Another weather related ? Crash in North Queensland

[Capt Fathom]

Crashing aircraft is not the sole domain of the young and unlicensed!

[red_dirt]

Originally Posted by 43Inches

One aeroclub where he did early training said that he did not complete his training with them and it sounds like the bulls have run with he didn't complete any training. Does not mean he didn't go elsewhere and complete the licence.

Well the ATSB said he didnt hold a licence soooooo……..

[PoppaJo]

I am not so crass to say he deserved what happened, but you just can't tell some people.

If it wasn't this accident, it would have been another, 30 hours is nothing and one has not even had Navigation training at that point. You would need to question if the male had any further intention to conduct any further flying at all with a training school, he had his own aircraft, the plan seemed to be fly under the radar.

​​​​​​​

[Squawk7700]

Originally Posted by PoppaJo

You would need to question if the male

he had his own aircraft

I see the ATSB has started using pronouns.

[PoppaJo]

Originally Posted by Squawk7700

I see the ATSB has started using pronouns.

Normally I’d say PIC. However he wasn’t. Reckless behaviour.

[Desert Flower]

Originally Posted by KRviator

ATSB has dropped the investigation - and this time I completely agree with their logic. Why waste resources on someone who was unlicensed and had a DILLIGAF attitude to the rules and regulations. I am not so crass to say he deserved what happened, but you just can't tell some people.

Sucks for his passenger though.

And the unborn child

DF.

[zegnaangelo]

Originally Posted by PoppaJo

If it wasn't this accident, it would have been another, 30 hours is nothing and one has not even had Navigation training at that point. You would need to question if the male had any further intention to conduct any further flying at all with a training school, he had his own aircraft, the plan seemed to be fly under the radar.

and he wanted to buy a twin too.
but i guess if he really wanted to buy one, he would have to finish his PPL before anyone would even bother training him in one...

[PoppaJo]

Originally Posted by zegnaangelo

and he wanted to buy a twin too.
but i guess if he really wanted to buy one, he would have to finish his PPL before anyone would even bother training him in one...

The ATSB mentioned he didn’t pass the RPC theory exam. Doubt this person would have even got to a twin endorsement.

I have to ask though, he was very active on public social channels, everything filmed and put up was in breach of multiple regs, did the Aero Club know about this illegal behaviour?

[43Inches]

Originally Posted by PoppaJo

The ATSB mentioned he didn’t pass the RPC theory exam. Doubt this person would have even got to a twin endorsement.

I have to ask though, he was very active on public social channels, everything filmed and put up was in breach of multiple regs, did the Aero Club know about this illegal behaviour?

If he owned one he'd just fly it, if he wasn't operating legally why would he suddenly change that attitude... There is no difference to a joy riding teen on the road, they don't know the danger until they are smeared across the pavement.

[MagnumPI]

Originally Posted by 43Inches

If he owned one he'd just fly it, if he wasn't operating legally why would he suddenly change that attitude... There is no difference to a joy riding teen on the road, they don't know the danger until they are smeared across the pavement.

Except this wasn't a teenager. This was an adult, with a pregnant partner, taking her to a scan. You'd hope that there'd be at least one or more well intentioned folks in the aero club who were aware of the shenanigans and took steps to stop him, or reported it to CASA if he was unwilling to change his ways.

If someone wants to go and be reckless in an aeroplane whilst ignoring every regulation in the books and any sense of airmanship, they should at least have the decency to not put others at risk whilst engaging in that behaviour.

I wonder if his pregnant partner knew that he wasn't legally allowed to fly such a trip or that he hadn't even completed navex training...sadly, we'lll probably never know.

Tragic.

[PiperCameron]

Originally Posted by MagnumPI

I wonder if his pregnant partner knew that he wasn't legally allowed to fly such a trip or that he hadn't even completed navex training...sadly, we'lll probably never know.

Reading the report it does seem that he got away with it before (in nice VFR on his own) so he thought he could do it again (in not-so-nice weather with a passenger). Likely a bit of "she'll be right, mate!" chucked in with some "I've done it before, so what's the big deal??"

