Now as the S&R phase is coming to an end.. next steps? Will they scour the sea bed using a survey vessel for the aircraft to enable it’s detection and recover it? Seeing the suggestion of possible illegal operation and aborted start ups. Surely it would be a Govt agency pushing for this to happen to get to the bottom of any aircraft faults and not just the owners insurer or players insurer to work our liability...

So what should SLF look (out) for?
 

Thanks for your answer.

I realise what I wrote was not very clear. I meant that from my perspective, the passenger experience on a Trislander was more like the charter (big or small c, I don't know) flights I've flown on Piper Cherokees or similar, despite it not actually being so similar for the kinds of reason you mention. (Not wishing to decrease Aurigny's professionalism in any way here though, I enjoyed all my flights with them, even when the pilot did not appear sure whether they were coming or going "welcome ladies and gentlemen, we'll be heading over to... um...."!)*.

To summarise my questions again:
1) What are pilots' assessments, regulatory issues aside, of carrying paying passengers in a single-engined piston aircraft over water, especially around the Channel Islands (not a huge distance to land, but it might well be covered in fog and the waters there are not friendly even on a calm day)? Of course "zero risk does not exist" as we say in France but from what I've read above, the gap between the actual risks and how they are perceived by users, including for VIP transport commissionned by (must be careful here re: confidentiality) let us say a reputable client, seems rather alarmingly huge.
2) Looking at the regulatory side, what should one be looking for as minimum requirements in terms of pilot's license, rating, and business arrangements to ensure that other things being equal passengers would be 'normally' insured for the trip?
3) Apologies for my continued ignorance, but what is the subtelty surrounding N-registered aircraft, as opposed to G-registered aircraft flying in this airspace? Based on my experiences related above, I'd rate the N-registered flight more 'professionally' executed with regard to safety and procedures, but possibly not strictly speaking legitimate in terms of appropriate qualifications/cover?

==
*I recall another Aurigny experience. My Guernsey-Jersey-Dinard flight was cancelled due to fog in Jersey (stop snickering) but somebody in Dinard chartered a plane from Aurigny which due to this WX had to come from Guernsey, so they flew me over all on my own on the shuttle flight (the pilot invited me to "spread myself around a bit"). Was this actually legal, regulated, insured...?

As owner/pilot of an N-reg PA46 with FAA IR flying within Europe on a regular basis, I might bring some insights into the discussion
.
To me the two most important questions are:

1) why was he flying at 5000 ft?
The distance between Nantes and Cardiff is around 270nm. Even though the winds were quite strong (>60kts headwind),
I would always choose an altitude between FL160 and FL240. This would allow for a 2h flight and give enough glide distance
in case of an issue. Also at that altitude I would be out of ice completely.

I fear he was aware not to comply with all rules and tried to play it low key:
Flying an N-reg aircraft IFR in Europe across two countries is only legally possible if you hold an FAA IR Licence and maybe
if he holds both French and UK EASA IR. Very unlikely.

Also the flight sounds to me like a commercial job more than a shared cost. You take a football star across the channel at night
during winter for fun? Very unlikely. To my knowledge, you can't operate a single piston IR commercially. Neither EASA nor FAA.

Possible supportive facts could be that
a) the transponder was off or at least no 7700
b) he did not declare an emergency on the radio
c) he did not turn on ELT (you can manually turn it on before impact)

2) what would make a pilot ask to go down from 5000 ft to 2300 ft over water?
There is only one reason coming to my mind: Ice. In case of engine or electrical failure, you are not asking for lower level, but vectors to nearest field (ie. Guernsey).
The PA 46 is equipped with a variety of deice systems, but you need to be very proficient to use theme properly. Especially following systems are critical, assuming that pitot/stall heat are working
a) Alternate Air: If you forget to open alternate air, the filter clogs and the manifold pressure drops => low power
b) Prop deice: If you forget to turn it on or it is not working properly, the aircraft will start to shake like hell => low power, less control
c) Wing deice: If you forget to turn it on, or at the right time or not working properly, the aircraft will become heavy quickly and the controls bad => less control

In any of theses cases, if the autopilot is still on, it might stall and/or disconnect at the worst possible moment => loss of control
But even the autopilot is off, you will need good stick/rudder, IFR proficiency and luck to come out of this...

