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)

Pittsextra 4th Apr 2019 22:24

Err are we forgetting the fact that cost sharing flights are OK even if the pilot pays just 1p?

So dodge pilot pays his 1p and rents an aircraft from his company at the wrong price. Or if you really wanted to be Charlie big time you could rent the aircraft owned by an offshore trust with nominee directors. Now how are you left searching for beneficial owners?? But that is to digress

So dodge pilot gets pinged by authority he says actually he was aware he was paying the wrong price for the PA46 but would you believe it the passenger was often happy to share a ride with him (they both share a common love of horse racing/ football/ motor racing/ business and often find themselves at the same place/time) but itbwas the passenger who insisted they fly in this overly expensive machine. Pax is happy to confirm same nonsense because he enjoys the cheap travel..

Or company gets paid the money from pax. Pilot pays in his bunch of 1p. At the time of being pinged you say thanks very much for highlighting the error and we issued a credit note to the pax.

meleagertoo 4th Apr 2019 23:22


Originally Posted by Pittsextra (Post 10439131)
Err are we forgetting the fact that cost sharing flights are OK even if the pilot pays just 1p?

I don't think we are, but you appear to be forgetting that the case we're discussing involves the N register. In which case the requirement is not only for strict equal sahres but no valuable consideration (eg hotel bills etc) and crucially the Common Purpose clause.

Pittsextra 5th Apr 2019 07:25

So in future maybe the determined will fly G reg? Or just transact via entitles that are offshore and outside of any scrutiny. Never in our lifetimes will you see aviation regulation contain reference to financial regulation because that really would just create more complications that aviation authority will have no experience or expertise and that usually merely opens up loop holes.

Recently we can read about a pilot in Ireland killing himself and photographer. The arrangement a multi year affair. The rules are already in existence we just either havent been looking or have turned a blind eye...

N707ZS 5th Apr 2019 08:23

Pittsextra, this whole incident doesn't seem to have changed anything.

Chronus 5th Apr 2019 20:05


Originally Posted by Pittsextra (Post 10439383)
So in future maybe the determined will fly G reg? Or just transact via entitles that are offshore and outside of any scrutiny. Never in our lifetimes will you see aviation regulation contain reference to financial regulation because that really would just create more complications that aviation authority will have no experience or expertise and that usually merely opens up loop holes.

Recently we can read about a pilot in Ireland killing himself and photographer. The arrangement a multi year affair. The rules are already in existence we just either havent been looking or have turned a blind eye...

"Never in our lifetimes will you see aviation regulations contain reference to financial regulations"

I don`t know what lays ahead for the little left of mine, but looking back to the days when I had to read the holy book on it there were some references to things to do with finance.Here are some of the lessons from the 2016 version of the Gospel.

“direct cost” means the cost (excluding any element of profit) directly incurred in relation to a flight, including— (a) the cost of fuel; (b) any charges payable in respect of the use of any airfield in connection with the flight; or (c) any rental or hire fees for the use of the aircraft;

“annual cost”, in relation to the operation of an aircraft, means the cost (excluding any element of profit) of keeping, maintaining and operating the aircraft over the period of one year;

Unless I am mistaken, direct cost, cost, profit are financial terms. Wallet size comes into it for weight and balance calculation and perhaps after this event it may take on a much more serious meaning and added to the Gospel as another commandment.


Schedule 1
“annual cost”, in relation to the operation of an aircraft, means the cost (excluding any element of profit) of keeping, maintaining and operating the aircraft over the period of one year;

Mike Flynn 6th Apr 2019 00:22

I have found all the info I was looking for on Dave Henderson and he is without doubt a very experienced long distance ferry pilot.

He has flown from the UK to Japan and similar ferry’s and there must be some sort of error on the FAA database which is why I could not find him.

I have no doubt that if he had flown Sala that night the tragedy would not have occurred.
​​

meleagertoo 6th Apr 2019 16:36


Originally Posted by Mike Flynn (Post 10440280)
I have found all the info I was looking for on Dave Henderson and he is without doubt a very experienced long distance ferry pilot.



While not wishing to cast any aspersions on Henderson I think your confidence in experienced ferry pilots may be somewhat misplaced.
Ferrying, especially in singles, is a pretty high-risk business and right out on the edge of what most aviation safety thinking considers acceptable and in many cases goes way beyond that. Ferry pilots are by nature chancers, risk takers. That is as necessary for their job as it is in a fighter pilot, but are most definately not desireable traits in public transport operation.

That's not to say they can't operate public transport safely, just a pointer towards a ferry pilot's inclination with regard to risk compared to the norm.

Why on earth would anyone choose a ferrry pilot to fly their pax when there are so many experianced air-taxi pilots out there?

Good Business Sense 6th Apr 2019 17:12


Originally Posted by meleagertoo (Post 10440853)
While not wishing to cast any aspersions on Henderson I think your confidence in experienced ferry pilots may be somewhat misplaced.
Ferrying, especially in singles, is a pretty high-risk business and right out on the edge of what most aviation safety thinking considers acceptable and in many cases goes way beyond that. Ferry pilots are by nature chancers, risk takers. That is as necessary for their job as it is in a fighter pilot, but are most definately not desireable traits in public transport operation.

