Blackpool 3/2/07
Fly Conventional Gear
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rubbish. The commander is the commander full stop. Any passenger is just a passenger pure and simple. Christ, I would never be able to fly as a passenger with another pilot for fear of being prosecuted for their mistakes. When I am teaching I am responsible, when I am a passenger I am there to look out the window.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: France
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not for me to speak for Mr Walker.
I fear that the debate above about 'command' is unhelpful. Perhaps Mr Walker might comment, if he is visiting here.
My perspective is that there is much more to be gained for the public good from an examination of the activities of an individual who was not on board the aircraft, but who was already 'known to' various organisations, and whose reputation precedes him.
I trust that HM Coroner will be adequately briefed. I also hope that he exercises his considerable powers to their full.
I fear that the debate above about 'command' is unhelpful. Perhaps Mr Walker might comment, if he is visiting here.
My perspective is that there is much more to be gained for the public good from an examination of the activities of an individual who was not on board the aircraft, but who was already 'known to' various organisations, and whose reputation precedes him.
I trust that HM Coroner will be adequately briefed. I also hope that he exercises his considerable powers to their full.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: An ATC centre this side of the moon.
Posts: 1,160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have followed this case with interest since the day of the accident,mainly because I spent most of my youth messing around Blackpool airport, indeed it is because of a famous old SATCO, JK that I find myself in the job I am now in.
I feel rather than debate the whys or why not's Andrew took command on that day we should rather be exploring the errors that lead to the accident!.....with all the help available from ATC service's enroute, why at no stage of the flight did he try to obtain any updated weather information from the London FIR sector???? thats what the guys are there to do, if that had happened an early diversion may have been the course of action and we would not be here today debating the rights or wrongs!
I feel rather than debate the whys or why not's Andrew took command on that day we should rather be exploring the errors that lead to the accident!.....with all the help available from ATC service's enroute, why at no stage of the flight did he try to obtain any updated weather information from the London FIR sector???? thats what the guys are there to do, if that had happened an early diversion may have been the course of action and we would not be here today debating the rights or wrongs!
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not for me to speak for Mr Walker.
I fear that the debate above about 'command' is unhelpful. Perhaps Mr Walker might comment, if he is visiting here.
I fear that the debate above about 'command' is unhelpful. Perhaps Mr Walker might comment, if he is visiting here.
It was the subsequent posters with their talk of 'justice', 'goals' and 'progress in the right directions', but not actually stating what these things actually meant in respect of this accident, that have set hares running.
If you don't clearly state what you are talking about, then people on here will debate what they think you might be talking about. Lack of clarity helps no one and might indeed cause distress to those who lost loved ones in the accident.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sth Bucks UK
Age: 60
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it would be rather difficult to persuade the CAA and the court that my 500hrs and private ticket allowed the ATPL with 10k hrs sitting next to me to walk free because he was a "passenger"
The plain and simple fact is that when you assume command you do just that. It is not a command that may be relinquished at a convenient moment just because the guy sitting next to you happens to hold qualifications equal to or superior to your own, unless you ask him to do so and he agrees.
You must accept the responsibility that goes with that command, full stop.
Apologies for digressing from the original posters topic, you have my utmost sympathy Sir.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Manchester
Age: 40
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not for me to speak for Mr Walker.
I fear that the debate above about 'command' is unhelpful. Perhaps Mr Walker might comment, if he is visiting here.
My perspective is that there is much more to be gained for the public good from an examination of the activities of an individual who was not on board the aircraft, but who was already 'known to' various organisations, and whose reputation precedes him.
I trust that HM Coroner will be adequately briefed. I also hope that he exercises his considerable powers to their full.
I fear that the debate above about 'command' is unhelpful. Perhaps Mr Walker might comment, if he is visiting here.
My perspective is that there is much more to be gained for the public good from an examination of the activities of an individual who was not on board the aircraft, but who was already 'known to' various organisations, and whose reputation precedes him.
I trust that HM Coroner will be adequately briefed. I also hope that he exercises his considerable powers to their full.
Basically, what I am trying to say is we are all, or should all be aware of our ability and what our licences & ratings entitle us to do, it is our awareness of this fact that should be the main factor when we are deciding to fly in less than favourable conditions. I am sorry to say this, but I cannot see why the 'activities' and 'reputation' of this 'individual' who is 'known to various organisations' has any relevance whatsoever to the tragic incident that unfolded in Blackpool 03/02/2007.
In my opinion it would be much more 'constructive' for those organisations to which this individual is known to, to call for enquiry independent from the accident at Blackpool.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Age: 68
Posts: 1,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are always contributory factors to such an accident, and I hope for Mr Walker that those people on the ground who confused the P1 in taking the decisions which were solely his will be pointed at in no unclear terms so that if need be the right prosecutions can follow. But let it be for the confusion not the go/no go decision taking because this was the P1's only task.
