We know that the pilot was Dave Ibbotson and it is reported he has a PPL and more than likely should not have been flying the footballer.RIP. The Pilot that appeared in the BBC video 'My life as a ferry pilot' and shows the a/c N264DB is David Henderson who was passport checked to also fly th plane back to Cardiff. Why did he not get on the plane ?

Passenger perspective
 

Every passenger places their trust in the pilots and the the machinery as a necessary part of flying. However, many passengers are frequent flyers or have pilot experience. Rational concerns and doubts should not be disregarded by pilots or passengers. I frequently fly as a passenger in small aircraft (several times a week). I avoid flying in marginal conditions and tend to check the weather particularly when flying with family. Probably I am overly cautious and do not represent the majority of the flying public.

As an example, I chose to take a short 20 min flight under marginal conditions because I had doctor's appointment. As it turned out, the flight took 1hr and 20mins because there was severe weather over all available airports and I missed my appointment anyway. There were no alternates within range and the only other option was to ditch. In hindsight I would not have taken the flight. The only choice was to land in dangerous conditions without much fuel left. I wanted to make my doctor's appointment and the pilots wanted to make their schedule. In hindsight I think that we would have all waited until the thunderstorm activity had subsided. It was an unnecessary risk.

I definitely would have not allowed my family to have flown on that flight. Luck was on our side that day, but the risk could have been avoided by ignoring the urges to fly. We must recognize that the urges to get to were you are going sometimes cloud judgment. I suspect that it may be possible to improve regulations to avoid some of those risks and make the decision not to fly more objective. Inevitably the flight crew has the greatest responsibility to avoid unnecessary risks.

It seems that the choice to fly Sala was questionable at the very best. No doubt there will be many factors taken into consideration in the investigation.

From the X-Files
 

Emiliano Sala search called off for the day as authorities find no trace of missing plane. The search began in the English Channel around the island on Tuesday and went on for two days before getting called off on Thursday. Guernsey Police tweeted: "After an intensive search using multiple aircraft and one lifeboat over the last nine hours, we have found no trace of the missing plane."
The aircraft, passenger and crew are therefore missing until physical evidence emerges to otherwise determine their exact whereabouts. Whilst the known facts, weather conditions, aircraft type, passenger, pilot etc. have been debated across this thread, there are historic references to unexplained sightings of 'unidentified flying objects' in the Channel Islands area filed by commercial pilots, in particular in and around the last known position of N264DB before vanishing from Jersey radar. If you're interested in reading the reports etc. (which appear to be credible) search Wikipedia 'Alderney UFO sighting'.

A lot of moving parts but which bit is causing people to throw their arms up in horror? Yes you can pick a route through the regulations about the complex nature [with reference to rating] of the aircraft, its N registration, the PPL and cost sharing flights. Yet that seems more effect than cause of the accident.
Many sat in the peanut gallery have been waiting for the potential to say "I told you so" about this type of flight yet very recently the CAA clarified amongst other things that advertising the availability of such flights were not a problem. So I say again whilst we may discuss many points the revenue streams seem a moot point as far as it relates to the aircraft ending in the sea.
As to awareness one might struggle to understand how anyone might think that arranging ones international travel via a facebook page without any other due diligence [making a huge assumption that this is what happened here] then I think you get what you pay for, or perhaps not in this case. For other premiership football players I would highlight that companies such as NetJets exist for your private flying needs.

If he was "not there" (i.e. not in France) he was not close to boarding.

Spot on. as a non-pilot I would get in a non-airline plane assuming that the pilot was suitably qualified, and that the pilot also didn't want to die and thus wouldn't take unecessary risks either.
I bet Sala was simply a 'pawn' in this game - he'll have simply called his agent and said 'can you get me from Cardiff to Nantes and back on these dates' and his agent will have said 'no problem, just turn up at these points at these times with your passport and try not to be too hungover'. Any 'cost' may have come out of the agent's fees, or may have come from Sala direct, or a club expense account, I have no idea. Money may not have changed hands, it may have been favours such as an executive box or tickets for a game.