That's not to say they can't operate public transport safely, just a pointer towards a ferry pilot's inclination with regard to risk compared to the norm.

Why on earth would anyone choose a ferrry pilot to fly their pax when there are so many experianced air-taxi pilots out there?

Interesting take - I'll be sure to let the several Captains that I know who fly 747s, widebodies, etc and who also ferry singles worldwide for fun that they have unacceptable and undesirable traits for airline ops.

rlsbutler 7th Apr 2019 12:36

We all know that flying is inherently risky. The ordinary GA pilot knows it. Pilots at all levels see it as part of their skill and practice to contain, minimise or avoid known risks.

Good Business Sense is being simply mischievous in pretending that the captains he knows (or knows of) have unacceptable and undesirable traits. By definition those airline pilots make a living from avoiding known risks. Who is he to tell them that, in seeking more pilotage risks to manage, they are exhibiting an undesirable trait ? GBS’s airline pilot feels professionally satisfied when, for instance, he believes that ATOPs procedures are well calculated and based on good probabilities. He is another character as a ferry pilot and would be another character if he should strip down and dress up for the Rio Carnival.

Megan wonders why Meleagertoo characterises ferry pilots as risk takers. If MLT invites challenge here, it is in seeing them as a group; judging almost any human activity in group terms is now illegitimate, useful as it often is. In any case I would have thought that ferry pilots are scarcely herdable in the way that cabin crew or allotment gardeners might be. Perhaps it is only PC righteousness that drives GBS.

That said there can be no doubt that risks to a ferry are increased just by the facts that (1) the pilot is likely to be unfamiliar with the aircraft (2) the ATC and Met environments are likely to be either less responsive or simply non-existent en-route than in the UK and (3) the terrain is likely to offer no escape over a large part of many routes in the event of a failure that could be managed in the UK. Each of those “likely” considerations could be (rather sketchily) quantified so that, while an ordinary GA flight might offer say 1-in-10000 mortal risk to GBS’s airline captain, a trans-Atlantic ferry flight might offer him an historic risk of perhaps 1-in-200 – both ratios being shamelessly plucked from the sky. A Cessna 152 engine failure is intrinsically survivable – but not in mid-Atlantic.

meleagertoo 12th Apr 2019 16:44


Originally Posted by rlsbutler (Post 10441455)
That said there can be no doubt that risks to a ferry are increased just by the facts that (1) the pilot is likely to be unfamiliar with the aircraft (2) the ATC and Met environments are likely to be either less responsive or simply non-existent en-route than in the UK and (3) the terrain is likely to offer no escape over a large part of many routes in the event of a failure that could be managed in the UK. Each of those “likely” considerations could be (rather sketchily) quantified so that, while an ordinary GA flight might offer say 1-in-10000 mortal risk to GBS’s airline captain, a trans-Atlantic ferry flight might offer him an historic risk of perhaps 1-in-200 – both ratios being shamelessly plucked from the sky. A Cessna 152 engine failure is intrinsically survivable – but not in mid-Atlantic.

Thus ferry pilots are likely to be more accepting of higher risks than most other parts of the piloting community.
QED

Where GBS's good sense runs out is assuming one can transfer this level of risk acceptance to their airline flying which is of course a wild and unsupportable assumption - and not one that I made any allusion to whatsoever.

Good Business Sense 12th Apr 2019 16:50


Originally Posted by meleagertoo (Post 10446101)

Where GBS's good sense runs out is assuming one can transfer this level of risk acceptance to their airline flying which is of course a wild and unsupportable assumption - and not one that I made any allusion to whatsoever.

Hi M, wrong way round - airline flying assists in the decision making on ferry flying - who would do it the other way round and where did I say that? Many of us have been doing this for forty years i.e. airlines and ferry - not sure I follow the logic on previous posts - I have a few colleagues with air to air combat time (old school) and kills and also some who have attacked heavily defended airfields ultra low level at night with cluster bombs - they are also first class airline pilots ! rgds

Sam Rutherford 13th Apr 2019 03:21

It is also possible (probable?) that airline, ferry and military pilots having analysed and accepted the higher risk of their 'mission', will use their skills to then reduce those risks as much as possible (not accept them blind 'it'll be alright on the night').

megan 13th Apr 2019 03:34

A professional ferry pilot is no more a risk taker than any other professional aviator. In saying that, yes they are exposed to more inherent risk than other areas of aviation, flying a FAR 23 aircraft exposes you to more risk than a FAR 25, because certification standards differ, performance capability in a multi with one engine out for example. A professional crop duster is no more a risk taker than a professional helicopter SAR crew, or what a Concorde crew were. Each of them are aware of the risks inherent in their chosen vocation and willingly accept them with due diligence applied in negating said risk the best way they can. That's what a professional does. An RPT pilot is just as much a risk taker and chancer, if you want to use that derogatory phrase, as any other, two MAX crashes bear that out, along with Concorde.

