Force landing, and they all walked away. [Archive]

ETOPS

9th Sep 2017, 17:39

I'm certain everyone here is relieved that this accident only resulted in bent metal and hopefully light injuries........

But.... Take a look at this advert...

Flight Share ? Shares for sale | City Airport and Heliport (http://cityairportandheliport.com/airport-services/pilot-noticeboard/show-notices/101/flight-share/shares-for-sale)

Then notice the registered owner on "G-INFO"

The Turks and Caicos Islands ?? A bit exotic for Eccles and Salford :rolleyes:

Very sad that the operator is now two Cherokees down in 4 years.

PENNINE BOY

9th Sep 2017, 17:55

More like 4!
Airfield was closed yesterday due to being waterlogged, Glad to hear every one is ok.

Maoraigh1

9th Sep 2017, 20:06

"Airfield was closed yesterday due to being waterlogged, "
The Newspaper did say the plane "ditched" in the field.

India Four Two

10th Sep 2017, 00:20

Force landing, and they all walked away.

A long time ago, an instructor transformed my attitude towards forced-landings when he told me:
When the engine fails, the aeroplane now belongs to the insurance company. Your objective is to walk away from the crash!

Oscar Charlie 192

10th Sep 2017, 08:25

with three passengers on board ?

Plus a 100+ litres of fuel that leaked in to a field.
From a WET grass runway.

Oscar Charlie 192

10th Sep 2017, 08:29

Take a look at this advert...

Flight Share ? Shares for sale | City Airport and Heliport (http://cityairportandheliport.com/airport-services/pilot-noticeboard/show-notices/101/flight-share/shares-for-sale)

Clicking that link, just now(09:30z 10/09) states that the advert is 'Pending, prior to approval' (or very similar). That suggests it has been pulled by someone, given the a/c in question is now u/s!

Daysleeper

10th Sep 2017, 08:44

Clicking that link, just now(09:30z 10/09) states that the advert is 'Pending, prior to approval' (or very similar). That suggests it has been pulled by someone, given the a/c in question is now u/s!

Doesn't appear to be archived but from memory yesterday it asked for a chunk of money up front (£2K ish) then you could fly X (20 ish) hours.

The name of the person involved would perhaps be familiar to people in the north-west.

snchater

10th Sep 2017, 09:13

lupomen

12th Sep 2017, 07:40

The name of the person involved would perhaps be familiar to people in the north-west.

Who I understand was also the pilot !

CloudHound

12th Sep 2017, 07:54

And familiar to the CAA too.

The next sentence will contain the words 'book' and 'throw'.

lupomen

12th Sep 2017, 10:00

Some people are made of teflon !

spargazer

28th Sep 2017, 15:04

The name of the person involved would perhaps be familiar to people in the north-west.

Who I understand was also the pilot !

wkipedia have this, note the date it ceased operating airline services! and is this the same company?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_NorthWest_Airlines

Oscar Charlie 192

19th Nov 2017, 14:55

Non-locals might have missed seeing this:-
Man arrested following plane crash in Salford - Manchester Evening News (http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/city-airport-eccles-plane-crash-13919768)

nevillestyke

23rd Nov 2017, 16:55

A long time ago, an instructor transformed my attitude towards forced-landings when he told me:
"When the engine fails, the aeroplane now belongs to the insurance company. Your objective is to walk away from the crash!"
Unless it is a literal ditching.;)

Gertrude the Wombat

23rd Nov 2017, 20:55

Unless it is a literal ditching.;)
My only (partial) engine failure was in a floatplane :ok:

Mike Flynn

20th Feb 2019, 23:11

'Greedy' pilot, 52, is found guilty of 'grossly overloading' his plane with birdwatchers to make a £1,000 profit on flight to Scottish island of Bara that left three injured when it crashed

Robert Murgatroyd, 52, agreed to fly three birdwatchers to a Scottish island
The pilot collected £500 each from the three men before the doomed flight
Murgatroyd could not fly passengers for reward under the terms of his licence
He will be sentenced for breaches of air law at Manchester Crown Court
The court also heard Murgatroyd has a previous conviction from 2014 for flying an aircraft without a valid ceritificate of airworthiness.

He denied endangering the safety of a person and an aircraft, flying without the relevant licence, failing to comply with insurance regulations plus three other charges under the Air Navigation Order 2016 - but it took a jury at Manchester Crown Square just under three hours to find him guilty of all counts.

Murgatroyd will be sentenced on March 15, and was granted bail, but prohibited from piloting or co-piloting any aircraft. He was also ordered to live and sleep at his given address.

Judge Michael Leeming told him: 'The counts are significantly serious to cross the custody threshold, and the likelihood is you will receive a lengthy custodial sentence.'

