|
Although I retired as a Flight Operations Inspector in 2001, I doubt that I could really be considered qualified today to comment on the current activities undertaken by the UK CAA with regard to managing safety oversight, for much has changed in the interim. However, we should bear in mind that a presumption exists, and is reflected in national legislation relating to aviation, that all who may be involved in this activity, in whatever capacity, amateur or professional, will wish to perform their duties or activities such that aircraft will fly safely.
Hence, legislation pertaining to non-commercial air transport activities is relatively light on limitations whereas those relating to commercial air transport include additional requirements designed to reduce hazards and mitigate risk when the public hire or offer/provide 'reward' (ie pay for) services on offer. Therefore, it is the responsibility of individuals as well as service providers to ensure that they understand whatever requirements apply to their activities and adhere to them. It may be worth remembering that laws in the UK are made by parliament whilst the CAA helps to frame such laws as may need updating or introducing acting as advisers to the government. Based upon experience, some laws prescribe requirements that will enhance safety margins whilst others proscribe actions such as are considered likely to increase risk. Although the Authority will investigate where it becomes aware that laws would appear to have been broken, this is by no means its main activity. Rather, this is to advise and assist those who seek to fly themselves as well as those who provide services to the public so as to ensure that, in the case of the latter, through audits and inspections the relevant standards are being upheld to the extent that licences, approvals, certificates, etc may be granted/issued and renewed. Where regulations are found to have been transgressed, the Authority is more likely to take administrative action (eg licence suspension) rather than seek the applications of sanctions through the courts. Although the methods applied today by those who are employed by the UK CAA may differ in format from those that were applied during the 20 years I spent in the Flight Operations Department, I doubt that the overall purpose has changed very much. It still behoves everyone involved in aviation to know what the requirements affecting their part of the operation are and to do their best to ensure that safety remains their top priority - and this applies across the board to baggage handlers, air traffic control staff, simulator instructors, aircraft design and maintenance engineers, managers, medical examiners, cabin crew, flight crew, surveyors, etc etc. As a former flight safety bulletin some 50 years ago published by Wg Cdr Spry in "Air Clues" had it, "Flight safety is your business" - with the emphasis on 'your'! |
For completeness, this exchange said to be between Callum Davies - Player Liaison Officer of Cardiff City Football Club - and Emiliano Sala may be worth putting on record. It has been published by the French media outlet Ouest-France and shows Cardiff City offering Emiliano Sala a scheduled round trip from Cardiff to Paris . There is a translation at the end of the transcript.
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....4acc3156ed.jpg https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....5b2cbf1bd7.jpg Player Liaison Officer: [thumbs up emoji] Emiliano Sala: Thank you very much PLO: It's nothing friend I write Spanish better than I speak it ES: Ha ha very good PLO: My girlfriend speaks Spanish. She is a teacher [shares commercial flight details] PLO: It is an option perhaps. Cardiff-Paris. But it's early. ES: Friend. It's good. I have a flight going tomorrow to Nantes and return Monday night to Cardiff. Willie McKay called me. PLO: Ok mate. Have you agreed a price with him? ES: Yes it's good. We will speak tomorrow before leaving for Nantes. PLO: Ok that works. What time do you fly? |
Originally Posted by korrol
(Post 10405794)
For completeness, this exchange said to be between Callum Davies - Player Liaison Officer of Cardiff City Football Club - and Emiliano Sala may be worth putting on record. It has been published by the French media outlet Ouest-France and shows Cardiff City offering Emiliano Sala a scheduled round trip from Cardiff to Paris .
|
I wouldn't quibble with the point you make deltafox44.
