Cardiff City Footballer Feared Missing after aircraft disappeared near Channel Island
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vance, Belgium
Age: 62
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
3 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Dunstable, Beds UK
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minimum sign off would require an FAA A and P Mechanic sign off.. Higher maintenance such as an Annual would require an FAA I.A. ( inspection Authorisation) or an FAA Certificated Repair station. I would imagine that the log book entries would make interesting reading.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Hinckley
Age: 61
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has the actual beneficial owner of the aircraft been verified anywhere? US databases show this Ms Fay Keely at a company called Cool Flourish Ltd, but that hasn't been acknowladged anywhere else so far? Photographs of it in a Gamston hangar, but no verification that this is where it lived most of the time - i.e. it's home base.
The PA46 of the accident at hand was not fit for AOC operation (engine is not a turbine).
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Usually firmly on the ground
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
shy torque Thanks, very helpful.
Excuse my ignorance. Again. Is the CPL requirement conditional on remuneration irrespective of flying conditions (which is what I've understood so far), or are you saying a PPL could suffice for a flight with a paying passenger if it was VFR-Day?
Luc Lion thanks again. A similar question about aircraft type. What about SEP in daytime VFR conditions?
(Armed with some of the info learned here I have established that the Cherokee I flew on is owned by a company that does not appear to hold an AOC, at least not at the time of posting).
(According to the document Luc Lion linked to, " At present the Jersey Aircraft Registry does not permit commercial air transport or aerial work" (!) so AOCs have to be obtained from the UK or... Guernsey!!).
[cross-post]
Luc Lion thanks again. A similar question about aircraft type. What about SEP in daytime VFR conditions?
(Armed with some of the info learned here I have established that the Cherokee I flew on is owned by a company that does not appear to hold an AOC, at least not at the time of posting).
(According to the document Luc Lion linked to, " At present the Jersey Aircraft Registry does not permit commercial air transport or aerial work" (!) so AOCs have to be obtained from the UK or... Guernsey!!).
[cross-post]
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vance, Belgium
Age: 62
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
3 Posts
@Eutychus,
PPL means that the pilot may not earn money for the flight and that he may not fly in the context of a commercial operation (ie: the service, transport or aerial work, may not be sold).
Of course there are some exceptions, but they don't play a role here.
A CPL (commercial pilot) may be paid and hired for a commercial operation.
SEP = single engine piston
SET = single engine turbine (turbopropellor or jet)
MEP = multi-engines piston
VFR = visual flight rules (only flights in visual meteorological conditions, day or night, are approved. A special qualification is required for night-VFR)
IFR = instrument flight rule (flight in day or night visual meteorological conditions or in instrument meteorological conditions. An instrument rating IR qualification is required)
IMC = instrument meteorological conditions (you can't see outside or the outside references are below some minima)
For AOC in Jersey/Guernsey, the 2 islands have a common aeronautical administration.
They happen to have put all AOC on the Guernsey registry.
For your account of your 2 flights to and from Jersey, there are only 3 "legal" possibilities:
- your business relation rented 2 charters flights from an official air-taxi company (AOC holder). The chance that such a company operates a single piston engine aircraft are very close to zero.
- your business relation organised a private flight by renting a small aircraft on a dry lease and hiring a commercial pilot separately.
- the pilot was your business relation, his associate or one of his close friend and this pilot organised the flight by himself.
In the third case, before the flight, the pilot could have asked you if you agree to share the direct cost of the flight.
In the second case, your business relation is not allowed to ask you to pay anything.
I am afraid that anything else (and matching your account) is illegal.
PPL means that the pilot may not earn money for the flight and that he may not fly in the context of a commercial operation (ie: the service, transport or aerial work, may not be sold).
Of course there are some exceptions, but they don't play a role here.
A CPL (commercial pilot) may be paid and hired for a commercial operation.
