|
Originally Posted by Good Business Sense
(Post 10370616)
FYI - You can have a piston single on an AOC.
|
Originally Posted by vintage ATCO
(Post 10369839)
Hardly. I was plugged in on Luton Radar that evening when the phone line from Heathrow rang to ask if I was working N6645Y, it had disappeared off radar. We had been in the clear but later went out in fog. The last visibility Hill was given for Elstree was 800m with no instrument let down #gethomeitis. There were three fatal accidents that night.
Hill’s FAA IR had lapsed, so had his UK IMC rating; his UK PPL was still valid. The aeroplane’s US registration had been cancelled three years previously; it was unregistered and stateless. Needless loss of life as will be this case. One of them at Birmingham Airport..all others had diverted to EMA.. 3 killed..Pilot had heart probs and safety pilot was from the club..... |
Maintenance
No one on the thread has mentioned aircraft maintenance. Does anyone know who holds the maintenance records for the accident aircraft? Was the a/c signed off as serviceable before the accident flight? At Gamston, perhaps?
|
Originally Posted by Good Business Sense
(Post 10370616)
FYI - You can have a piston single on an AOC.
|
@Eutychus,
back to your account of 2 flights in small piston engine to and from Jersey : you can only consider that you are transported by professional people if the aircraft operator holds an AOC. The list of AOC holders in Jersey and Guernsey is here (page 32) : https://cidca.aero/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=115363&p=0 Under some conditions, air taxi UK AOC holders can also operate from the Channel Islands. The list is here: https://www.caa.co.uk/Commercial-ind...-Certificates/ Until recently (and but for a handful exceptions), air transport in IMC could only be performed with twin engine aircrafts. See, for instance, the Beechcraft BE-90 for low profile operation, Since 1 March 2017, EASA has issued a regulation that authorises IMC operation with single engine turbine aircraft (example: Cessna Caravan, Socata TBM, Pilatus PC12). So you could come across AOC holders operating single engine turbine aircraft. |
Originally Posted by captainspeaking
(Post 10370633)
No one on the thread has mentioned aircraft maintenance. Does anyone know who holds the maintenance records for the accident aircraft? Was the a/c signed off as serviceable before the accident flight? At Gamston, perhaps?
Originally Posted by ChickenHouse
(Post 10370635)
For VFR-Day-only, No IFR, No Night, to be precise.
|
Originally Posted by Slowclimb
(Post 10370625)
But only VFR.
|
Is it known how Sala got to Cardiff for his signing on?
|
Originally Posted by Winniebago
(Post 10370646)
It's patently obvious this N-Registered aircraft was not a Part-135 charter operation
|
Originally Posted by Good Business Sense
(Post 10370616)
FYI - You can have a piston single on an AOC.
You know that AOC with a SEP is restricted to day VFR. |
Originally Posted by ChickenHouse
(Post 10370635)
For VFR-Day-only, No IFR, No Night, to be precise.
|
Originally Posted by ChickenHouse
(Post 10370635)
For VFR-Day-only, No IFR, No Night, to be precise.
|
Minimum sign off would require an FAA A and P Mechanic sign off.. Higher maintenance such as an Annual would require an FAA I.A. ( inspection Authorisation) or an FAA Certificated Repair station. I would imagine that the log book entries would make interesting reading.
|
Has the actual beneficial owner of the aircraft been verified anywhere? US databases show this Ms Fay Keely at a company called Cool Flourish Ltd, but that hasn't been acknowladged anywhere else so far? Photographs of it in a Gamston hangar, but no verification that this is where it lived most of the time - i.e. it's home base.
|
Originally Posted by Luc Lion
(Post 10370651)
I was writing to Eutychus, which is not a pilot.
You know that AOC with a SEP is restricted to day VFR. The PA46 of the accident at hand was not fit for AOC operation (engine is not a turbine). |
shy torque Thanks, very helpful.
Originally Posted by ChickenHouse
(Post 10370607)
Besides from the 'CPL needed?' part, his FAA PPL license may have been ok for the VFR-Day trip.
