the basis of a foreign pilot license, or short CFR 61.75.
During the validation process you will enter your data through the corresponding FAA portal, the Integrated Airman Certification and Rating Application (IACRA). If your initial application for the 61.75 based FAA pilot license, which states 'based on foreign license' = piggyback of the rights of your original license, runs through the validation process and gets countersigned in IACRA by the authority doing your test, your required signing of the countersignature results in your agreement for the data also going into the airman database (if you actively uncheck the permit, the database will receive no entry). Initial validation is only granted PPL rights, everything else usually requires further testing and exam sitting.
If you later do additions to your 61.75 piggyback license, it will also run through IACRA, is countersigned there by your test authority and valid by that. If you do not enter IACRA thereafter and sign permit to let the data flow to the database, additions and alterations are valid by the IACRA management, but will not transfer to the database. Most pilots don't do the last step and it is totally legal fine with that, but so only the initial data usually appears in public search.
Last edited by ChickenHouse; 24th Jan 2019 at 09:55.
Of course another possibility is that a sudden electrical failure perhaps due to having all the lights, deicing equipment overloading an electrical system with an underlying fault and aged battery with underperforming alternator perhaps coupled to an unheralded engine failure happened without reasonable warning soon after a perfectly reasonable decision to descend to 2300 into clear air and a well executed glide to ditch was then performed in complete silence and darkness. No information that is currently available or likely to emerge or makes good reporting is around to support this, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t exactly what happened, pilot legality aside!
Of course this is all just thinking out loud, but my feeling, having assisted in this search, is that I doubt very much that they'll ever be found, or if they are, it'll be on the north coast of France in an extended period of time.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Farnborough
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the possibility that the aircraft was heavy with a reasonable amount of luggage, presumably the handlers in charge that evening at Aviapartner Executive (assuming that's the agent/handler/FBO used) will recall how much stuff they carried over to the aircraft. Likewise they might enlighten the AAIB on other pertinant facts - the rumoured attempt to start-up several times etc.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 617
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Mckay added that the plane was "not owned in any way or part by either myself or any member of my family".
He said he began looking into arranging a private flight to take him to Nantes after his medical and signing in Cardiff on Saturday, at the footballer's request.
The question for Mr McKay
1) Who did he call to “arrange” the flight and did he borrow the aircraft from a friend or was this a commercial transaction?
The questions for Fay Keely
1) Are you the owner of the aircraft?
2) If so, who did you rent it to?
3) Did you provide the pilot?
4) If not, did you ask what the aircraft was to be used for and check the qualifications of the pilot?
He said he began looking into arranging a private flight to take him to Nantes after his medical and signing in Cardiff on Saturday, at the footballer's request.
The question for Mr McKay
1) Who did he call to “arrange” the flight and did he borrow the aircraft from a friend or was this a commercial transaction?
The questions for Fay Keely
1) Are you the owner of the aircraft?
2) If so, who did you rent it to?
3) Did you provide the pilot?
4) If not, did you ask what the aircraft was to be used for and check the qualifications of the pilot?
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: PommyLand - but I'll be back!
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many thanks for the clarification ChickenHouse. I still don’t fully understand though why people don’t appear on the database. Obviously those who have never held an FAA licence will not appear but for example, I myself had an FAA Airman Certificate, admittedly rather a long time ago, issued on the basis of a CAA licence and I have no entry in the database. Others whom I know did their initial licence in the US are not there; I have searched even for one who I know did his ATPL in the States and there is no entry. It could of course, (most likely!), be that I am just using the search function wrong.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: London
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After reading conflicting information in press reports ("Piper Malibu" with a "single turbine engine") I have checked on the JetProp webpage listing all past JetProp conversions and haven't found the accident aircraft registration there. Having said that, a few conversions on their list have the aircraft identification redacted. Having said that in turn, had it been converted to a turboprop, we would have probably seen by now a photo showing the accident aircraft with a changed look. On conversion the engine cowling length increases dramatically, to accommodate for the turbine PT6A engine length.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Farnborough
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where is this aircraft's normal home base? Nobody in this entire thread seems to have clarified that? Is it Gamston? Identified owner (Cool Flourish / Fay Keely?) had another aircraft at Gamston?
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many thanks for the clarification ChickenHouse. I still don’t fully understand though why people don’t appear on the database. Obviously those who have never held an FAA licence will not appear but for example, I myself had an FAA Airman Certificate, admittedly rather a long time ago, issued on the basis of a CAA licence and I have no entry in the database. Others whom I know did their initial licence in the US are not there; I have searched even for one who I know did his ATPL in the States and there is no entry. It could of course, (most likely!), be that I am just using the search function wrong.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 617
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts