Cardiff City Footballer Feared Missing after aircraft disappeared near Channel Island
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Craven Arms
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forget his politics he sounds like a cheap salesman in that video and his view on medicals was borderline idiotic because by extrapolation of his view nobody needs either medical, licence or any other checks or balance.
Chronos hits the nail on the head - just how difficult would it be to mystery shop those providing cost sharing flights?? Those whose remit it is are maxed out and someone needs to call time.
Chronos hits the nail on the head - just how difficult would it be to mystery shop those providing cost sharing flights?? Those whose remit it is are maxed out and someone needs to call time.
Its not a soap box its incredulity. Remember this film is from November 2018 and not only is it incredible that it is the regulator that is the host but that having taken the various sales pitches the Q&A has no guidance, clarity, engagement from those who are going to provide oversight. There is nothing. Q&A from 1m10 is about the risk to the passenger, and what he may or may not know. The answer given is dominated by the cost sharing platform representatives and nothing from regulators. The platforms will try and explain and highlight a variety of points to the passengers but they accept that things are not very adequate in that regard, yet it seems that despite the acceptance of risk and the ability for those not acting in the spirit of cost sharing, the road ahead is we will carry on regardless and I heard nothing from the regulator(s). i.e. might have been a good idea for EASA to say "we are going to do random mystery shopping to ensure things are as they should be..." For example.
There is a complete muddle about fixed/variable costs - why? and yet the pilot can pay 0.000001% of the flight etc. Its just so random. Which brings us to 1m 20min in and Shapps talking of data and medicals. The logic is just flawed where the view articulated is that lets look at the data, yet were it isn't available then first de-regulate then after deregulation prove a safety case for future regulation. So in some ways with this accident they have what they wanted but I'm not entirely sure it looks very intelligent nor what the public, who in this case is a victim, expected.
There is a complete muddle about fixed/variable costs - why? and yet the pilot can pay 0.000001% of the flight etc. Its just so random. Which brings us to 1m 20min in and Shapps talking of data and medicals. The logic is just flawed where the view articulated is that lets look at the data, yet were it isn't available then first de-regulate then after deregulation prove a safety case for future regulation. So in some ways with this accident they have what they wanted but I'm not entirely sure it looks very intelligent nor what the public, who in this case is a victim, expected.
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Craven Arms
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not a soap box its incredulity. Remember this film is from November 2018 and not only is it incredible that it is the regulator that is the host but that having taken the various sales pitches the Q&A has no guidance, clarity, engagement from those who are going to provide oversight. There is nothing. Q&A from 1m10 is about the risk to the passenger, and what he may or may not know. The answer given is dominated by the cost sharing platform representatives and nothing from regulators. The platforms will try and explain and highlight a variety of points to the passengers but they accept that things are not very adequate in that regard, yet it seems that despite the acceptance of risk and the ability for those not acting in the spirit of cost sharing, the road ahead is we will carry on regardless and I heard nothing from the regulator(s). i.e. might have been a good idea for EASA to say "we are going to do random mystery shopping to ensure things are as they should be..." For example.
There is a complete muddle about fixed/variable costs - why? and yet the pilot can pay 0.000001% of the flight etc. Its just so random. Which brings us to 1m 20min in and Shapps talking of data and medicals. The logic is just flawed where the view articulated is that lets look at the data, yet were it isn't available then first de-regulate then after deregulation prove a safety case for future regulation. So in some ways with this accident they have what they wanted but I'm not entirely sure it looks very intelligent nor what the public, who in this case is a victim, expected.
There is a complete muddle about fixed/variable costs - why? and yet the pilot can pay 0.000001% of the flight etc. Its just so random. Which brings us to 1m 20min in and Shapps talking of data and medicals. The logic is just flawed where the view articulated is that lets look at the data, yet were it isn't available then first de-regulate then after deregulation prove a safety case for future regulation. So in some ways with this accident they have what they wanted but I'm not entirely sure it looks very intelligent nor what the public, who in this case is a victim, expected.
I respect your view but am going to consider this for another thread. I think we all agree that extra hours generally makes for better skills and better skills lead to safer operation in GA/ PPL flying. I am also unconvinced that because I am over 50 (just!) that I need an AME to look at me annually to tell me I'm not going to die of heart failure at the controls. It's an interesting debate but unrelated, really, to the subject of this thread IMHO. I shall await the AAIB conclusions on the DI/ Sala flight and until they are published, this thread is getting a bit random.
ShropshirePilot, I disagree that more hours always = better skills. In theory yes. Not always in practice. I know 200-300hr ppl's who I feel safer with in the air than 5k+hr CPL's. I might fly 5x less than a similarly employed pilot, yet do more instrument flying and more take-offs and approaches, purely due to the nature of the job. Some pilots claim 10k hrs but they spend 5-8hrs in the cruise each flight just monitoring, which clocks up lots of hours but limited actually handling experience. In 5 hours I can carry out numerous joins to up to 10+ ILS and 10 Radar approaches. These can be totally IMC and down to minima. Risk is increased with a lack of experience, yes, but don't get hung up about hours being the be all and end all. The pilot of the accident aircraft had a fair few hours, unfortunately just not of the type of hours required for the flight he elected to take that night.