Luc Lion thanks again. A similar question about aircraft type. What about SEP in daytime VFR conditions? (Armed with some of the info learned here I have established that the Cherokee I flew on is owned by a company that does not appear to hold an AOC, at least not at the time of posting). (According to the document Luc Lion linked to, " At present the Jersey Aircraft Registry does not permit commercial air transport or aerial work" (!) so AOCs have to be obtained from the UK or... Guernsey!!). [cross-post] |
@Eutychus,
PPL means that the pilot may not earn money for the flight and that he may not fly in the context of a commercial operation (ie: the service, transport or aerial work, may not be sold). Of course there are some exceptions, but they don't play a role here. A CPL (commercial pilot) may be paid and hired for a commercial operation. SEP = single engine piston SET = single engine turbine (turbopropellor or jet) MEP = multi-engines piston VFR = visual flight rules (only flights in visual meteorological conditions, day or night, are approved. A special qualification is required for night-VFR) IFR = instrument flight rule (flight in day or night visual meteorological conditions or in instrument meteorological conditions. An instrument rating IR qualification is required) IMC = instrument meteorological conditions (you can't see outside or the outside references are below some minima) For AOC in Jersey/Guernsey, the 2 islands have a common aeronautical administration. They happen to have put all AOC on the Guernsey registry. For your account of your 2 flights to and from Jersey, there are only 3 "legal" possibilities: - your business relation rented 2 charters flights from an official air-taxi company (AOC holder). The chance that such a company operates a single piston engine aircraft are very close to zero. - your business relation organised a private flight by renting a small aircraft on a dry lease and hiring a commercial pilot separately. - the pilot was your business relation, his associate or one of his close friend and this pilot organised the flight by himself. In the third case, before the flight, the pilot could have asked you if you agree to share the direct cost of the flight. In the second case, your business relation is not allowed to ask you to pay anything. I am afraid that anything else (and matching your account) is illegal. |
@Eutychus: I am very sorry for not formulating precise enough!
AFAIK, IF paying customer THEN CPL mandatory IF NOT CPL THEN no remuneration What I meant was, if this was not a paying customer, a FAA validation on a day-only CAA FCL PPL may be ok for a day-VFR flight. Typical, I take a friend A-B. |
Just bringing this point up in relation to the low cruising altitude question. When asked why this flight didn't show on the usual tracking sites, FR24 replied the the transponder was either not working or "old" equipment. I take this to mean it was Mode C and thus not eligible to enter the airways system in Europe as a Mode S transponder is mandated. Having recently replaced my old Mode C unit with a new Class 1 Mode S device (at under £2000) I wonder why this upgrade had not be auctioned in this case? |
Thanks for taking the time, Luc Lion, I think I have it now :)
In the various cases my client flew me and one other person and I personally never saw any paperwork. But I think you're right, it probably wasn't legal, as I understand it now because a) no AOC b) probably no CPL c) I am virtually certain money changed hands against a receipt. I am given to understand that my client proceeded on the basis of seeing a pilot's licence and an (unspecified) insurance certificate. What's really getting through to me here is that unless a client is really really clued up to the point of having either specialist advice or knowing a lot about general aviation themselves, it's really really easy for a pilot to give the impression of providing a legal and (reasonably) safe service when one may not be getting either. |
Originally Posted by ETOPS
(Post 10370710)
Just bringing this point up in relation to the low cruising altitude question. When asked why this flight didn't show on the usual tracking sites, FR24 replied the the transponder was either not working or "old" equipment. I take this to mean it was Mode C and thus not eligible to enter the airways system in Europe as a Mode S transponder is mandated. Having recently replaced my old Mode C unit with a new Class 1 Mode S device (at under £2000) I wonder why this upgrade had not be auctioned in this case? Nothing to say it didn't get an upgrade between then and now. ELT circled in red from earlier post. https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....eb07c9499a.jpg |
Originally Posted by ETOPS
(Post 10370710)
Just bringing this point up in relation to the low cruising altitude question. When asked why this flight didn't show on the usual tracking sites, FR24 replied the the transponder was either not working or "old" equipment. I take this to mean it was Mode C and thus not eligible to enter the airways system in Europe as a Mode S transponder is mandated. Having recently replaced my old Mode C unit with a new Class 1 Mode S device (at under £2000) I wonder why this upgrade had not be auctioned in this case? |
Really nothing much to do with N- registration or Commercial or EU legislation . Everyone of us could have been caught in this |
It sounds like problems with serviceability caused ongoing delays in the departure time (three previous attempts to take off have been mentioned).
