Here it is ....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47406109

Whilst it always seemed highly unlikely I guess this is the final nail in the coffin of any cost-sharing argument.

So McKay says it was not a cost sharing flight implying it was commercial. With a PPL at the wheel. Whoever hired Mr Ibbotson (Mr Henderson?) will have a lot to answer for.

Flying Hours
Our thoughts on this discussion converge to focus on the pilot. Whether he was fit in every way to undertake this fateful flight.
Accepting he had accumulated the significant time of 3700hrs, and had done some aerial work such as para drops band glider tow, would it not be reasonable to suggest that his ambition may have been to work as a commercial pilot. That flying was more than a hobby or pass time. Why did he not at least get an instructor`s rating and take it one step further, why did he not get an IR to his PPL. Why did he not go for a CPL. Why were all these beyond his reach. Does it not also raise the question that he may have tried and maybe failed. Where do so many hours take one without a purpose. If one has very deep pockets, well all these do not come into question. But in this instance a gas fitter/engineer/plumber, with a poor financial score behind him, surely does not fall into that well heeled flying nut category. How much does 3700 hrs airtime cost. How did this unfortunate plumber could have afforded it, even if it was over a number of years. Flying has never been cheap. Unless you have a very deep pocket someone else must pay for the person sitting up at the front end of the machine. Who could those at the back be. I suppose that depends on how many good well heeled friends one may have.

This is how Mr Henderson sells his business on Linkedin... My bold and underline...

On top of this: Mr McKay is known in the industry to be ONLY price oriented when booking aircraft...

So does that not mean he was a victim of love. The most unfortunate that such love also took another victim who did not share his love. Is it not for good reason that a person who has the misfortune of suffering with such disability as colour blindness is barred from holding a professional licence. But there again as the old proverb goes, love has no boundaries.

"He had a Second Class medical with the only restriction being 'Must have available glasses for near vision.'
and he had a U.K. licence Class 2 medical with a restriction on specifically preventing flight at night"
I find this strange. His current medical was an EASA Class 2. The restrictions on it were what matter. It is surprising that colour blindness restrictions were lifted, but apparently they were. The UK licence medical would have been in the past, and replaced by the EASA one when it expired.
(I have flown on a PPL since 1987. I got a JAR number in 2006. I got both an EASA and a UK National PPL in 2018. I have always had a standard PPL medical - was it called Class 2 in 1987? My original FAA 61.75 had a night restriction, although I had a Night Rating, but that restriction was removed later.)

From the Daily Heil

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...al-flight.html

The player was always intending to return in the evening according to these whatsapp's

Yes , if those screenshots are correct it is quite damaging as indeed the return flight was from the beginning planned to be in the evening ( so at least partly at night) and Sala apparently paid for it as the person on the other end of the phone asked Sala if he arranged the price [with Willis Mc Kay] , , and Sala replied : yes , it is good .

The colour blindness issue is a red herring.
Historically, barring some flying privileges to colour blind people had surfaced for fear that such people would be unable to distinguish the different flare signals sent by a tower in the event of a radio-communication failure or unable to distinguish the left and right position lights of a conflicting traffic. Most colour blind people can perfectly distinguish the 2 position lights but fail the Ishihara test.

The real issues that have a causal relationship with this accident are:
- was the pilot trained and current for flying in IMC at night ?
- why wasn't a commercial pilot at the controls of that plane, if it is confirmed that the actual conditions of the flight match private carriage operation as defined under FAR 91.501(b)(4).

You may even believe that, I don't.

He was colourblind and had a specific licence restriction to Day Time Flying ONLY. He had NEVER been trained to fly out night due to this restriction. This could not be over ridden on his 61.75 certificate. So regardless of any of the other issues around the flight, the fact that it was flown at night made it illegal.......