I think it's interesting that the flight from Nantes to Cardiff was being envisaged - by Sala - from the outset as a night flight . He says "I have a flight going tomorrow to Nantes and return Monday night to Cardiff. Willie McKay called me". This wasn't a case of Sala showing up late for take off on the Monday . Even the previous day it had been planned to be a night flight. |
....responsibility for this accident lays fully with the pilot in command... All that said, we all know where the blame for the current opaque legislation and grossly ineffectual enforcement lies. And because of that the pilot was, IMO, both responsible and a victim at the same time. |
Originally Posted by Mike Flynn
(Post 10404801)
US piggyback licences are issued on the back of UK licences and their restrictions. In the case of this pilot his eyesight prevented him obtaining a UK night rating because he was colour blind. So he could not fly at night end of story. Don't be so sure. He had an FAA Second Class medical without a night flying restriction. To fly an N reg at night, he would only have needed three hours night training with a FAA instructor in his logbook. This would not show up on the 61.75 certificate, because FAA certificates are deemed to include night flying privileges, unless annoted to the contrary. The difference between CAA and FAA colour vision standards are easy to find online. |
Originally Posted by ATC Watcher
(Post 10406439)
.
To be the devil's advocate , this is not what the Sala SMS says , it says to come back in Cardiff Monday EVENING. not night. |
Originally Posted by patowalker
(Post 10406471)
Don't be so sure. He had an FAA Second Class medical without a night flying restriction. To fly an N reg at night, he would only have needed three hours night training with a FAA instructor in his logbook. This would not show up on the 61.75 certificate, because FAA certificates are deemed to include night flying privileges, unless annoted to the contrary.
The difference between CAA and FAA colour vision standards are easy to find online. |
Originally Posted by patowalker
(Post 10406471)
Don't be so sure. He had an FAA Second Class medical without a night flying restriction. To fly an N reg at night, he would only have needed three hours night training with a FAA instructor in his logbook. This would not show up on the 61.75 certificate, because FAA certificates are deemed to include night flying privileges, unless annoted to the contrary.
The difference between CAA and FAA colour vision standards are easy to find online. He could not operate the aircraft between EASA states on his US licence. Only by using the privileges of his EASA licence and medical could he operate an N registered aircraft between UK and France and the return. Therefore in this instance his US licence and medical are irrelevant. |
Originally Posted by PT6Driver
(Post 10406521)
My understanding is that the US medical relates to his US licence and the EASA medical to his EASA licence. He could not operate the aircraft between EASA states on his US licence. Only by using the privileges of his EASA licence and medical could he operate an N registered aircraft between UK and France and the return. Therefore in this instance his US licence and medical are irrelevant. The sad thing for Mr Ibbotson would seem to be that for all of his 3700 hours he didn’t have the experience to realise how difficult, or even impossible, it is to fly visually over water on a dark night under a cloud layer. There is almost no visual reference, and sadly from the report of the last few moments of the flight this crash almost certainly resulted from disorientation, the idea that anyone who was in control of the situation would be descending deliberately at 7000 feet per minute in that aircraft at that level is totally unbelievable. And the sad thing for those who want to believe that an experienced PPL holder with 3700 hours would be better than a newly qualified CPL / IR holder is that this proves quite clearly that it’s not the case. Your 250 hr CPL/IR holder could have got in a Malibu or an Arrow or a Seneca and operated that flight perfectly safely on an IFR flight plan, just the way they flew their IR flight test a few days or weeks before. |
There is no doubt about the time the flight was to take off.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47013474 These messages between Jack McKay and Sala were translated from French. Friday, 18 January 8:01pm - Sala: "I want to leave tomorrow for Nantes at around 11am and come back on Monday night around 9pm to Cardiff if that is possible." 8:05pm -McKay:"Good. I'll send a message when that's sorted." Sunday, 20 January 5:00pm - McKay: "Hi there is it possible you could come back at seven in the evening on Monday night? Just because the pilot has to get home in the north after he gets to Cardiff." 5:01pm - Sala:"Hi, Half past seven would be possible." 5:03pm - McKay:"Yes that's good." |
Thought MCKay didn`t know who was the pilot....?
|
The bottom line is this - the aircraft had, I assume, an autopilot. If that's the case this flight could have been handled safely by almost anyone who could operate the AP. Regardless of legalities, or of his qualifications which seem to be the subject of much conjecture. Many people seem to know someone who knew him (I do too) and who rated his skills. But he made TERRIBLE DECISIONS at many stages of the flight, and that can happen to any human being CPL/IR or not (albeit less likely I suppose). Terrible decisions in aviation cost lives. We've seen it before and we'll see it again.
