PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Accidents and Close Calls (https://www.pprune.org/accidents-close-calls-139/)
-   -   Cardiff City Footballer Feared Missing after aircraft disappeared near Channel Island (https://www.pprune.org/accidents-close-calls/617514-cardiff-city-footballer-feared-missing-after-aircraft-disappeared-near-channel-island.html)

mryan75 4th Feb 2019 18:49

Report is that the plane was found intact, which is surprising given what I think is the safe assumption that it hit the water pretty hard. Maybe it was a successful ditching after all? And they just sunk.

From the Beeb:

"They saw the registration number and the biggest surprise is that most of the plane is there - we were expecting to find a debris field," he added. (He being shipwreck hunter David Mearns).

positiverate20 4th Feb 2019 18:52

Weight on his mind
 
Not really sure how anyone could assess this flight to be anything other than 'commercial'. McKay was an agent in a significant commercial transaction where an asset under his control was purchased for £15m. Released emails from McKay to Sala affirm that his relationship was strictly professional- in fact he openly stated that there would be no personal relationship, in his words "just want to make money". As part of the commercial transaction, the asset had to be delivered to it's new facilities. His new employers offered a commercial flight. McKay arranged this alternative transportation. McKay has since said that he 'wished he'd told Sala he couldn't go that weekend'- therefore McKay has admitted to having sufficient control and authority over this asset. McKay had the responsibility of assuring the safe delivery of his asset. McKay did not choose an appropriate commercial operator- he instead selected a cheap alternative with no AOC.

The cheap alternative, working in a very casual and informal way then sub-contracted an even less adequate and less qualified individual. All of which is a bit smoke and mirrors. Dont try to pull the "he wasn't paid card". That's the way they've been trying to portray this since it happened. Dave Ibbotson was made to go out of his way to carry out this delivery. I've seen wingly being discussed as being marginal... but with wingly... generally the pilot is going to a specific location on a specific day anyway and is offering a lift for someone to help with fuel & landing costs etc. This is much different- Dave Ibbotson was sent to Nantes at short notice- significantly out of his way- to bring an asset back. Sala's delivery to Cardiff was due to, and a part of, the larger commercial transaction. Dave Henderson, if he has a trusted and longstanding arrangement with McKay will know that he would be fully compensated for his services- be it cash or other. Ibbotson I'm sure had the same expectation of payment for his services- whether the specific amount had been prior agreed or not. Even if he "owed a favour", it's still a commercial service, just as it would be if Ibbotson DJ'd for Henderson's wedding or serviced his boiler. Just because it may not be invoiced at arms length doesn't preclude it from being a commercial relationship. I'd say if the boiler leaked or caused an explosion or death, Ibbotson would have been brought to book and if at fault possibly prosecuted and lost his accreditation regardless of whether it was 'just a favour' or not.

In legal terms if I were Cardiff/Nantes- I'd be chasing McKay for the £15m. As far as the flight arrangements go, I'd say Henderson has a lot to answer for, in essence operating a commercial service without the appropriate licences and all the checks and balances that go with being a fully certified Air Operator. Again, this young lad was the asset, worth about 5 times the value of the plane when brand new. The only reason for his journey was for commercial purposes. There was no personal connection.

In terms of investigation, I'd imagine it crucial to recover the aircraft and as much evidence as they can find. Ibbotson's phone would be invaluable for the investigations. For example to see text messages and phone calls with Henderson and others during arrangements and on the day itself. Possible attempts to contact during the flight? At under 5,000 ft, signal would be available. We also know the unfortunate situation in which he was placed, he would have been very reluctant to relay problems to ATC fearing it may open up a can of worms, but did he attempt to contact others via his phone when in the air? Phone may also give info from skydemon or other apps.

Also, in terms of investigation, surely one of their initial tests would be the PIC's toxicology? Or even a post mortem to check if there was a sudden medical emergency that incapacitated the PIC? I would suggest that the AAIB investigation team would be very keen to recover the wreckage.

Another factor that I'm not sure has been mentioned, but would anyone think weight and CG might be an issue here? I've read that there were three failed take-off attempts but haven't seen any verification. Remember Sala was moving home, left his dog in kennels, how much did he bring with him for his move- was it everything and the kitchen sink? Significant weight, CG too far aft, with probable icing in IMC at night under the control of a PIC whose PPL stated that he was restricted to only VFR during the day?

