Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck 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 3rd Feb 2019, 12:46
  #981 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Bremen
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Holding Out

The FAA term from memory is ‘Holding Out’ and I recall reading that the FAA won it’s case against a flight sharing website in 2017. This FAA term is unlikely to have been known by a 61.57 issued FAA PPL, who wouldn’t have had any written exams or alternative tuition apart from what was learned for their U.K. PPL
established28 is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 12:55
  #982 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I know it probably wouldn’t have made a difference but the concentrated area of search today is further west and north than that being searched, certainly by sea, in the immediate hours after the accident.

Any thoughts
Sark is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 13:01
  #983 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: S.E.Asia
Posts: 1,953
Received 10 Likes on 4 Posts
In my opinion the autopilot not the pilot was flying up until the icing overcame it and disengaged.

If they find the wreckage I suspect it will display evidence of a classic stall spin accident.

He had a great opportunity to divert in to Guernsey for the night, citing weather problems ,and still get the player back by mid morning the next day.

Mike Flynn is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 13:08
  #984 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
I'm still struggling to understand how that can be so. Can you explain further ?

I don't see how it's possible to derive GS.

.
You do not need Mode S to get GS . Any radar can give you GS, if you know the Rotation RPM of the antenna , the distance covered between 2 update and bingo : GS. I a multi radar environment , the GS is very accurate. It is often displayed on the labels of ATC radar displays .
What Mode S gives you is 25ft vertical increments ( i.s.o 100 with mode C ) , with that info you can calculate pretty accurately the ROD , and notice any change . i.e. if decreasing/ increasing or steady . When you lose returns close to the ground (or in our case sea, which is typically around or below 1000ft,) If you put that info with GS you can extrapolate when the line will hit the sea..
.
No doubt that's true, but the estimate of final position could well have come from primary radar (possibly military?), rather than SSR.
Absolutely. I am pretty sure the BEA looked at a few PRI recordings to see if they match . But Primary will not give you any altitude nor Rate of descent info, and the primary returns will also stop at a certain point , generally above 1000 ft due garbling , and where the antenna is located , ( i.e. how far /how close away it is , obstacles, earth curvature , etc.. ) but with PRI you have no idea if the aircraft was descending at 200ft a min or 2000/ft/min or was just leveling off at 1000 ..., Mode S will give you that valuable info.
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 13:10
  #985 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 353
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Mike Flynn
In my opinion the autopilot not the pilot was flying up until the icing overcame it and disengaged.

If they find the wreckage I suspect it will display evidence of a classic stall spin accident.

He had a great opportunity to divert in to Guernsey for the night, citing weather problems ,and still get the player back by mid morning the next day.

In normal circumstances a Pilot with a problem will seek help - I guess when you are breaking laws you press on and keep it to yourself hoping things will improve - seeking help can mean drawing a great deal of attention to yourself perhaps followed by a great deal of paperwork.
Good Business Sense is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 13:30
  #986 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: S.E.Asia
Posts: 1,953
Received 10 Likes on 4 Posts
I think that it depends on your mindset.
I doubt anyone would question his reason for diverting and closing the flight plan.

Over more than three decades I have turned back or refused to go many times.

I was once weathered in at New Orleans for a week. Worse places to be stuck.

Which is not a problem if you own the aeroplane and the time.

Others are more self confident.

Hence the saying old pilots and bold pilots.

We can go right back to Buddy Holly on this accident.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Day_the_Music_Died
The official investigation was carried out by the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB, precursor to the NTSB). It emerged that Peterson had over four years of flying experience, of which one was with Dwyer Flying Service, and had accumulated 711 flying hours, of which 128 were on Bonanzas. He had also logged 52 hours of instrument flight training, although he had passed only his written examination, and was not yet qualified to operate in weather that required flying solely by reference to instruments. He and Dwyer Flying Service itself were certified to operate only under visual flight rules, which essentially require that the pilot must be able to see where he is going. However, on the night of the accident, visual flight would have been virtually impossible due to the low clouds, the lack of a visible horizon, and the absence of ground lights over the sparsely populated area.[7] Furthermore, Peterson, who had failed an instrument checkride nine months before the accident, had received his instrument training on airplanes equipped with a conventional artificial horizon as a source of aircraft attitude information, while N3794N was equipped with an older-type Sperry F3 attitude gyroscope. Crucially, the two types of instruments display the same aircraft pitch attitudeinformation in graphically opposite ways.[[url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed]citation needed]