The chap flying the display at Shoreham was a CPL/IR as far I am aware and a crash happened. So CPL is not necessarily the panacea some posters on here seem to think. My own conclusion is that the aircraft should have been operating under an AOC and I reckon the authorities need to examine why it is so expensive to get one because the processes entailed in operating under an AOC do improve safety. Safety should be priced such that more people can access it!? |
Originally Posted by ShropshirePilot
(Post 10406762)
The bottom line is this - the aircraft had, I assume, an autopilot. If that's the case this flight could have been handled safely by almost anyone who could operate the AP. Regardless of legalities, or of his qualifications which seem to be the subject of much conjecture. Many people seem to know someone who knew him (I do too) and who rated his skills. But he made TERRIBLE DECISIONS at many stages of the flight, and that can happen to any human being CPL/IR or not (albeit less likely I suppose). Terrible decisions in aviation cost lives. We've seen it before and we'll see it again.
The chap flying the display at Shoreham was a CPL/IR as far I am aware and a crash happened. So CPL is not necessarily the panacea some posters on here seem to think. My own conclusion is that the aircraft should have been operating under an AOC and I reckon the authorities need to examine why it is so expensive to get one because the processes entailed in operating under an AOC do improve safety. Safety should be priced such that more people can access it!? |
Having an autopilot fitted is not necessarily safe. I used to fly a large British turboprop and the airline owner would never pay to have them made servicable, as co-pilots were paid to fly the aircraft. |
Originally Posted by tubby linton
(Post 10406883)
Having an autopilot fitted is not necessarily safe. I used to fly a large British turboprop and the airline owner would never pay to have them made servicable, as co-pilots were paid to fly the aircraft. |
Originally Posted by ShropshirePilot
(Post 10406762)
The bottom line is this - the aircraft had, I assume, an autopilot. If that's the case this flight could have been handled safely by almost anyone who could operate the AP. Regardless of legalities, or of his qualifications which seem to be the subject of much conjecture. Many people seem to know someone who knew him (I do too) and who rated his skills. But he made TERRIBLE DECISIONS at many stages of the flight, and that can happen to any human being CPL/IR or not (albeit less likely I suppose). Terrible decisions in aviation cost lives. We've seen it before and we'll see it again.
The chap flying the display at Shoreham was a CPL/IR as far I am aware and a crash happened. So CPL is not necessarily the panacea some posters on here seem to think. My own conclusion is that the aircraft should have been operating under an AOC and I reckon the authorities need to examine why it is so expensive to get one because the processes entailed in operating under an AOC do improve safety. Safety should be priced such that more people can access it!? Entirely agree. I think many here are stating different pieces of the same puzzle. This pilot tried to fly VFR over sea at night, most likely fully reliant on the A/P. I have little doubt A/P was fully operational up until the few minutes in question. To fly A/P takes an awful lot more knowledge and understanding than just flicking a switch and trusting it. My hypothesis, ignoring all the legal aspects for now: - Pilot under pressure to fulfill his obligations with high valued famous passenger on board - pilot lacked the skill and qualification to fulfill his obligations at that time and in those weather conditions - pilot went ahead with flight based on his confidence in the A/P - during flight A/P was disengaged. Possible reasons include: • overspeed (AAIB state average air speed at 175, A/P on this model is set to automatic disengage at 185). Speed above 185 may have been brought on by the descent that he'd already requested from ATC. or • handflying around clouds without disengaging A/P, causing it to then try to counteract his inputs or • icing or other feedback errors from A/P sensors - pilot was now in a situation where he was in IMC at night over the sea without A/P and became spatially disorientated. |
is there a link to the report please.
|
Here it is:
https://assets.publishing.service.go...64DB_Final.pdf Note: it's an intermediary report even if it holds the word "final" in its title. |
thanks
What does the AP do if the elevator gets iced up and jams and the servos run out of grunt or travel I presume the AP flies it off the elevator trim tabs? |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 15:03. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.