SEP = single engine piston
SET = single engine turbine (turbopropellor or jet)
MEP = multi-engines piston
VFR = visual flight rules (only flights in visual meteorological conditions, day or night, are approved. A special qualification is required for night-VFR)
IFR = instrument flight rule (flight in day or night visual meteorological conditions or in instrument meteorological conditions. An instrument rating IR qualification is required)
IMC = instrument meteorological conditions (you can't see outside or the outside references are below some minima)
For AOC in Jersey/Guernsey, the 2 islands have a common aeronautical administration.
They happen to have put all AOC on the Guernsey registry.
For your account of your 2 flights to and from Jersey, there are only 3 "legal" possibilities:
- your business relation rented 2 charters flights from an official air-taxi company (AOC holder). The chance that such a company operates a single piston engine aircraft are very close to zero.
- your business relation organised a private flight by renting a small aircraft on a dry lease and hiring a commercial pilot separately.
- the pilot was your business relation, his associate or one of his close friend and this pilot organised the flight by himself.
In the third case, before the flight, the pilot could have asked you if you agree to share the direct cost of the flight.
In the second case, your business relation is not allowed to ask you to pay anything.
I am afraid that anything else (and matching your account) is illegal.
Last edited by Luc Lion; 25th Jan 2019 at 16:33.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Eutychus: I am very sorry for not formulating precise enough!
AFAIK,
IF paying customer THEN CPL mandatory
IF NOT CPL THEN no remuneration
What I meant was, if this was not a paying customer, a FAA validation on a day-only CAA FCL PPL may be ok for a day-VFR flight. Typical, I take a friend A-B.
AFAIK,
IF paying customer THEN CPL mandatory
IF NOT CPL THEN no remuneration
What I meant was, if this was not a paying customer, a FAA validation on a day-only CAA FCL PPL may be ok for a day-VFR flight. Typical, I take a friend A-B.
Just bringing this point up in relation to the low cruising altitude question.
When asked why this flight didn't show on the usual tracking sites, FR24 replied the the transponder was either not working or "old" equipment. I take this to mean it was Mode C and thus not eligible to enter the airways system in Europe as a Mode S transponder is mandated.
Having recently replaced my old Mode C unit with a new Class 1 Mode S device (at under £2000) I wonder why this upgrade had not be auctioned in this case?
When asked why this flight didn't show on the usual tracking sites, FR24 replied the the transponder was either not working or "old" equipment. I take this to mean it was Mode C and thus not eligible to enter the airways system in Europe as a Mode S transponder is mandated.
Having recently replaced my old Mode C unit with a new Class 1 Mode S device (at under £2000) I wonder why this upgrade had not be auctioned in this case?
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Usually firmly on the ground
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
Thanks for taking the time, Luc Lion, I think I have it now 
In the various cases my client flew me and one other person and I personally never saw any paperwork. But I think you're right, it probably wasn't legal, as I understand it now because a) no AOC b) probably no CPL c) I am virtually certain money changed hands against a receipt.
I am given to understand that my client proceeded on the basis of seeing a pilot's licence and an (unspecified) insurance certificate.
What's really getting through to me here is that unless a client is really really clued up to the point of having either specialist advice or knowing a lot about general aviation themselves, it's really really easy for a pilot to give the impression of providing a legal and (reasonably) safe service when one may not be getting either.
In the various cases my client flew me and one other person and I personally never saw any paperwork. But I think you're right, it probably wasn't legal, as I understand it now because a) no AOC b) probably no CPL c) I am virtually certain money changed hands against a receipt.
I am given to understand that my client proceeded on the basis of seeing a pilot's licence and an (unspecified) insurance certificate.
What's really getting through to me here is that unless a client is really really clued up to the point of having either specialist advice or knowing a lot about general aviation themselves, it's really really easy for a pilot to give the impression of providing a legal and (reasonably) safe service when one may not be getting either.
Just bringing this point up in relation to the low cruising altitude question.
When asked why this flight didn't show on the usual tracking sites, FR24 replied the the transponder was either not working or "old" equipment. I take this to mean it was Mode C and thus not eligible to enter the airways system in Europe as a Mode S transponder is mandated.
Having recently replaced my old Mode C unit with a new Class 1 Mode S device (at under £2000) I wonder why this upgrade had not be auctioned in this case?