The CAB concluded that the accident was due to "the pilot's unwise decision" to embark on a flight that required instrument flying skills he had not proved to have. A contributing factor was Peterson's unfamiliarity with the old-style attitude gyroscope fitted on board the aircraft, which may have caused him to believe that he was climbing when he was in fact descending (an example of spatial disorientation). Another contributing factor was the "seriously inadequate" weather briefing provided to Peterson, which "failed to even mention adverse flying condition which should have been highlighted".[7]
[25]


Last edited by Mike Flynn; 3rd Feb 2019 at 13:44.
Mike Flynn is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 13:30
  #987 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,787
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
Originally Posted by ATC Watcher
You do not need Mode S to get GS. Any radar can give you GS, if you know the Rotation RPM of the antenna, the distance covered between 2 update and bingo: GS. In a multi radar environment, the GS is very accurate. It is often displayed on the labels of ATC radar displays.
Ah, I'm with you now. I misinterpreted your post as meaning that it was Mode S that the GS was derived from.

Yes, I understand how GS can be derived from successive radar plots (or of course extracted direct from EHS or ADS-B transmissions from aircraft thus equipped).
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 13:56
  #988 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sark
I know it probably wouldn’t have made a difference but the concentrated area of search today is further west and north than that being searched, certainly by sea, in the immediate hours after the accident.

Any thoughts
Looks like it’s international waters...
Daysleeper is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 13:58
  #989 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: England
Posts: 514
Received 229 Likes on 87 Posts
Calculation of the impact point is one thing, but there are very strong tides in that area.

If the aircraft broke up on impact the component parts are not going to be found just below the impact point. After several days of tides the wreckage will be spread over a wide area.
Sallyann1234 is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 14:15
  #990 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 599
Received 17 Likes on 14 Posts
FAA night qualification

Originally Posted by malabo
Easy enough to look up Ibbotson's FAA license in the FAA directory. PPL SEL, issued on the basis of his UK license in 2014 (and doesn't say if the UK license was PPL, CPL or ATPL). No ratings, so yes, single-engine day VFR is all he was licensed to do with an "N" registered aircraft on his FAA license.
There is no FAA night rating. Anyone with an unrestricted PPL is qualified to fly at night and, if night current, to carry passengers at night. Night training is required to qualify for issue of an FAA PPL.

I'm not commenting on the legality of the accident flight, only on the expressed belief that the holder of an FAA PPL with no ratings is not qualified to fly at night.

Last edited by EXDAC; 3rd Feb 2019 at 14:22. Reason: correct punctuation error
EXDAC is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 14:17
  #991 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Bremen
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FAA 61.75

Perhaps there should be greater oversight of FAA 61.75 licences issued on the basis of U.K. PPL’s. They contribute to an apparent lack of knowledge of FAA regulations as no FAA testing is required for their issue. A quick check of FAA regulations and one would know that this flight should have never been undertaken. ‘Holding Out’ has already led to the shutdown of a flight cost sharing website in the US, and yet over here EASA lets it happen
established28 is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 14:34
  #992 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Location: Location
Posts: 59
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ATC Watcher
But Primary will not give you any altitude nor Rate of descent info, and the primary returns will also stop at a certain point , generally above 1000 ft due garbling , and where the antenna is located.
You talk a lot of sense, but permit me to correct a couple of specific points.

"Garbling" is strictly a secondary radar phenomenon - nothing to do with primary radar. It is where two separate SSR return pulse trains (from different aircraft) overlap at the receiver and hence interfere with one-another.

Also, primary radar base of cover is a lot less than 1,000'. Typically out to 50 or 60 miles it is actually below ground level, hence the ground clutter that is removed by processing (e.g. STC, MTI). See the typical primary radar vertical polar diagram below.

Of course, the actual surface conditions close to the radar will influence this, as you rightly say, but not as much so as to give a 1,000' base of cover.
CBSITCB is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 14:37
  #993 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In an ever changing place
Posts: 1,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sark
I know it probably wouldn’t have made a difference but the concentrated area of search today is further west and north than that being searched, certainly by sea, in the immediate hours after the accident.