It's possible that one pilot, having previously been involved (and therefore being recorded as having cleared security) declined to depart by night. |
Originally Posted by Eutychus
(Post 10370721)
Thanks for taking the time, Luc Lion, I think I have it now :)
What's really getting through to me here is that unless a client is really really clued up to the point of having either specialist advice or knowing a lot about general aviation themselves, it's really really easy for a pilot to give the impression of providing a legal and (reasonably) safe service when one may not be getting either. And then you get organisations like Wingly where 100 hour PPL's can advertise to take you flying on what are effectively A to A Commercial flights (sightseeing) without a commercial license, AOC or any other of the myriad checks and balances those of who provide aviation services as a living are subject too. My Flight Ops Inspector was shamefaced when I asked him how he dare turn up and audit us when the CAA allow Wingly. Cost sharing and the Wingly principal have dropped standards of safety for people in ignorance of the rules. A couple of PPL's sharing a trip know the deal they are entering into, the man in the street be he dustman or premiership footballer have no real chance of knowing the truth. Grant Shapps, MP for Welwyn and Hatfield and owner of a Cirrus SR22 pushed hard for this situation via his "Red Tape Challenge" The red tape (and fees) for AOC's went up and an area of GA became the wild west. Well done Grant! you c@@t! SND |
Just a comment on the discussion of AOC etc. It reflects the practice in Canada and I suspect it is the same over in the UK, but...
The renting of an aircraft without crew is not considered a commercial air service here. It probably isn't there. So any entity can rent the aircraft, and then has to find a pilot. If the renter is involved in arranging the pilot, then it becomes a grey area. |
Originally Posted by runway30
(Post 10369939)
If, and I don’t know if this is the case here, a pilot is recruited by someone who knows he doesn’t have the correct qualifications but knows he is cheap; is it only the pilot who is at fault or the person offering the money as well? If, and I don’t know if this the case here, an aircraft owner doesn’t enquire what their aircraft is going to be used for and doesn’t care about the qualifications of the pilot; is it only the pilot who is at fault or the aircraft owner as well? |
Grant Shapps, MP for Welwyn and Hatfield and owner of a Cirrus SR22 pushed hard for this situation via his "Red Tape Challenge" The red tape (and fees) for AOC's went up and an area of GA became the wild west. Well done Grant! you c@@t! |
Originally Posted by five zero by ortac
(Post 10370299)
Unfortunately, you don't have to look to hard on Facebook to find PPL holders with aircraft offering to 'fly you anywhere'. My local area residents FB page has three pilots regularly posting (advertising) to fly you, none of which are locally based.
|
Originally Posted by sellbydate
(Post 10370669)
Has the actual beneficial owner of the aircraft been verified anywhere? US databases show this Ms Fay Keely at a company called Cool Flourish Ltd, but that hasn't been acknowladged anywhere else so far?
Cool Flourish has its registered address in Matlock. Fay Keely is company secretary and a director. Her address is given as being in Alfreton, which is 8 miles from Matlock. On the website of Baker Consultants (based in Matlock) a Fay Keely is listed as part-time Finance Director. Her bio includes “I have a private pilots licence and have flown over the east coast of the UK seal watching”. As I say, for what it’s worth, but it's a small piece in the jigsaw... |
Originally Posted by rotorspeed
(Post 10370352)
This flight was patently so stupid with so many blindingly obvious high risk factors - old plane, single engine, piston engine, night, winter, fairly poor weather, across extensive water, virtually unsurvivably cold water, poorly qualified pilot, inadequately competent pilot, single pilot. And no doubt more.
|
Originally Posted by Wycombe
(Post 10370761)
The aforementioned Rt Hon Mr Shapps is also of course the Chairman of The All-Party Parliamentary Group on General Aviation (APPG-GA)!
Admittedly this aircraft comes/came under US jurisdiction, as did the license of the pilot, and a whole lot of questions need to be answered about what went on. But, cost sharing was based around friends flying together. Not commercial advertising for trips to the South of France, where the actual costs to the "cost sharer" are roughly the same as the cost of the whole trip, and such flights are advertised on the Wingly website today. And the French very sensibly banned Wingly flights at the outset, although I don't know the legal status of such flights in France now. I challenge Mr Shapps to come on to PPRUNE and justify what I see as a gross reduction in the safety of the trailing public. If he reads my posts he'll know exactly who I am, I asked for such justification face to face in the past. SND |
Speculation is one thing but personally, I feel this thread is getting a bit free and easy with some peoples names who have not been mentioned in the investigation or indeed in the press.