His weight and balance calcs were interesting.'He accepted that he had not weighed the passengers or asked them for their weights. But he worked on the principle that if they fitted through the door then they could fly with you.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6725897/Greedy-pilot-52-guilty-grossly-overloading-plane.html

Rory166

21st Feb 2019, 00:07

The Daily Mail says cost sharing the pilot must not be the owner of the plane. Is that right? I think if not the owner then the normal hire fee can also be shared. If the owner only direct costs can be shared.

uncle dickie

21st Feb 2019, 05:03

No AAIB report?

treadigraph

21st Feb 2019, 06:18

I can't find an AAIB report either - can't think that publication would have been delayed?

Mike Flynn

21st Feb 2019, 06:23

I can't find an AAIB report either - can't think that publication would have been delayed?

Is it possible the AAIB were never informed?

Where no one is hurt it is usually down to the pilot to submit a report by post.

DaveReidUK

21st Feb 2019, 06:57

Is it possible the AAIB were never informed?
Where no one is hurt it is usually down to the pilot to submit a report by post.
Injuries were sustained, including broken ribs - see the link in your earlier post - and the accident is the subject of both AAIB and CAA investigations.

jolihokistix

21st Feb 2019, 07:08

Quote: "Murgatroyd will be sentenced on March 15, and was granted bail".

Ah, so obviously no risk of flight, then.

Mike Flynn

21st Feb 2019, 08:05

Quote: "Murgatroyd will be sentenced on March 15, and was granted bail".

Ah, so obviously no risk of flight, then.

His bail conditions prevent him flying.

....prohibited from piloting or co-piloting any aircraft. He was also ordered to live and sleep at his given address.

Given his previous and the judges comments it is safe to say this wayward bird will have his wings clipped and be caged for some time.

happybiker

21st Feb 2019, 08:56

He is a serial offender and in this case has been found guilty on all counts. From the CPS website:https://www.cps.gov.uk/north-west/news/pilot-guilty-endangering-life-after-crashing-illegal-commercial-flight

Notes to editors

Robert Murgatroyd (DOB: 19 May 1966) was convicted of the following charges:

Endangering the safety of an aircraft
Endangering the safety of a person
Illegal public Transport
Flying otherwise than in accordance with a licence
Flying otherwise than in accordance with any conditions/limitations contained in the aircraft flight manual
Failure to comply with the insurance regulation
Flying without the aircraft flight manual

uncle dickie

21st Feb 2019, 09:13

Mike Flynn

21st Feb 2019, 10:19

The lack of any obvious AAIB involvement in this crash landing is somewhat strange given the non fatal injuries sustained. Perhaps RM did notify the AAIB?

Police & CAA according to reports carried out the investigation & interviews. AAIB behind the scenes must be a distinct possibility?

No doubt once the dust has settled after 15 March, an explanation will be provided by the authorities and an AAIB report will be published.
The dots will eventually be joined up....

My understanding is that the police recovered the aircraft and held in possession as evidence.Given their detailed investigation I imagine that will provide all the necessary for the AAIB report.

There are quite a few rogues in GA!

DaveReidUK

21st Feb 2019, 14:36

The lack of any obvious AAIB involvement in this crash landing is somewhat strange given the non fatal injuries sustained.

Most of the AAIB's investigations (other than high-profile ones that involve on-site presence) do not come into the public domain until the report is published, usually in one of their monthly bulletins.

While this one has taken longer to emerge than most, that's probably a by-product of the police involvement and the court case.

The Old Fat One

21st Feb 2019, 19:59

Hot 'n' High

21st Feb 2019, 20:24

Hands up if you think the current application of "cost sharing" rules will shortly be taken out, dusted down and subjected to the same sort of compliance standards that are de rigueur in many other industries.

:ok:

Quite how it has been allowed to get to this position is beyond me. Or maybe certain "influencers" with their hands in the honey pot? But then I'm a confirmed cynic! ;)

Chris Royle

21st Feb 2019, 21:11

Was this a Wingly flight?

The Old Fat One

22nd Feb 2019, 06:07

Was this a Wingly flight?

I don't think so???

Plenty of info in the PF forum on another thread. Point is with two flights now splashed all over the media re "cost sharing", I suspect the CAA will have no choice but to wake up and get real. Once they have sorted out brexit, that is.

Quite how it has been allowed to get to this position is beyond me.

Quite. Although, I think I would be looking at the archaic relationship between flying clubs and flying schools, added to the commercial need for bucket-loads of lo-cost pilots, were I to be researching the current regulatory mish mash.

Maoraigh1

22nd Feb 2019, 19:37

Does the CAA have any responsibility for the current cost-sharing rules? I thought they were EASA rules.

Global_Global

23rd Feb 2019, 11:57

Does the CAA have any responsibility for the current cost-sharing rules? I thought they were EASA rules.