MPN11 4th Feb 2019 18:53

So far the media have done ...
Football tragedy
Missing 'plane
'Plane found

Not a whisper yet [apart from here] about 'appropriate operation/licensing'. Is that [hopefully] being done quietly by AAIB?

S-Works 4th Feb 2019 19:42


Originally Posted by mryan75 (Post 10380292)
Report is that the plane was found intact, which is surprising given what I think is the safe assumption that it hit the water pretty hard. Maybe it was a successful ditching after all? And they just sunk.

From the Beeb:

"They saw the registration number and the biggest surprise is that most of the plane is there - we were expecting to find a debris field," he added. (He being shipwreck hunter David Mearns).

And for God's sake, why are so many non-pilots allowed to post such gibberish on here? Unless I got the PP part of PPRUNE wrong.

how do you describe one body inside the aircraft as “successful”?

Gwyn_ap_Nudd 4th Feb 2019 20:43


Originally Posted by mryan75 (Post 10380292)
Report is that the plane was found intact, which is surprising given what I think is the safe assumption that it hit the water pretty hard. Maybe it was a successful ditching after all? And they just sunk.

From the Beeb:

"They saw the registration number and the biggest surprise is that most of the plane is there - we were expecting to find a debris field," he added. (He being shipwreck hunter David Mearns).

They haven't said that the aeroplane is intact, but that most of it appears to be in one place. Wouldn't that suggest that it may have entered the water pretty much vertically which might be consistent with it stalling due to build-up of ice, as has been suggested earlier in this thread?

cncpc 4th Feb 2019 20:52


Originally Posted by Gwyn_ap_Nudd (Post 10380399)
They haven't said that the aeroplane is intact, but that most of it appears to be in one place. Wouldn't that suggest that it may have entered the water pretty much vertically which might be consistent with it stalling due to build-up of ice, as has been suggested earlier in this thread?

It appears that the only door is open.


Originally Posted by S-Works (Post 10379939)
And the tail appears to be nearly torn off...... Your point?

His point is that the aircraft door is open. It's a pressurized aircraft and it takes some force to open that door. Unless someone inside opened it.

What is your point?

Gwyn_ap_Nudd 4th Feb 2019 21:23


Originally Posted by cncpc (Post 10380405)
It appears that the only door is open.



His point is that the aircraft door is open. It's a pressurized aircraft and it takes some force to open that door. Unless someone inside opened it.

What is your point?

Looking at the underwater photograph, the aft fuselage appears to have suffered pretty substantial damage so perhaps it was pressure of the water, maybe at the time of impact, that forced the door open?

Fly-by-Wife 4th Feb 2019 21:23


Originally Posted by cncpc (Post 10380405)
It appears that the only door is open.

It's a pressurized aircraft and it takes some force to open that door.

I would suggest that smashing into the sea would constitute "some force" in this context. You will also note the extensive buckling of the fuselage - if the crash could do that, then it is more than likely it deformed or ruptured the fuselage around the door sufficient to open it, or make it appear open.

FBW


G-CPTN 4th Feb 2019 21:55

Why no MAYDAY?
Even a single pilot would have had a hand free for a call?
Things were obviously not 'OK'.

sycamore 4th Feb 2019 21:58

I would think that the aircraft would be recovered,otherwise it`s position would become an `attraction` for divers of a certain disposition.....

Maoraigh1 4th Feb 2019 22:01

Would lifting the fuselage add much to the cost, having already chartered Geo Ocean III?
Finding all the small bits would probably be expensive.

Good Business Sense 4th Feb 2019 22:46


Originally Posted by positiverate20 (Post 10380294)
I've seen wingly being discussed as being marginal... but with wingly... generally the pilot is going to a specific location on a specific day anyway and is offering a lift for someone to help with fuel & landing costs etc.

....... unfortunately, most are not going there anyway - most are offering any day, any time, any destination, overnights etc etc - "just ask" - to me that's a commercial charter but the UK CAA and EASA don't agree - after the first Wingly crash the courts will decide.

RatherBeFlying 4th Feb 2019 23:16

What the photo shows doesn't resemble the outcome of a successful ditching.

Loss of control from disorientation or icing seem more likely.