Originally Posted by MagnumPI

Tragic.

Indeed... stupid also.

[43Inches]

If someone wants to go and be reckless in an aeroplane whilst ignoring every regulation in the books and any sense of airmanship, they should at least have the decency to not put others at risk whilst engaging in that behaviour.

That is exactly what makes them the same as the joyrider. They don't go out of their way to crash, they push the limits because they know better than everyone else. I know my plane, my car, my boat, etc etc etc... If he knew he was endangering the others on board he probably would not have gone. Its the attitude that you know what you are doing and can handle it that gets you into trouble when you don't have the training or real knowledge of what is going on. Of course it all goes fine until finally it doesn't. Unfortunately this trait can go life long, if you survive the bad days, and is not limited to teens. I've seen it in older pilots in their 50s, especially self made businessmen, they feel they can handle anything once they are taught the basics.

[Squawk7700]

I wonder if his pregnant partner knew that he wasn't legally allowed to fly such a trip or that he hadn't even completed navex training...sadly, we'lll probably never know.

My wife probably wouldn’t care if I told her I had a licence without the nav endorsement, probably as I would have convinced her prior that it’s safe to go… “honey, that’s just a formality, it’s for when you don’t use the GPS, but we have GPS so it’s perfectly fine, I’ll just turn around if the weather gets bad.” Just like most passengers couldn’t care less if their old-school taxi drivers had a licence or not. I worked with people who didn’t care if the qantas pilot has a licence or not, as long as they arrived safely.

[Lookleft]

I've seen it in older pilots in their 50s, especially self made businessmen, they feel they can handle anything once they are taught the basics.

Very true. i saw a lot of that when I was a flying instructor. A good example of it was the Chieftain crash at Mt Hotham. Being old and arrogant has the same outcome as being young and stupid.

[helispotter]

Aside from the media release link shared by Desert Flower, here is link to the investigation report and discontinuation notice: Discontinuation notice (atsb.gov.au). It was also covered in ABC on-line news: Investigation finds pilot was unlicensed during north Queensland crash that killed young couple - ABC News

I wonder how prevalent it might be for aircraft to be flown in Australia by unlicensed pilots? In this case, the pilot even owned the aircraft. That makes me wonder whether there is any CASA requirement for the registered owner or registered operator to hold a pilots license or to even simply list such details in the process of registering their aircraft?

[43Inches]

Can't see anyway for CASA to police who owns aircraft. A lot of people for various reasons might buy an aircraft and not fly them personally. You could own a business jet and get someone else to fly it. Or just own a Cessna and rent it to the local aero club as a tax write off. Pilots flying unlicensed or without medicals requires them to be caught on a ramp check or by reporting.

[runway16]

Reporting? Tried that and the report to CASA fell in the round file. The rule busting went on.
R

[Cedrik]

Originally Posted by runway16

Reporting? Tried that and the report to CASA fell in the round file. The rule busting went on.
R

They are too busy putting putting more legalise into regs, making everything a strict liability offence, using tax payers money to travel Australia under the excuse of "currency" and telling everybody how they listen to the industry while destroying GA.

[172heavy]

If you go to a remote part of the NT you may find a guy who owns an aircraft operating daily charters on a PPL without an AOC. This individual may also hold an extremely high position in an aviation governing body.

[Mach E Avelli]

Originally Posted by 172heavy

If you go to a remote part of the NT you may find a guy who owns an aircraft operating daily charters on a PPL without an AOC. This individual may also hold an extremely high position in an aviation governing body.

I commend you for your careful use of the word “may”.
However, you cannot be sued for defamation if your allegations are true, so why not report it in writing to CASA and relevant industry representatives? Include other members of the aviation governing body that he is representing, but give CASA a month’s head start , in the hopes that they ping him and pull his licence.
Advise all recipients that you will retain a copy of your correspondence and will go public if this person does not immediately desist, or ever has an accident.
OTOH, if it’s only hearsay, I suggest you let it go and leave it to Charles Darwin. He sure sorted out the original subject of this thread!