When asked why this flight didn't show on the usual tracking sites, FR24 replied the the transponder was either not working or "old" equipment. I take this to mean it was Mode C and thus not eligible to enter the airways system in Europe as a Mode S transponder is mandated.
Having recently replaced my old Mode C unit with a new Class 1 Mode S device (at under £2000) I wonder why this upgrade had not be auctioned in this case?
Nothing to say it didn't get an upgrade between then and now.
ELT circled in red from earlier post.
Just bringing this point up in relation to the low cruising altitude question.
When asked why this flight didn't show on the usual tracking sites, FR24 replied the the transponder was either not working or "old" equipment. I take this to mean it was Mode C and thus not eligible to enter the airways system in Europe as a Mode S transponder is mandated.
Having recently replaced my old Mode C unit with a new Class 1 Mode S device (at under £2000) I wonder why this upgrade had not be auctioned in this case?
When asked why this flight didn't show on the usual tracking sites, FR24 replied the the transponder was either not working or "old" equipment. I take this to mean it was Mode C and thus not eligible to enter the airways system in Europe as a Mode S transponder is mandated.
Having recently replaced my old Mode C unit with a new Class 1 Mode S device (at under £2000) I wonder why this upgrade had not be auctioned in this case?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Really nothing much to do with N- registration or Commercial or EU legislation . Everyone of us could have been caught in this
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 416 Likes
on
219 Posts
It sounds like problems with serviceability caused ongoing delays in the departure time (three previous attempts to take off have been mentioned).
It's possible that one pilot, having previously been involved (and therefore being recorded as having cleared security) declined to depart by night.
It's possible that one pilot, having previously been involved (and therefore being recorded as having cleared security) declined to depart by night.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Do I come here often?
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for taking the time, Luc Lion, I think I have it now
What's really getting through to me here is that unless a client is really really clued up to the point of having either specialist advice or knowing a lot about general aviation themselves, it's really really easy for a pilot to give the impression of providing a legal and (reasonably) safe service when one may not be getting either.
What's really getting through to me here is that unless a client is really really clued up to the point of having either specialist advice or knowing a lot about general aviation themselves, it's really really easy for a pilot to give the impression of providing a legal and (reasonably) safe service when one may not be getting either.
And then you get organisations like Wingly where 100 hour PPL's can advertise to take you flying on what are effectively A to A Commercial flights (sightseeing) without a commercial license, AOC or any other of the myriad checks and balances those of who provide aviation services as a living are subject too.
My Flight Ops Inspector was shamefaced when I asked him how he dare turn up and audit us when the CAA allow Wingly. Cost sharing and the Wingly principal have dropped standards of safety for people in ignorance of the rules. A couple of PPL's sharing a trip know the deal they are entering into, the man in the street be he dustman or premiership footballer have no real chance of knowing the truth.
Grant Shapps, MP for Welwyn and Hatfield and owner of a Cirrus SR22 pushed hard for this situation via his "Red Tape Challenge" The red tape (and fees) for AOC's went up and an area of GA became the wild west. Well done Grant! you c@@t!
SND
Just a comment on the discussion of AOC etc. It reflects the practice in Canada and I suspect it is the same over in the UK, but...
The renting of an aircraft without crew is not considered a commercial air service here. It probably isn't there. So any entity can rent the aircraft, and then has to find a pilot. If the renter is involved in arranging the pilot, then it becomes a grey area.
The renting of an aircraft without crew is not considered a commercial air service here. It probably isn't there. So any entity can rent the aircraft, and then has to find a pilot. If the renter is involved in arranging the pilot, then it becomes a grey area.
If, and I don’t know if this is the case here, a pilot is recruited by someone who knows he doesn’t have the correct qualifications but knows he is cheap; is it only the pilot who is at fault or the person offering the money as well? If, and I don’t know if this the case here, an aircraft owner doesn’t enquire what their aircraft is going to be used for and doesn’t care about the qualifications of the pilot; is it only the pilot who is at fault or the aircraft owner as well?