So, if as highlighted in this thread David Ibbotson, Dave Henderson and possisbly another pilot regularly flew this private, N-Reg, single-piston engined aircraft for McKay to transport footballers from A to B, occassionaly IFR, in EU airspace, one can rationally assume that payment was involved between the parties for services rendered. There's no great 'footballer air transport service charity' anyone's aware of here. In multiple respects this is simply illegal. Which authorities though follow up with prosecutions/investigations and who takes the lead? The US FAA, the UK CAA, the French DGAC, the Channel Islands and/or UK Police, the French Police? Several interested insurance companies and or their legal representatives. Who takes the lead? How does responsibility rest between the actual/beneficial owner of the aircraft (not the owner trustee), the possible lessee/lessor relationship, the pilots, any middleman (quasi-broker) offering access to the aircraft, the guy that 'booked' it and paid for it?

Lots and lots of lessons will be learnt and a lot of that won't be new. But who is in charge?

If it'sa anything like shipping, it's the country of registry that makes the investigation (or often delegates it to an authority in the area). Of course, it may be that countries where the plane took off will have some laws&regulations, as will countries with airspace it's flown through.

What investigation took place about the twin crashing on route to Chalgrove?

Thermal IR typically detects around 10 micron wavelength, in the atmospheric absorption window, and shows up "hot" objects. There are other IR bands/wavelengths. E.g. near IR that is adjacent to visible wavelengths and might be part of what is detected by low light image intensifiers. So for practical purposes, I'd say you're right and it's a tautology. If you're taking a wider tech. view, not so much.

Remember, this is soccer business? We will see an accident report and possible description. Anything further happening is very unlikely due to the 'networking' effect.

Aggh, I thought I was just getting a handle on all this... which part of this is "simpy illegal"?

Improper certification for an N-reg aicraft?
No AOC?
No CPL?
IFR as opposed to VFR?
Payment for services rendered?
EU airspace?
...?

It's understanding how this matrix fits together to constitute something dodgy that us poor trusting users need more clarity on.

Aside from "at night/bad weather/single-engine over water/poor cruise altitude decision" issues.

Err that is exactly my point.

yet on another day in another place the investigation didn't seem to care less why an aircraft was grubbing around in such obviously poor weather to collect another pilot to take him to another airfield to collect another aircraft. I'm sure when asked the other pilot, possibly a little more savvy simply suggested they were the firmest of mates and it was a favour, etc, etc, etc. BUT perhaps he was a mate and it was a favour and the payback was something other than money, maybe it was to enrich the soul? Yet put a premiership footballer in the mix and everyone is at it!

This was the subject of an AAIB Field Investigation.

https://assets.publishing.service.go...ATMT_10-17.pdf

Basically descent below MSA in IMC whilst not following a published approach procedure.

Hello!

Many of the answers we don't know yet, therefore much is based on assumption (e.g. from watching others perform similar flights) and "half-information" from the internet and newspapers.

1. We don't know anything for sure about that.

2. Obviously not. Any type of commercial flying would therefore have been illegal. Even with an (American) AOC, a commercial flight between European countries carrying European passengers would have required a heap of paperwork ("cabotage").
And even with an AOC, this kind of aircraft (single engine piston) would only have been allowed to do flights under visual flight rules (VFR). And even a single engine turbine (SET) aircraft operating legally under an AOC and carrying passengers would have had to observe minimum distances from alternate enroute airfields (to enable an engine-out gliding landing) which at their intended cruising altitude of 5000ft over the sea would not have been met. (This is a Europen regulation for SET commercial operation.)

3. If he was paid in any way for his flying he would have needed a CPL. But we do not know if he received imuneration. If he flew out of courtesy for his buddy who himself borrowed the plane to his soccer player buddy for gas money only then he would not have needed a CPL.

4. On a private flight it would not have mattered as long as the pilot and the aircraft hold the necessary qualification. Commercially it would not have been possible to do this under IFR (see point 2).

