Cardiff City Footballer Feared Missing after aircraft disappeared near Channel Island
That said there can be no doubt that risks to a ferry are increased just by the facts that (1) the pilot is likely to be unfamiliar with the aircraft (2) the ATC and Met environments are likely to be either less responsive or simply non-existent en-route than in the UK and (3) the terrain is likely to offer no escape over a large part of many routes in the event of a failure that could be managed in the UK. Each of those “likely” considerations could be (rather sketchily) quantified so that, while an ordinary GA flight might offer say 1-in-10000 mortal risk to GBS’s airline captain, a trans-Atlantic ferry flight might offer him an historic risk of perhaps 1-in-200 – both ratios being shamelessly plucked from the sky. A Cessna 152 engine failure is intrinsically survivable – but not in mid-Atlantic.
QED
Where GBS's good sense runs out is assuming one can transfer this level of risk acceptance to their airline flying which is of course a wild and unsupportable assumption - and not one that I made any allusion to whatsoever.
Hi M, wrong way round - airline flying assists in the decision making on ferry flying - who would do it the other way round and where did I say that? Many of us have been doing this for forty years i.e. airlines and ferry - not sure I follow the logic on previous posts - I have a few colleagues with air to air combat time (old school) and kills and also some who have attacked heavily defended airfields ultra low level at night with cluster bombs - they are also first class airline pilots ! rgds
Last edited by Good Business Sense; 12th Apr 2019 at 16:19.
It is also possible (probable?) that airline, ferry and military pilots having analysed and accepted the higher risk of their 'mission', will use their skills to then reduce those risks as much as possible (not accept them blind 'it'll be alright on the night').
A professional ferry pilot is no more a risk taker than any other professional aviator. In saying that, yes they are exposed to more inherent risk than other areas of aviation, flying a FAR 23 aircraft exposes you to more risk than a FAR 25, because certification standards differ, performance capability in a multi with one engine out for example. A professional crop duster is no more a risk taker than a professional helicopter SAR crew, or what a Concorde crew were. Each of them are aware of the risks inherent in their chosen vocation and willingly accept them with due diligence applied in negating said risk the best way they can. That's what a professional does. An RPT pilot is just as much a risk taker and chancer, if you want to use that derogatory phrase, as any other, two MAX crashes bear that out, along with Concorde.
At one point in my life I spent 2,000 hours flying single engine over water far from land carrying passengers in a commercial operation, so even the regulators are risk takers and chancers by your definition.
For an insight into a professional ferry pilot read "Ocean Flying" by Louise Sacchi.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louise_Sacchi
At one point in my life I spent 2,000 hours flying single engine over water far from land carrying passengers in a commercial operation, so even the regulators are risk takers and chancers by your definition.
For an insight into a professional ferry pilot read "Ocean Flying" by Louise Sacchi.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louise_Sacchi
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 419 Likes
on
221 Posts
Surely a professional (in the sense of doing the job for a living = paid) ferry pilot should also hold a CPL?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When you have the likes of small UK operators not touching people with under 300 hours to fly single crew survey work etc, yet Ryanair will take you with a little over 200hrs, that goes some way to demonstrate how lacking our CPL standards and training really are - for single pilot operation. There are few people I would trust with say flying a family member across the UK in something like a PA28, and would be more inclined to have an experienced PPL whos been at it years take them, than some idiot who trained in Poland/Sweden on the cheap with all the bells and whistles and ticks in boxes who can't fly for toffee. Just my 2p worth as someone who's done a fair bit of single engine flying for private owners, given plenty of instruction, and am now working at a small UK regional.
S
Evidently our hero Mr Ibbotson seems to have struggled on this occasion, but that's not the point I'm making.
There are few people I would trust with say flying a family member across the UK in something like a PA28, and would be more inclined to have an experienced PPL whos been at it years take them, than some idiot who trained in Poland/Sweden on the cheap with all the bells and whistles and ticks in boxes who can't fly for toffee.
We see relatively few accidents where the main causal factors are professional commercially qualified low hours aircrew making poor choices. However when you look at 'high' houred PPL accidents where poor decision making has been a significant factor in the event, theres more than enough examples, the one involving N264DB comes to mind.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure of what point you're making, Ibbotson N264DBs pilot on this flight never had a CPL or even an instrument rating. He meets your family member chauffeur 'safer' criteria of being a several thousand hour PPL though. So from your posting above a PPL pilot who flies under conditions they're not trained or qualified for, is safer to fly your family than a low time CPL holder trained from early hours to adhere to SOP's, weather, ATC airspace requirements etc etc.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Stockport MAN/EGCC
Age: 70
Posts: 991
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I have found all the info I was looking for on Dave Henderson and he is without doubt a very experienced long distance ferry pilot.
