Cardiff City Footballer Feared Missing after aircraft disappeared near Channel Island
common purpose - contd.
Thanks for the reference. It includes " In addition, this pro-rata sharing of expenses is further limited by the FAA's "common-purpose" test, which requires the private pilot and all expense sharing passengers share a bona fide common purpose for their travel." . However, I don't see any indication as to where that common purpose test is defined. Perhaps there is additional information in the referenced FAA letter of interpretation but that letter is not disclosed.
I did find a reference to "common purpose" in 91.501 but that reg is specific to "the operation of large airplanes of U.S. registry, turbojet-powered multiengine civil airplanes of U.S. registry, and fractional ownership program aircraft of U.S. registry........"
With cost sharing being quite common it would be good to have a clear reference to a specific regulation, advisory circular, or publicly available FAA letter of interpretation. Not trying to be awkward. I have a genuine interest in the subject both as an owner of an N reg aircraft and as a CFI.
I did find a reference to "common purpose" in 91.501 but that reg is specific to "the operation of large airplanes of U.S. registry, turbojet-powered multiengine civil airplanes of U.S. registry, and fractional ownership program aircraft of U.S. registry........"
With cost sharing being quite common it would be good to have a clear reference to a specific regulation, advisory circular, or publicly available FAA letter of interpretation. Not trying to be awkward. I have a genuine interest in the subject both as an owner of an N reg aircraft and as a CFI.
A great post - and very timely - Let there be no matches struck and held before your eyes on final!
I have a PPL but do not have either Night or IMC ratings. Also I have never been a PAX in a SEA or twin during darkness. So please be gentle with this question!
Normally during night flying, are the lights of towns/cities of any assistance other than the navigation? In other words do these lights give any visual reference to help situational awareness so as to reduce the total reliance on the AI?
Normally during night flying, are the lights of towns/cities of any assistance other than the navigation? In other words do these lights give any visual reference to help situational awareness so as to reduce the total reliance on the AI?
An Instrument rating is there for a reason.
An Instrument rating is a very useful rating for those with limited experience.
Off course city lights may be of help..... only if you know what to look for..
But we are now flying VMC.
If this "pilot" ended up at (a dark) night (over sea, with no horizon) with none of the above ratings/endorsements....
its suiside.....
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Kinross
Age: 74
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Altimeter
My, very limited, understanding of air crash investigation is that analogue instruments with needles can show a microscopic indication in the face of the display that a needle hit it under sufficient “g”. The needle may well subsequently move for whatever reason but may have left a telltale indication at the point of impact.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a PPL but do not have either Night or IMC ratings. Also I have never been a PAX in a SEA or twin during darkness. So please be gentle with this question!
Normally during night flying, are the lights of towns/cities of any assistance other than the navigation? In other words do these lights give any visual reference to help situational awareness so as to reduce the total reliance on the AI?
Clive
Normally during night flying, are the lights of towns/cities of any assistance other than the navigation? In other words do these lights give any visual reference to help situational awareness so as to reduce the total reliance on the AI?
Clive
Just a numbered other
dalgetty , might be best to steer clear of air crash investigation!
With apologies, the quantity of errors and assumptions in your post are too numerous to list.
I will, though, do the first one. There is no such thing as an IFR rating, it's simply an IR.
Sorry!
With apologies, the quantity of errors and assumptions in your post are too numerous to list.
I will, though, do the first one. There is no such thing as an IFR rating, it's simply an IR.
Sorry!
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: scotland
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My, very limited, understanding of air crash investigation is that analogue instruments with needles can show a microscopic indication in the face of the display that a needle hit it under sufficient “g”. The needle may well subsequently move for whatever reason but may have left a telltale indication at the point of impact.
Last edited by ericsson16; 27th Jan 2019 at 21:21.
Thanks for the reference. It includes " In addition, this pro-rata sharing of expenses is further limited by the FAA's "common-purpose" test, which requires the private pilot and all expense sharing passengers share a bona fide common purpose for their travel." . However, I don't see any indication as to where that common purpose test is defined. Perhaps there is additional information in the referenced FAA letter of interpretation but that letter is not disclosed.
I did find a reference to "common purpose" in 91.501 but that reg is specific to "the operation of large airplanes of U.S. registry, turbojet-powered multiengine civil airplanes of U.S. registry, and fractional ownership program aircraft of U.S. registry........"
With cost sharing being quite common it would be good to have a clear reference to a specific regulation, advisory circular, or publicly available FAA letter of interpretation. Not trying to be awkward. I have a genuine interest in the subject both as an owner of an N reg aircraft and as a CFI.
I did find a reference to "common purpose" in 91.501 but that reg is specific to "the operation of large airplanes of U.S. registry, turbojet-powered multiengine civil airplanes of U.S. registry, and fractional ownership program aircraft of U.S. registry........"