5. We don't know yet. But any penny changing hands that exceeds cost sharing would have made the whole thing illegal.

6. EU airspace has nothing do do with it I think.

Regards
Max

It was rhetorical. My apologies but the point was someone posted that an investigation will get to the bottom of the purpose of the flight and who was paying. In the past other PPL's have crashed as you suggest and there was no mention of who was paying or any highlight in the report that it was even something to investigate. So why should it happen here? One assumes you could give a premiership player a lift just as one might give a fellow pilot from a well known aviation supplier a lift? No?

and how much is that exactly in real GBP or EUR? Lets be realistic. Lets assume you wanted to be super illegal and as a pilot charge what? 400GBP a day for your efforts? Do you think that it would be very difficult to hide 400GBP under the context of "costs" when we are talking about a PA46? The average club snot box PA28 can vary in 60 or 70 quid per hour up and down the country. So a PA46, over several hours and overnight hangarage at a non-home airfield etc etc etc. Its not even a challenge.

Of course I agree 100% so why do we suggest anything nefarious was afoot this week?

You are right. But we were talking about legality only. And if people find clever ways to hide the money they pay to their unqualified pilots the whole thing remains illegal.
In the accident investigation these issues are not really important. But - apart from the tragic loss of life - someone lost 15M currency units in this accident. Therefore they will drag anyone to court who offeres them even the remotest chance of recovering their financial loss. And if they suspect someone to have offered (or paid) a PPL holder money to conduct the flight than this someone better looks for a real good lawyer.

Lots of suppositions and assumptions looking for someone to blame while the truth is most probably much more simple :

Try this : An agent that want to please and impress his client ( I can get you a private aircraft to get to Cardiff, forget commercial via or CDG or AMS ) , a young guy that is impressed by it , (and frankly would anyone refuse this ? ) A friend that know a friend that has a Malibu and can do this cheaply ( or even for free ) a Malibu ? for 99% of people a Malibu is a very sleek turbine private a/c , who had heard of a piston Malibu before ? The owner of the aircraft calling one of his friends always eager to fly , saying , Mr X ( who normally flies the plane ) cannot today you want to fly to Nantes and back with it to get someone important ? Who will say no ?
You arrive there , the weather is not to your liking but the kid and his agent are pushing to get there as he has first training with this new club and full media coverage the next morning . So he is pushed in a corner he does not like but not in a position to really say no .
During the flight something happens not planned that he did not encounter before , electric, icing , engine , whatever, everything gets aligned , and bingo!.

Really nothing much to do with N- registration or Commercial or EU legislation . Everyone of us could have been caught in this . and the more I think about it , me included . The only thing that differentiate us all in this situation is our power to say no. The rest is just bar discussions with Mr hindsight.

Same pilot, same aircraft previous incident August 2011- from the AAIB report,

Reporting of the accident
A third party notified the AAIB of the accident in February 2012. The pilot did not consider that the damage to the aircraft constituted a reportable occurrence. Accidents and serious incidents that are reportable to the AAIB are defined in the Civil Aviation (Investigation of Air Accidents and Incidents) Regulations 1996, available on the AAIB website.

Carrying three paying passengers from the Channel Islands I understand, broke the wing spar and bent the wing such that it had to be replaced...... eventually this 'grey charter' business sadly seems to have caught up with him. There are quite a few pilots out there quietly chiseling a living out of aviation without the relevant skill set, supervision or qualification, every so often one of them comes unstuck.The AAIB reports can be more telling for what they don't directly say than what they do on occasion.

Enough said other than that there potentially appear to be multiple similarities in profile between the Malibu incident pilot and the pilot of the PA30.

Nobody positions from say Gamston to Nantes, to go to Cardiff to then reposition back to Gamston for 'free'. Based on all indications so far, this was an illegal charter. Proving who paid what to whom for what is for the police, the lawyers and insurance companies inolved. It is horrendously messy.

To try and summarise so far...

What most likely happened to the Piper is that it iced up. At 5,000 ft, in a front with 7 C on the deck, it would have been flying with an OAT of about -5 C, peak icing. A request to descend to 2,300 ft would fit with that.

Under EASA regs single engine single pilot commercial ops at night or IMC are limited to turbines. As this was a SEP Malibu, the flight could not have been legal if what was in any sense legal. The pilot didn't have a full IR rating; if had have had one, the flight would have been safely conducted in Class A above FL150, above the icing layer. SEP over water isn't dangerous.