He has flown from the UK to Japan and similar ferry’s and there must be some sort of error on the FAA database which is why I could not find him.
I have no doubt that if he had flown Sala that night the tragedy would not have occurred.
He has flown from the UK to Japan and similar ferry’s and there must be some sort of error on the FAA database which is why I could not find him.
I have no doubt that if he had flown Sala that night the tragedy would not have occurred.
Thanks
David
and there must be some sort of error on the FAA database which is why I could not find him.
In this grubby business nothing would surprise me.
Why has Henderson disappeared from view? It seem it's more than he's just choosing not to say owt, rather he's gone to ground. Why?
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why has Henderson disappeared from view? It seem it's more than he's just choosing not to say owt, rather he's gone to ground. Why?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn’t mention anything to do with poor flying conditions or flying outside their licence privileges. Merely, in the case of ferry flying, paradropping, aerial survey etc there are probably much more capable PPLs for the job than CPLs. Not in every case, but my point is that a CPL isn’t the be all and end all of piloting skills for certain roles - putting aside the legal aspects.
Last edited by S-Works; 15th Apr 2019 at 21:21.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: York
Age: 68
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capability or shall we say pure ability is not everything. CPL training helps people form better decision making processes. Generally its PPLs who think they are superior that think a CPL is not needed to do Commercial flying tasks and are usually the same people who will complain that the exams and the training are too much hard work/overkill/waste of time etc.......
I would suggest that ones career and training, whether it be in Aviation or not steers us into good and not so good decisions.
Making a PPL/CPL a director of a company involved in renting Aircraft, so that he can rent on shared costs, then get profits from the Company is also legal. So PPL rents aircraft from Company at £350 an hour. Cost shares and pays £10 an hour towards flying with the passengers on a shared basis. Flies 2 hrs. £700 to Company. Pilot as director gets £220, £200 profit for a PPL.
Is this more or less correct?
If so, is it it "right"
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope, none of it is right. The FAA "common purpose" rules are the way to go and banning outfits like Wingly as well.
I understand now that they have now identified the real owner of the aircraft which is going to damn one individual.......
I understand now that they have now identified the real owner of the aircraft which is going to damn one individual.......
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: York
Age: 68
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree It's not right, but if the CAA make an AOC so bloody difficult and expensive, what do we expect?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 76
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If something is not affordable and it would involve breaking the law to obtain it then one must not obtain it. Take for example being offered one of these latest highly sought after mobile phones. If you are offered one at your regular watering hole really cheap and it turns out to have been knocked-off, could you be accused of being a receiver. Perhaps not the same thing will apply to flying services, but for sure you would know that it is cheap and any sense and reason should raise some doubts in your mind whether it is dodgy or not. If you are offered cheap fags, will you not suspect that they may have been smuggled.
Turning onto the matter of AOC`s being difficult and expensive to obtain, does that not show that it is for the sake of safety that it is. Should these legit operators who provide such services cut corners,cheat, fiddle, employ PPL`s, not carry out maintenance, fit bogus parts and do anything and everything to reduce costs to such levels so as to compete with rogues and put them out of their illegal businesses once and for all.
So, no I don`t go along that the root cause for unlawful acts is cost. That the blame may be laid on prohibitive cost of goods and services. If that would be sufficient to say excuse a thief, a cheat, a fraudster, then we might as well throw away all our law books and close all our prisons and turn them into housing of which we are in such short supply.
Some say laws are made to be broken and some do subscribe to that. But those who make a lifetime habit of it invariably do come a cropper sooner or later. Unfortunately in some cases their habit does have an impact on some unfortunates who have innocently been involved in their habits of dodging and diving.
As far as I can understand the whole mess, my conclusion is that it seems the regulatory authorities limited resources have so far been more focused on those who operate legitimate businesses and not enough on the unregulated sectors. I can only hope that this tragic event will be the catalyst for future change.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 76
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The other reason why I have used it is within the context of "risk", which has been a feature of some of the discussion on this particular issue.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 76
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts