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?