The only ways this flight could have been conducted legally would be if the cost was being shared, in this case 50/50 pilot/passenger, or if the pilot was not being paid at all. I don't think someone with a CCJ against them would have been able to afford the former, but that doesn't preclude the latter. Indeed I wouldn't be surprised if someone hired the Piper from the owner for the cost of the flight (fuel, fees etc), but the pilot was purely volunteering. That he was not qualified to undertake the flight safely (i.e. IFR, high in the airways) but did it anyway is poor airmanship. Yes he could have flown the whole trip below the freezing level, about 3,000 ft, but that would have been... bold.

My friend as you know some words are used out of context by the unknowing. Once as aviators the height of our moral high ground is inversely proportional to the degree we knew Bloggs. It has been the same in all the recent helicopter fatals, the same in the airshow crash which everyone defended as nothing to see until it seems to be in court [which btw is a very sad day for all of us and I wish AH the best of luck]. My point being you can not be a little bit pregnant and it seems very unfair to pan the pilot of this PA46 over commercials when the very practice of "booking" and "arranging" a flight is deemed acceptable by authority via the variety of "flight sharing" apps as you will well know. Unless one books how else do you get a seat?

Make of this what you will. It's the Daily mail, but...
Daily Mail report

This report asserts that three people - Henderson, Ibbotson and Sala - were recorded passing though passport control at Nantes prior to departure of the ill-fated flight though, as we know, Henderson was not on board when it disappeared.

In the same article, he is reported as saying that he had not been to Nantes for at least a year.

Clearly both statements can't be simultaneously true.

Simply, if the pilot holds an FAA CPL (commercial pilot licence) and an FAA IR and if no payment is asked from the footballers, then it is perfectly legal.
It is a private flight paid and organised by the aircraft operator.

If the pilot is FAA PPL (private pilot licence) with an FAA IR, it could still be legal (but on the edge) if the pilot is not paid and if the flight is organised by him and the footballers.
Some participation to the flight cost by the passengers is even possible in this configuration.

If the flight is paid by the passengers, it is illegal in the absence of an AOC (air operator's certificate).
The PA46 of the accident at hand was not fit for AOC operation (engine is not a turbine).
The AOC is held by the aircraft operator.

If the pilot does not hold the proper licence CPL + IR (or PPL + IR) then it is also illegal.

I don't have the complete meteorological picture (see partial info here: https://www.pprune.org/accidents-clo...l)
but it seems that this type of the aircraft was fit to the task, if all de-icing equipment was serviceable.
The pilot could have flown above the weather at flight level 200 (20000 ft) and the de-icing boots and pads could have dealt with light and moderate icing on approach.

The chosen flight profile with a cruising altitude of 5000 ft (even below airway floor) is hard to understand.
I wonder if the pilot was very experienced in IFR flying in winter IMC conditions.

I am reminded of a jet charter into Aspen where the customers turned up late so that the arrival time would be in the dark, when the airport is closed. The HNW customer insisted that they absolutely had to be in Aspen. Unfortunately they hit an unlit hill on approach and missed the event.

Try reading here:
https://www.britishhelicopterassocia...-Transport.pdf

If Daily Mail is right, we are getting closer, but not prettier, to a plausible scenario.
If that 'Dibbo' expected to fly the trip VFR-Day, many up to now known facts would come together.
Besides from the 'CPL needed?' part, his FAA PPL license may have been ok for the VFR-Day trip.
Now the big Q:
From all other rumors, was his competency, license, medical sufficient to do an IFR or IFR-like night flight?

Hi - Of course I'm playing devils advocate and I think we are in total agreement actually but to answer your point I can think of 3 reasons straight away. Maybe he just likes flying? Maybe he wanted to do something - no matter how odd - in that area (a girlfriend/hooker - who knows?) Maybe he is the worlds biggest fan of the footballer in the aircraft?

It remains plausible that this was done for no reward. As a PPL, doing Part TIme dropzone work when any was available **if any was available** (I am aware that a few dropzones had taken on different pilots so I dont know if he was still active..) he could essentially get free hour building time by doing trips such as this.
The fact that he had no IR is clearly a seperate legal issue altgother and in all honesty the dots all seem to line up as a dodgy charter gone horribly wrong.

FYI - You can have a piston single on an AOC.