Any thoughts

Actually the GEO Ocean Iii has positioned itself and is stationary at the intersection of all sonar tracks made today by the sonar ship FPV Morven. Its position is approx. 14nm bearing 300 degrees from the Casquets lighthouse.
Above The Clouds is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 17:05
  #994 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: BREST
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The CAA and the DGAC know as much as we do about illegal public transportation. Their problem is to find a way to prosecute with reasonable chances to succeed. On many occasions they lost in court. Judges seem to follow politicians : "we want more business, let's take the rules down". The victims are the public (in the present case a highly respected and beloved young footballer) and to some extent the pilots who accept to play such a dangerous game.
All around in GA newcomers apply this simple scheme : let's buy a plane, finance it, and find people to rent it so that we can pay the bank with their money. If the plane flies often enough, it will also pay for maintenance and fixed costs. When the loan is finished, let's sell the plane and buy another one to do the same again. Well, that implies OPERATING an airplane, which is something they don't want to do, so they leave it up to isolated pilots in desperate need to build up hours. That's how it works. It's been like this for ages but worked mainly in closed circles such as sports. This seems to apply to the accidented aircraft.
But now, thanks to the internet, the same scoundrels have found a way to do it on a large scale. Just check out "www.airaffaires.fr". The website is dedicated to users who become "members" of club on line. Aircraft owners are invited to register their airplanes, desperate pilots are also invited to join. Then it is the member's job to organize the trip. The website is very active and the management reports a recent 2.1 M€ fund raising. Needless to say, the founder owns airplanes that are advertised on the website and fly a lot. An N registered MALIBU and a D registered JET PROP DLX, none of which is a suitable transport airplane. Everyone knows their payload is ridiculous but no one is there to check so they obviously fly overloaded very, very often.
The DGAC is investigating but they fear that legal action may not end up well...
Let's hope that SALA's accident will wake up some people at EASA because there will be more occurrence if nothing is done to stop this madness. And the number of AOC holder will decrease rapidly.
SET fan is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 17:50
  #995 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,787
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
Originally Posted by SET fan
The CAA and the DGAC know as much as we do about illegal public transportation. Their problem is to find a way to prosecute with reasonable chances to succeed. On many occasions they lost in court.
Do you have any evidence for that ?

DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 18:06
  #996 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North Cornwall
Age: 73
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The search tracks of both survey vessels today.

srobarts is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 18:12
  #997 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,116
Received 9 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by jumpseater


If as you suggest an AOC won’t prevent it, first para, what checks, balances and controls do you suggest? An AOC provides some top cover if adhered to for the operator or crew to cancel a trip. A PPL has none apart from the discipline of operating within the privileges of their license.

Your checks and balances in this event event should have been, licensed, proficiency, aircraft serviceability, airfield & navaid serviceability and weather as the basics. Surely that’s what’s required to make the go/no go decision? Access to all of those were available to the pilot and he decided to fly, why? Playing devils advocate, even if some of those basics listed above weren’t available, and a pilot still decided to fly, why?
What further checks and balances are you suggesting will have a meaningful impact, i.e. a ‘no fly’ decision, and who’s going to administer and pay for them?
my point is that we already have a great deal of checks and balances but if people are minded to break them then sometimes it ends badly. The issue is how things are enforced and how regulation is written with a rigor and attention such that it says what is intended. That way people who transgress can expect a consequence very many people know others who operate close to the wind and others find out usually when the tide has gone out and we read about it in an AAIB report. Ill leave you to read them for yourself however perhaps one start could be the warnings given about the man who died in his own AW139 in Norfolk. Why wasnt that dealt with years before?
Pittsextra is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 18:13
  #998 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 1,658
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Sark
I know it probably wouldn’t have made a difference but the concentrated area of search today is further west and north than that being searched, certainly by sea, in the immediate hours after the accident.

Any thoughts

That area, all the way up to, including east and south of the channel light vessel, was searched by 2 aircraft on the Tuesday morning following the accident. It was fairly windy on the Tuesday morning, and the sea wasn't 'calm'.
helimutt is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 18:32
  #999 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: MARS
Posts: 1,102
Received 10 Likes on 4 Posts
Deepest part of the Channel that area, close to the Hurd Deep. They will probably also find wartime munitions and low level nuclear waste which will lijely disrupt the search.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurd%27s_Deep

Alderney Hurd Deep radioactive waste 'not dangerous' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-guernsey-22198566

Widger is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2019, 18:50
  #1000 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is the Morven returning to base?
runway30 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.