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Craven Arms
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a fair point and well made, but I did say "I think we all agree that extra hours generally makes for better skills".
DI clearly lacked the requisite skills for his final mission.... despite hours at the controls
DI clearly lacked the requisite skills for his final mission.... despite hours at the controls
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 76
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is an extract from the link in that post.
"I recognise the concerns expressed by my hon. Friend the Member for Bosworth. It may well be necessary to ensure that people are properly covered when they go flying. An element of caveat emptor is involved. Someone who is not a pilot and goes private flying should first check whether the pilot is insured and that they are not invalidating their own insurance cover. If a company hires an aeroplane to someone, it has a responsibility to ensure that that person is competent and has the necessary insurance cover. I should like to see common sense applied to those matters rather than further regulation.
All of us who are engaged in aviation in Britain know that the number one priority is safety, the number two priority is safety and the number three priority is safety. The Royal Air Force trained me, and I can assure my hon. Friend that safety is the number one interest of all of us engaged in aviation, because our lives are at risk."
The above are the words of Gerald Howarth.
If you were to read post no 1689, you may perhaps be persuaded to change your mind.
Here is an extract from the link in that post.
"I recognise the concerns expressed by my hon. Friend the Member for Bosworth. It may well be necessary to ensure that people are properly covered when they go flying. An element of caveat emptor is involved. Someone who is not a pilot and goes private flying should first check whether the pilot is insured and that they are not invalidating their own insurance cover. If a company hires an aeroplane to someone, it has a responsibility to ensure that that person is competent and has the necessary insurance cover. I should like to see common sense applied to those matters rather than further regulation.
All of us who are engaged in aviation in Britain know that the number one priority is safety, the number two priority is safety and the number three priority is safety. The Royal Air Force trained me, and I can assure my hon. Friend that safety is the number one interest of all of us engaged in aviation, because our lives are at risk."
The above are the words of Gerald Howarth.
Here is an extract from the link in that post.
"I recognise the concerns expressed by my hon. Friend the Member for Bosworth. It may well be necessary to ensure that people are properly covered when they go flying. An element of caveat emptor is involved. Someone who is not a pilot and goes private flying should first check whether the pilot is insured and that they are not invalidating their own insurance cover. If a company hires an aeroplane to someone, it has a responsibility to ensure that that person is competent and has the necessary insurance cover. I should like to see common sense applied to those matters rather than further regulation.
All of us who are engaged in aviation in Britain know that the number one priority is safety, the number two priority is safety and the number three priority is safety. The Royal Air Force trained me, and I can assure my hon. Friend that safety is the number one interest of all of us engaged in aviation, because our lives are at risk."
The above are the words of Gerald Howarth.
Reading the report below ,in the Grimsby Evening Telegraph, clearly there was an incentive for Ibbotson to take the job. With his credit card issues it is fair to assume he was not picking up the tab.
I suspect he spent too much time flying and not enough on the day job.
https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/n...-order-2641984
I suspect he spent too much time flying and not enough on the day job.
The private pilot who died with Emiliano Sala when his plane went down in the English Channel was ordered by a court to settle a Ł4,413 bill just days before he was hired to fly the Cardiff City star, it can be revealed.
David Ibbotson, 59, from Crowle near Scunthorpe, had already been told to pay off Ł23,000 worth of debt before he was made the subject of a fifth court order for the additional bill on January 11 - 10 days before the tragedy.
It had already been established that Mr Ibbotson faced Ł23,000 worth of debt repayment orders to companies including Orange, Yorkshire Water, Barclaycard and Bank of Scotland.
The revelation comes amid an investigation into how Mr Ibbotson, who had dropped out of commercial flight training, was hired to make the doomed flight. Private pilots are banned from taking payment for commercial flights
David Ibbotson, 59, from Crowle near Scunthorpe, had already been told to pay off Ł23,000 worth of debt before he was made the subject of a fifth court order for the additional bill on January 11 - 10 days before the tragedy.
It had already been established that Mr Ibbotson faced Ł23,000 worth of debt repayment orders to companies including Orange, Yorkshire Water, Barclaycard and Bank of Scotland.
The revelation comes amid an investigation into how Mr Ibbotson, who had dropped out of commercial flight training, was hired to make the doomed flight. Private pilots are banned from taking payment for commercial flights
Last edited by Mike Flynn; 14th Mar 2019 at 12:39.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: With the fairies!
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The pilot of the accident aircraft had a fair few hours, unfortunately just not of the type of hours required for the flight he elected to take that night.
He knowingly broke the rules and was responsible for not only his own death but that of an otherwise innocent passenger who had been ignorant of detailed arrangements. No amount of 'nod and a wink- it goes on all the time' will change those facts - unpalatable though they may be.
Ibbotson should never have 'elected' to take that flight.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 76
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He may have had hours but he was totally unqualified and unlicensed to carry out that flight. If you go back a couple of pages and look at the picture of his licence he was a PPL limited to day only flight.