I get really fed up reading about so called Grey Charters. There are either legal Charters run by companies with a valid Air Operating Certificate or illegal Charters. Using the word Grey might perhaps give them some validity. This is a very tragic situation and when the authorities come to their conclusions, all in the industry should be working to ensure that it never happens again.

I humbly beg to differ. Painful as it may be, apart from cavalier attitudes to keeping their ratings current (they weren't), the main issues in both the the Colin McCrae and Graham Hill incidents were two pilots who had higher opinions of their skills than they, in truth, had. This caused their deaths and those of eight innocent members of the public flying with them.

The ignorance or imprudence of an overconfident pilot is, more often than not, the first step into the incident pit.

PA 46 has two vacuum pumps. They do inflate the boots and provide pressurized cabin. On pre-glass models vacuum also drives instruments, like gyro and turn coordinator.

Yes. Your carrier sold you a ticket from Guernsey to Dinard and he flew you from Guernsey to Dinard. That your flight did not do an intermediate stop at Jersey and the fact that you did have the plane all to yourself does not make it illegal...

IIRC the boots are vacuum driven; the PA46 has twin Vac Pumps for redundancy.

Interestingly a quick internet search threw up this MSB and related link:

http://www.tcmlink.com/pdf2/M90-10.pdf

https://meadaircraft.wordpress.com/2...ump-conundrum/

What FAA database are you guys referring to ? Cant find any mention of the pilots name in the FAA airman databsae and would be surprised if hes already been deleted by the FAA ? Cant find anyone I know with an FAA licence on it either ?

Proper operation with an AOC, two professional pilots, Multi engine aircraft. MINIMUM

5,000 ft?
 

What I don't understand is why a pressurised and turbocharged aircraft was flying IFR into weather at 5,000'. It could and should have been at FL150 or more. Given the surface temperature and weather conditions, that would have been above the icing.

Not Grey charters
 

So, without naming and shaming, what are all those single-engine aircraft with part-time pilots operating out of Guernsey and Jersey with various paying passengers hopping in and out of the back doing all day and why? Do regular CI GA pilots agree with the above assessment?

As always, it depends. There's SLF and SLF. Jockey's for instance accept SEPs to get into race courses and tourists accept them for Island hopping in warmer climes. A proper turbine engine single also has a place for certain commuting operations but for the flight that this thread refers to, for a straight-forward SLF not involved in an aviation activity, I'd agree.

If you want scheduled airline safety standards, that.

Single pilot increases the risk. Single engine increases the risk. Flying single engine at night increases the risk a bit more still (though I'm not convinced SE over land at night is materially safer than over water). All this should be properly explained to any prospective SLF.

But the PA46 was designed for this type of mission, if flown on a sensible flight plan by a properly rated pilot. It's deiced & has just about as much redundancy as you'll get in an SEP. A quick climb to the lower airways, out of the ice, well before the open water segment. A controller keeping watch who knows precisely where you are, and should the worst happen, can coordinate S&R assets without delay.

Forecast icing at the planned cruise level, no go.

Off airways, low level at night over a freezing sea, no way.

Looks like the search has been called off again, according to Sky News at least.

If the pilot only had IR(r) then no class A allowed. That might be the reason?

Search called off according to the JEP https://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2...on-called-off/

Please be careful with the word 'rubbish'. The last EASA safety report says rather different to 'safer' https://www.easa.europa.eu/document-...ty-review-2017. In short, our over-regulated EASA system produces roughly twice the accidents and 1.6 times fatal rate compared to the FAA regulations. I say this does definitely not qualify for a 'more safe' statement.

I think you've got the wrong end of the stick. What Eutychus meant was that specifically in HIS personal experience the flight with the US Aircraft was more professionally executed than the British one (because, if you can recall, the pilot of the British aircraft rushed the departure -one thing you should never do in this game unless ABSOLUTELY necessary).