EASA creates the rules with all the stakeholders like the NAA's and other parties that want to have a say like AOPA, unions, etc. The delegated authority, reads in this case the UK CAA, is responsible for enforcement.

Good Business Sense

23rd Feb 2019, 17:27

EASA creates the rules with all the stakeholders like the NAA's and other parties that want to have a say like AOPA, unions, etc. The delegated authority, reads in this case the UK CAA, is responsible for enforcement.

EASA are also supposed to do a financial impact analysis - try and get a copy of that - whilst you're there ask for a list of the AOC Holders, flying clubs and insurers that thought that "cost sharing", in it's current form, was a good idea.

The consultation was flawed in many ways - I didn't respond to the consultation because the "cost sharing" rule change was proposed to allow fellow pilots, club members and friends to share costs (nothing wrong with that I thought). The CAA wrote a great deal during the consultation and even well after the law was passed emphasising the "cost sharing" rules that I've just mentioned (I've got screenshots of all) - Suddenly, third party agents such as Wingly etc appeared employing PPLs to fly the general public who had bought flights and gift cards from their website - Gift cards can also be bought and given to people/third parties who had no idea (probably the same as the purchaser) what Cost sharing, PPLs etc etc all means. So like SALA they were unable to assess the safety aspects of the flight accurately for themselves i.e. whether they wished to take the risk associated with flying with someone who has 55 hours total time or with a commercially licensed AOC operation.

Sadly, it wasn't long before the CAA did a complete 180 by removing the advised restrictions and towing the EASA party line.

The AvgasDinosaur

24th Feb 2019, 13:04

Robert Murgatroyd is the owner of the Pa-28 involved in the Barton incident.

Google 'G-BBBK' and 'G-BBEF' for details of two previous fatal accidents to aircraft owned by Murgatroyd - he doesn't come across as a particularly responsible operator.
if my memory is correct one of his ‘Flying School’ aircraft crashed at Caernarfon, the pilot was shocked and dismayed to find the aircraft was not insured. This earned a ban from operating from Blackpool and forced his move to Barton. One can only wonder why Peel Holdings didn’t make diligent enquiries as to why he was evicted from Blackpool before allowing him to set up shop at Barton, sorry Manchester City Airport!!
Be lucky
David

Whopity

24th Feb 2019, 23:12

I thought they were EASA rules. There are no EASA Rules. All Regulations came from the EC now the EU. Whilst changes to the rules can be acheived through the NPA process, the time taken to do so is excessive with 3-5 years being fairly normal and the end product often bears no resemblance to the initial proposal. DTOs being just one example.

elmorejames

14th Mar 2019, 16:52

Norman Stanley Murgatroyd, you have been found guilty of the charges brought by this court, and it is now my duty to pass sentence. You are an habitual criminal, who accepts crashing an aircraft as an occupational hazard, and presumably accepts imprisonment in the same casual manner. We therefore feel constrained to commit you for the maximum term allowed for these offences. You will go to prison for......(fill in the blank tomorrow)

PENNINE BOY

15th Mar 2019, 16:23

Sentenced today for 3 1/2 years

slfool

15th Mar 2019, 17:08

Sentenced today for 3 1/2 years

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/pilot-jailed-crash-landing-risking-15981019

uncle dickie

15th Mar 2019, 17:08

Sentenced today for 3 1/2 years

Out after 21 months. Might be sooner with a tag.
Licence revoked by CAA.

Chronus

21st Mar 2019, 19:31

This particular prize prick of the aviation world, who tried to demonstrate his skills as a penguin to his hapless bird watcher pax, was finally awarded with his just reward. That is despite his Sully act.

He was an ex-con, courtesy of CAA.

Here is his previous conviction:
"ROBERT MURGATROYD T/A FLYBPL.COM G-BBEF crashed in Switzerland on 14 October 2011. The aircraft’s last Airworthiness Review Certificate had expired on 30 August 2011. G-BBEF had made 28 flights, including instructional flights, in the 44 days after the ARC expired, totalling 21.27 hours of flying time. Robert Murgatroyd trading as FlyBpl.com was the registered owner of G-BBEF. Robert Murgatroyd trading as Flybpl.com pleaded guilty to: 1. Operating G-BBEF on 28 flights without an ARC (Part M.A.902(b) of Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2042/2003 and Article 241(7) of the Air Navigation Order 2009). 18/06/2014 Blackpool Magistrates’ Court 1. Fine £333" . From the CAA Prosecution Results.

Blackpool magistrates who tried him for his part in the crash of G-BBEF, heard:
"The court heard that Murgatroyd had four previous convictions after being prosecuted by the CAA.These included illegally operating public transport flights". Source :https://www.wave965.com/news/local/plane-shouldnt-have-been-in-the-air/