|
Originally Posted by Sir Niall Dementia
(Post 10370754)
\
And then you get organisations like Wingly where 100 hour PPL's can advertise to take you flying on what are effectively A to A Commercial flights (sightseeing) without a commercial license, AOC or any other of the myriad checks and balances those of who provide aviation services as a living are subject too. My Flight Ops Inspector was shamefaced when I asked him how he dare turn up and audit us when the CAA allow Wingly. Cost sharing and the Wingly principal have dropped standards of safety for people in ignorance of the rules. A couple of PPL's sharing a trip know the deal they are entering into, the man in the street be he dustman or premiership footballer have no real chance of knowing the truth. Grant Shapps, MP for Welwyn and Hatfield and owner of a Cirrus SR22 pushed hard for this situation via his "Red Tape Challenge" The red tape (and fees) for AOC's went up and an area of GA became the wild west. Well done Grant! you c@@t! SND Wingly has given further cover to the illegal charter mob many of whom fly N REG machines. There is no oversight anywhere. "Cost sharing" is now a new cottage industry (wingly, flyer on the pub notice board, Facebook etc) and it is sending a message that the next step up or down, i.e. "illegal charter", if you prefer, is ok - nobody is going to bother you. If you look at the Wingly website some of the prices on there are certainly money makers - I understand 6 seaters are selling well. Unfortunately, AOCs are disappearing extremely fast - companies cannot complete with 100 hour PPLs who have to meet almost no regulatory requirements - when the next recession comes around and there are no airline jobs then there will be no levels below to fall back on. In addition, going forward, as we appear to be leaving EASA British licensed pilots will be as rare as ....... insert as required. The regulator (joke), as they like to be known, has been well informed. |
Originally Posted by what next
(Post 10370517)
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 |
Sir Niall! Well said. I had had never heard of Wingly until this thread and was frankly amazed by it. Wild West indeed. As you say, the fine tooth comb rightly applied to any commercial operation for the safety of the public is totally circumvented by this lunacy. A few few questions I haven’t seen answered are whether Sala was flown in the same aircraft to Nantes after signing on Saturday? If so did he have two pilots? DI and DH? If not how was DH going through security with them on Monday (if he did). Did he sensibly decline the mission only for DI to heroically ‘save the day’ by setting off on his own? how old is DI? As a PPL of course it’s academic. But if a CPL the difference between 59 and 60 is crucial as he couldn’t operate commercially as a single pilot at 60. I’d reckon that DI amassed the vast majority of whatever hours he had day VFR. He was totally out of his depth at night and in bad weather and icing conditions. His admitted ‘bit rusty’ comes nowhere near it! More questions than answers. And those with the answers are keeping shtum. Probably with legal advice to. |
DH claims he hasn't been to Nantes for a year. The French authorities swear that a Flightplan was opened in his name and that his ID was used in the airport.
Perhaps all of the above is true, but then why was DI using DH's identity? And why did he then change his mind once the flight was delayed until evening? |
Originally Posted by Arkroyal
(Post 10370790)
how old is DI? As a PPL of course it’s academic. But if a CPL the difference between 59 and 60 is crucial as he couldn’t operate commercially as a single pilot at 60. Well we know he was a plumber and gas repairer. A check of his plumbing business (if I have the right one!) gives the Gas Safe register number as 195505 Check the Gas safe register gives his full initials as David A Ibbotson Its also gives his full contact and address details which I shall not repeat on here but it matches the address given in the media generally. I then check the UK's freebmd births marriage,deaths index to get his birth and that comes up in the search range of 1958 to 1960 with only one David A Ibbotson born in the UK and that entry is for the December quarter of 1959 in Cleethorpes meaning he was born in Oct, Nov or Dec of 1959. The indexes at that time only gave the date to the nearest quarter: - you can't do this thing with common names like John smith as there are too many of them to differentiate the right one each quarter. So there is most likely your answer.... |
Originally Posted by dsc810
(Post 10370810)
Well we know he was a plumber and gas repairer.
So there is most likely your answer.... so he could have a CPL but looks pretty unlikely. |
Originally Posted by ETOPS
(Post 10370710)
Just bringing this point up in relation to the low cruising altitude question. When asked why this flight didn't show on the usual tracking sites, FR24 replied the the transponder was either not working or "old" equipment. I take this to mean it was Mode C and thus not eligible to enter the airways system in Europe as a Mode S transponder is mandated. Having recently replaced my old Mode C unit with a new Class 1 Mode S device (at under £2000) I wonder why this upgrade had not be auctioned in this case? |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 21:57. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.