With cost sharing being quite common it would be good to have a clear reference to a specific regulation, advisory circular, or publicly available FAA letter of interpretation. Not trying to be awkward. I have a genuine interest in the subject both as an owner of an N reg aircraft and as a CFI.
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...bSubmit=Search
and check this one out, and this guy had an ATP. And he still needed common purpose with his passengers for the operation ey ran (which the FAA determined he did not have).:
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...rpretation.pdf
Last edited by Pilot DAR; 27th Jan 2019 at 23:16. Reason: Removed copy of deleted post
Sadly, I'd suggest you don’t hold your breath……...
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Glens o' Angus by way of LA
Age: 60
Posts: 1,975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even if the pilot had a valid Instrument ticket (hopefully current) and a commercial rating ( a glorified PPL unless further training, hour building and type ratings are added) the fact that he was a full time plumber would just not leave this poor guy the time, on the job training and constant daily real world commercial flying standards experience to be competent enough to be running on-demand “charter” flights safely. I’ve got a FAA CPL IR with all the trimmings and have flown my puddle jumper from Rennes to Swansea a few times in day VRF, to try it at night in low or no viz with ice forecast is suicide.
common purpose - contd.
If they want a rule for pilots to follow it would seem reasonable for it to be included in the regulations that pilots are expected to know about.
dalgetty , might be best to steer clear of air crash investigation!
With apologies, the quantity of errors and assumptions in your post are too numerous to list.
I will, though, do the first one. There is no such thing as an IFR rating, it's simply an IR.
Sorry!
With apologies, the quantity of errors and assumptions in your post are too numerous to list.
I will, though, do the first one. There is no such thing as an IFR rating, it's simply an IR.
Sorry!
I have a friend who is very experienced ex Canadian TSB investigator. He tells me that when the actual cause of an accident is determined, it rarely is what everybody originally thought it was. Or was sure it was.
i dont think recent history supports the broader points. There have been many accidents recently where the basics of what people assume within the first days perfectly align to the basics of a final report several years later. There is little doubt that this accidents cause will focus upon weather and the pilots ratings and the aircrafts equipment with the sub-theme of discussion around the commercials
Eutychus, I suspect you are in very good company - even amongst the Pros on here. I think you'll find all the Aviation professionals who have posted on/read this sad, sad thread, no matter how many years in the industry, will also have shaken their heads in disbelief and sadness on a significant number of occasions reading about this ......
I do think we should be careful as a million assumptions slowly become 'fact' on this thread.
Whilst the whole duck thing is generally valid (walks like, looks like etc.), there is an absence of hard fact and fast amounts of conjecture...
Just sayin'
PS We're not the only ones reading this thread, and two people (with families) died...
Whilst the whole duck thing is generally valid (walks like, looks like etc.), there is an absence of hard fact and fast amounts of conjecture...
Just sayin'
PS We're not the only ones reading this thread, and two people (with families) died...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: london
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd agree that rigorous and thorough accident investigation makes a substantial contribution to air safety and I'm not suggesting for a moment that we shouldn't do all we reasonably can in this, or indeed any other case.
That said, it seems from what's been posted that there are many things that were wrong in this case that will remain wrong whatever the primary cause. In my opinion, even finding wreckage showing incontrovertible proof of catastrophic engine failure won't make conducting this flight in the manner it was conducted any more of a reasonable decision.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: WILTSHIRE
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do think we should be careful as a million assumptions slowly become 'fact' on this thread.
Whilst the whole duck thing is generally valid (walks like, looks like etc.), there is an absence of hard fact and fast amounts of conjecture...
Just sayin'
PS We're not the only ones reading this thread, and two people (with families) died...
Whilst the whole duck thing is generally valid (walks like, looks like etc.), there is an absence of hard fact and fast amounts of conjecture...
Just sayin'
PS We're not the only ones reading this thread, and two people (with families) died...
Ironic though that before signing for Cardiff Sala got a Corporate jet and a Commercial Pilot , after signing he got a Plumber and a Piper
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: England
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A night rating is there for a reason.....
An Instrument rating is there for a reason.
An Instrument rating is a very useful rating for those with limited experience.
Off course city lights may be of help..... only if you know what to look for..
But we are now flying VMC.
If this "pilot" ended up at (a dark) night (over sea, with no horizon) with none of the above ratings/endorsements....
its suiside.....
An Instrument rating is there for a reason.
An Instrument rating is a very useful rating for those with limited experience.
Off course city lights may be of help..... only if you know what to look for..
But we are now flying VMC.
If this "pilot" ended up at (a dark) night (over sea, with no horizon) with none of the above ratings/endorsements....
its suiside.....
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Echo Romeo/ test panel
Suicide is something a person decides on and kills them self, flying by night in IMC without the appropriate training is not suicide it is stupidity.
Just a numbered other
It’s clear from his voice message that he expected somewhat better arrangements. What a pity he didn’t refuse to board the thing.