He knowingly broke the rules and was responsible for not only his own death but that of an otherwise innocent passenger who had been ignorant of detailed arrangements. No amount of 'nod and a wink- it goes on all the time' will change those facts - unpalatable though they may be.
Ibbotson should never have 'elected' to take that flight.
He knowingly broke the rules and was responsible for not only his own death but that of an otherwise innocent passenger who had been ignorant of detailed arrangements. No amount of 'nod and a wink- it goes on all the time' will change those facts - unpalatable though they may be.
Ibbotson should never have 'elected' to take that flight.
And of course knowing his financial predicament Henderson knew he would not decline.
When he handed the aircraft keys to Ibbotson that weekend it must have crossed his mind that he was encouraging and assisting Ibbotson to break the law.
The agent has explained he assigned Henderson to carry out the charter.
The lawyers will be beating a path to his door and given the sums involved this is going to be expensive.
Looking at the wider picture ,we have as others pointed out earlier, the issue of jockey flights and other grey area charters.
AOPA should be making a big fuss about this in the press to highlight how cowboy operations are undermining the genuine AOC companies.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 76
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If that is in response to:
"The question that really matters is, why did he. "
It would suggest money motive. But others have suggested his financial plight might have been brought about by his bug for flying.
Could the answer not be, the opportunity to fly was simply irresistible. That which is so common to many affected by the bug, he just jumped to grab any opportunity to fly. And that affliction is sadly, the ailment that divides, those who do it to earn a living and those who do it for personal reasons. It is such a shame that he failed to cross that divide. He would then have had the opportunity to discover what the job really entailed.
"The question that really matters is, why did he. "
It would suggest money motive. But others have suggested his financial plight might have been brought about by his bug for flying.
Could the answer not be, the opportunity to fly was simply irresistible. That which is so common to many affected by the bug, he just jumped to grab any opportunity to fly. And that affliction is sadly, the ailment that divides, those who do it to earn a living and those who do it for personal reasons. It is such a shame that he failed to cross that divide. He would then have had the opportunity to discover what the job really entailed.
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
With his experience you jump at the chance of almost any free GA flying or right seat on a commercial flight to gather experience. But not as PIC on your Jack Jones on a night IFR flight in a semi capable aircraft with some poor unsuspecting soul sitting in the back. That’s basically manslaughter.
And of course knowing his financial predicament Henderson knew he would not decline.
When he handed the aircraft keys to Ibbotson that weekend it must have crossed his mind that he was encouraging and assisting Ibbotson to break the law.
The agent has explained he assigned Henderson to carry out the charter.
The lawyers will be beating a path to his door and given the sums involved this is going to be expensive.
Looking at the wider picture ,we have as others pointed out earlier, the issue of jockey flights and other grey area charters.
AOPA should be making a big fuss about this in the press to highlight how cowboy operations are undermining the genuine AOC companies.
The concern is with illegal flights.
Be it to take bird watchers to Scotland or a footballer to Cardiff.
The 3 1/2-year sentence for Robert Murgatroyd is encouraging but will it deter the ‘chancer’ when they know that their illegal flight will not be discovered unless/until they have an accident ?
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 55N
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can we stop perpetuating the concept of ‘grey area’ charters.
The concern is with illegal flights.
Be it to take bird watchers to Scotland or a footballer to Cardiff.
The 3 1/2-year sentence for Robert Murgatroyd is encouraging but will it deter the ‘chancer’ when they know that their illegal flight will not be discovered unless/until they have an accident ?
In the Barton sentencing report this point emerged.
Murgatroyd's insurance was void as he held a private pilot's licence and was not allowed to run commercial flights.
So I guess the insurers would refuse to pay for the airframe loss. No doubt the same applies to the Ibbotson aircraft.
In the Barton sentencing report this point emerged.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-manchester-47589932
So I guess the insurers would refuse to pay for the airframe loss. No doubt the same applies to the Ibbotson aircraft.
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you guys should open a new thread discussing legal, insurance issues and regulatory issues .
As far as Aviation professionals are concerned this is a clear case of a pilot having accepted to do a flight for which he was unqualified. Period. The rest is for the lawyers..and whether it was private or commercial ops is for the judge to determine in the end..
Can we prevent this from happening again . No. There are always 1% of people that want to bend the rules. Tightening the rules will not change that , just affect the 99% of us that do follow the rules...
As far as Aviation professionals are concerned this is a clear case of a pilot having accepted to do a flight for which he was unqualified. Period. The rest is for the lawyers..and whether it was private or commercial ops is for the judge to determine in the end..
Can we prevent this from happening again . No. There are always 1% of people that want to bend the rules. Tightening the rules will not change that , just affect the 99% of us that do follow the rules...
ATCwatcher, why should someone else do it? nothing stopping you starting any thread you think should be started, crack on. The legal/insurance/licensing issues etc are key elements to this thread, and undoubtedly will remain being discussed here whilst of interest to contributors.