Bournemouth crash

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

Rumour has it that the flight was a 'Trial Lesson'. Wonder if the families thought it was a pleasure flight...

A very sad day. I used to see that Cherokee a bit when I was at EGHH. Makes you think. Thats at least four flying instructors we've lost in the UK this year...

Not good is it?

WWW

[HungryPilot]

And you guys take the **** out of FAA trained pilots?

[ComJam]

HungryPilot,

There's no need.

It's a sad day when anyone in the business dies doing what we do.

Our thoughts should go to the families involved.

If you can't say something sensible please don't say anything at all.

CJ

PS I hope you have nothing to do with CRM courses!!

I think you do.

[This message has been edited by ComJam (edited 19 December 1999).]

[HungryPilot]

I apologize.

[Arkwright]

I've only just heard of this accident. I used to work at EGHH for a Flying School a couple of years ago. I would be interested in knowing any more information if anyone can assist.
Maybe now the CAA will look at this school more closely. We gained numerous students from this 'Notorious' organisation, who seen to exist purely on 'Trial Lessons'. I wonder exactly how many fully fledged PPL's they can claim over the last few years.

------------------

[Daifly]

I'm intrigued as to what the follow up from Belgrano will be after this.

My understanding was that you cannot carry pax when training - hence no-one in the back.
Properly you need an AOC.

Am I right in thinking this? If I am, what will be the actions of the CAA d'you think?

[Meeb]

Daifly, it is acceptable (to the CAA) to carry a 'passenger' in the back on a 'trial flying lesson' (although in principle there is no such thing as a trial lesson) as long as the person carried will gain from the flight. This boils down to the fact that the person in the back may have been the one who gave the voucher to the student in the front as a birthday gift etc. Another reason would be that maybe they are themselves considering taking lessons at a later date. All that has to be proved is that the 'passenger' is involved in some way with the flight. Hope this helps a bit.

[mayday]

A short interjection into the 4 seat trial debate. I do them, they account for approximately 10-15 percent of my instructional hours and I should add that as a school we are at pains to point out that they are Lessons not jolly joy rides, despite having a pax (usually the purchaser)sat in the back.

I have always understood any trial lesson to be Excercise 3- Air Experience and this is how my students log it. It is fair to say that it is used as come-on for a full course of lessons and as such the name of the game is to enjoy the experience giving as much time as possible at the controls in order to show them that flying is not beyond anyone of average co-ordination and intelligence.

Anyway i'm rambling now but what I wanted to say is that the fact that this unfortunate flight had extra people on board probably had nothing whatsoever to do with the accident, and those who imply that it did are guilty of the usual crime of second guessing a pilot who cant answer back.

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

I worry when taking these trips that the punter does not have a logbook to record and exercise and we don't start a training record either. Would the Board of Enquiry be happy that it was in fact a trial lesson and not a pleasure flight...?

I'm not pointing fingers here at Airbourne - the problem is wisespread and affects me.

WWW

[mayday]

Our school issues a certificate following any trial which includes all info required for a first logbook entry if the student wants to go with it.

Still cant ses whats not legit about it.

[Arkwright]

I assume the a/c was GOHOG/GOSOW but can anyone give me the name of the unfortunate instructor,(an e-mail would do), and any details of exatly what happened? Was it EFATO?