At one point in my life I spent 2,000 hours flying single engine over water far from land carrying passengers in a commercial operation, so even the regulators are risk takers and chancers by your definition.

For an insight into a professional ferry pilot read "Ocean Flying" by Louise Sacchi.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louise_Sacchi

ShyTorque 13th Apr 2019 20:27

Surely a professional (in the sense of doing the job for a living = paid) ferry pilot should also hold a CPL?

sapperkenno 14th Apr 2019 09:22


Originally Posted by ShyTorque (Post 10446890)
Surely a professional (in the sense of doing the job for a living = paid) ferry pilot should also hold a CPL?

That's a good point, but it may be time to mention now, that holding a CPL (especially from what I've seen of many low hour UK CPL holders) doesn't necessarily prove someones ability to conduct safe, efficient and sensible flying along the lines of single-engine, single crew operations when you have to think for yourself and adapt in an ever changing envoironment. Evidently our hero Mr Ibbotson seems to have struggled on this occasion, but that's not the point I'm making.
When you have the likes of small UK operators not touching people with under 300 hours to fly single crew survey work etc, yet Ryanair will take you with a little over 200hrs, that goes some way to demonstrate how lacking our CPL standards and training really are - for single pilot operation. There are few people I would trust with say flying a family member across the UK in something like a PA28, and would be more inclined to have an experienced PPL whos been at it years take them, than some idiot who trained in Poland/Sweden on the cheap with all the bells and whistles and ticks in boxes who can't fly for toffee. Just my 2p worth as someone who's done a fair bit of single engine flying for private owners, given plenty of instruction, and am now working at a small UK regional.

jumpseater 14th Apr 2019 11:18


Originally Posted by sapperkenno (Post 10447141)

S​​​NIP
​​​​Evidently our hero Mr Ibbotson seems to have struggled on this occasion, but that's not the point I'm making.
SNIP
There are few people I would trust with say flying a family member across the UK in something like a PA28, and would be more inclined to have an experienced PPL whos been at it years take them, than some idiot who trained in Poland/Sweden on the cheap with all the bells and whistles and ticks in boxes who can't fly for toffee.

Not sure of what point you're making, Ibbotson N264DBs pilot on this flight never had a CPL or even an instrument rating. He meets your family member chauffeur 'safer' criteria of being a several thousand hour PPL though. So from your posting above a PPL pilot who flies under conditions they're not trained or qualified for, is safer to fly your family than a low time CPL holder trained from early hours to adhere to SOP's, weather, ATC airspace requirements etc etc.
We see relatively few accidents where the main causal factors are professional commercially qualified low hours aircrew making poor choices. However when you look at 'high' houred PPL accidents where poor decision making has been a significant factor in the event, theres more than enough examples, the one involving N264DB comes to mind.

sapperkenno 14th Apr 2019 12:04


Originally Posted by jumpseater (Post 10447185)
Not sure of what point you're making, Ibbotson N264DBs pilot on this flight never had a CPL or even an instrument rating. He meets your family member chauffeur 'safer' criteria of being a several thousand hour PPL though. So from your posting above a PPL pilot who flies under conditions they're not trained or qualified for, is safer to fly your family than a low time CPL holder trained from early hours to adhere to SOP's, weather, ATC airspace requirements etc etc.

I didn’t mention anything to do with poor flying conditions or flying outside their licence privileges. Merely, in the case of ferry flying, paradropping, aerial survey etc there are probably much more capable PPLs for the job than CPLs. Not in every case, but my point is that a CPL isn’t the be all and end all of piloting skills for certain roles - putting aside the legal aspects.

The AvgasDinosaur 14th Apr 2019 16:35


Originally Posted by Mike Flynn (Post 10440280)
I have found all the info I was looking for on Dave Henderson and he is without doubt a very experienced long distance ferry pilot.

He has flown from the UK to Japan and similar ferry’s and there must be some sort of error on the FAA database which is why I could not find him.

I have no doubt that if he had flown Sala that night the tragedy would not have occurred.
​​

Care to share ?
Thanks
David

meleagertoo 14th Apr 2019 17:01


and there must be some sort of error on the FAA database which is why I could not find him.
That's quite an assumption. We should not dismiss other possibilities that are open to conjecture until facts are known.
In this grubby business nothing would surprise me.
Why has Henderson disappeared from view? It seem it's more than he's just choosing not to say owt, rather he's gone to ground. Why?

Jonzarno 14th Apr 2019 17:17


Why has Henderson disappeared from view? It seem it's more than he's just choosing not to say owt, rather he's gone to ground. Why?
I have no specific knowledge of this case, but would imagine that he has taken legal advice and, whether or not he has done anything wrong, line one of that advice would almost certainly have been that he should say nothing in public.


All times are GMT. The time now is 00:49.


Copyright © 2022 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.