ATC Watcher 5th Feb 2019 06:03


Originally Posted by RatherBeFlying (Post 10380501)
What the photo shows doesn't resemble the outcome of a successful ditching.

Loss of control from disorientation or icing seem more likely.

Tend to agree, but on the other hand making a" successful" ditching at night is not something easy to achieve ( judging height ) so it could still have been an attempt to ditch that turned bad .le.g. hitting tail first , or flipping over.

ATC Watcher 5th Feb 2019 06:09


Originally Posted by G-CPTN (Post 10380458)
Why no MAYDAY?
Even a single pilot would have had a hand free for a call?
Things were obviously not 'OK'.

When you find yourself suddenly in the sh*t at 2000ft , communicate is not the first thing that comes to your mind, and would have not helped them much either in this case , switching on manually the ELT would have...

ChickenHouse 5th Feb 2019 06:48


Originally Posted by DaveReidUK (Post 10380096)
Is there not a legal requirement for an inquest in these circumstances? If so, presumably the Coroner would determine whether the bodies are required for a PM.

On the contrast, by international regulations of the sea the scene of an accident on the oceans is a grave. If you want to recover the bodies, it is an exhumation. Somebody authorized has to demand for it, this why the question to the relatives, and in this case has to be authorized by the country on which territory the accident scene is. There are quite some countries where this is impossible and an offense against the deceased by national laws. Anybody here firm in French funeral law?

DaveReidUK 5th Feb 2019 07:12


Originally Posted by ChickenHouse (Post 10380656)
On the contrast, by international regulations of the sea the scene of an accident on the oceans is a grave. If you want to recover the bodies, it is an exhumation. Somebody authorized has to demand for it, this why the question to the relatives, and in this case has to be authorized by the country on which territory the accident scene is. There are quite some countries where this is impossible and an offense against the deceased by national laws. Anybody here firm in French funeral law?

Thanks for the background. I wonder if that would then preclude raising of the wreck by the AAIB as part of the investigation, since at least one of the bodies appears to be still inside ?

That said, I would imagine that the family of Sala, and quite possibly also Ibbotson's, would wish to recover the remains of their loved ones. Very sad.

ChickenHouse 5th Feb 2019 07:26


Originally Posted by DaveReidUK (Post 10380666)
Thanks for the background. I wonder if that would then preclude raising of the wreck by the AAIB as part of the investigation, since at least one of the bodies appears to be still inside ?

That said, I would imagine that the family of Sala, and quite possibly also Ibbotson's, would wish to recover the remains of their loved ones. Very sad.

I guess it only means it will need the approval of a judge. Given the 'media high profile' attention (= media making money on it), adequacy will not serve as a reference.

rog747 5th Feb 2019 07:28


Originally Posted by DaveReidUK (Post 10380666)
Thanks for the background. I wonder if that would then preclude raising of the wreck by the AAIB as part of the investigation, since at least one of the bodies appears to be still inside ?

That said, I would imagine that the family of Sala, and quite possibly also Ibbotson's, would wish to recover the remains of their loved ones. Very sad.

Its all being decided now as reported from GCI in past 12 hours - Sala's family are demanding the wreck to be raised plus having discussions with the Pilots family,
I read earlier here the wreck site is just in UK waters (well on the border thereof)

AFAIK are the French very involved in recovery and investigation compared to the AAIB ? but please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks

Daysleeper 5th Feb 2019 07:39


Originally Posted by rog747 (Post 10380682)
Its all being decided now as reported from GCI in past 12 hours - Sala's family are demanding the wreck to be raised plus having discussions with the Pilots family,
I read earlier here the wreck site is just in UK waters (well on the border thereof)

AFAIK are the French very involved in recovery and investigation compared to the AAIB ? but please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks

The position being given on AIS for GeoOcean over the last couple of days appears to be outside UK and CI territory. It looks also to be outside French territorial waters. I.e. it is outside 12 nm from both, indeed more than 24 nm from the French coast.

What this means I’m not sure but as it is a US registered aircraft does it default to US law or does it become something else?

Regarding a coroner, it depends on what, if any, remains are recovered. I doubt a British coroner has any jurisdiction for an Argentine citizen, in a US aircraft, in international waters.

Of course where the ship is and where the wreck is may be different... but not by miles in that depth of water.



All times are GMT. The time now is 17:24.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.