However, the question is what would the P1 think of all this were he here? Perhaps he would not wish anyone else to be blamed? Perhaps he was a true pilot like many of us who would never wish anyone else to be blamed for his own mistakes, and exchange these strong views constantly when on the ground due to bad weather?
I dont know those "people on the ground" with their history, nor do i know the pilot.
But i am aware of those concerned in another fatal air accident who, at the instigation of no cure no pay lawyers, have sued others where those that knew him simply know he would have never wished this to happen as the ultimate mistake on the flight was clearly his own.
So let us be clear... Whichever pilot rents a plane (and is checked out on it) is the P1 unless explicitly agreed otherwise on beforehand and noted down) and that person alone is ultimately responsible for all actions regarding the flight, all actions from others can only be considered contributory factors.
The drama meanwhile remains the same... Many people have lost a loved one, due to our hobby/passion and that remains such a sad thing.... But both pilots were part of our community, dying doing what they loved so much
However, the question is what would the P1 think of all this were he here? Perhaps he would not wish anyone else to be blamed? Perhaps he was a true pilot like many of us who would never wish anyone else to be blamed for his own mistakes, and exchange these strong views constantly when on the ground due to bad weather?
I dont know those "people on the ground" with their history, nor do i know the pilot.
But i am aware of those concerned in another fatal air accident who, at the instigation of no cure no pay lawyers, have sued others where those that knew him simply know he would have never wished this to happen as the ultimate mistake on the flight was clearly his own.
So let us be clear... Whichever pilot rents a plane (and is checked out on it) is the P1 unless explicitly agreed otherwise on beforehand and noted down) and that person alone is ultimately responsible for all actions regarding the flight, all actions from others can only be considered contributory factors.
The drama meanwhile remains the same... Many people have lost a loved one, due to our hobby/passion and that remains such a sad thing.... But both pilots were part of our community, dying doing what they loved so much
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: France
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Radar,
I think that Mr Walker has a very accurate understanding of all the factors behind the accident.
I hope that the Coroner will be in a similar position, and will investigate, thoroughly, the circumstances of the flight.
In my opinion, there is little benefit in examining who was 'in command' (whether on paper or de facto). Of greater interest are the background to the flight (the reason why the aircraft would fly to its destination and back), the development of the plan for the flight to take place, the motivation both felt by and placed upon those involved, and the promise and delivery of favour then and in the future.
Supersport, if you are as immune to normal human response to motivation as you claim, then you are unique indeed...
I think that Mr Walker has a very accurate understanding of all the factors behind the accident.
I hope that the Coroner will be in a similar position, and will investigate, thoroughly, the circumstances of the flight.
In my opinion, there is little benefit in examining who was 'in command' (whether on paper or de facto). Of greater interest are the background to the flight (the reason why the aircraft would fly to its destination and back), the development of the plan for the flight to take place, the motivation both felt by and placed upon those involved, and the promise and delivery of favour then and in the future.
Supersport, if you are as immune to normal human response to motivation as you claim, then you are unique indeed...
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any passenger is just a passenger pure and simple.
Last edited by foxmoth; 13th Apr 2008 at 21:53.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Manchester
Age: 40
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Supersport, if you are as immune to normal human response to motivation as you claim, then you are unique indeed...
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its going to be interesting the result. It might have some far reaching effects on some of the old school CFI's. Similar to the BAe Prestwick's instructors case.
I think most instructors have seen certain flights be launched in conditions which they wouldn't go themselves. Or have launched when they would have prefered not to.
Most have also seen unacceptable peer pressure bordering on bullying occuring and the blackmail which also sometimes occurs.
I wish Mr Walker all the best for the next few weeks it isn't going to be pleasant as no doudt certain parties are going to be very critical of his sons actions some of which will be valid.
I think some forget what it was like being twenty odd. The pressure that someone significantly older, more experenced and more qualified than you can apply is immense. I have also been told in the past that qualified pax don't count for the 90 day rule. So it is quite a common bull**** by individuals who should and do know better.
I think most instructors have seen certain flights be launched in conditions which they wouldn't go themselves. Or have launched when they would have prefered not to.
Most have also seen unacceptable peer pressure bordering on bullying occuring and the blackmail which also sometimes occurs.
I wish Mr Walker all the best for the next few weeks it isn't going to be pleasant as no doudt certain parties are going to be very critical of his sons actions some of which will be valid.
I think some forget what it was like being twenty odd. The pressure that someone significantly older, more experenced and more qualified than you can apply is immense. I have also been told in the past that qualified pax don't count for the 90 day rule. So it is quite a common bull**** by individuals who should and do know better.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have also been told in the past that qualified pax don't count for the 90 day rule.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It doesn't matter if its an instructor or not.
You cannot be PIC with anyone else onboard if outside 90 days unless you are an instructor yourself (and there are a heap of technical issues you need to make sure about before thats even legal) It basically has to be a training flight with all the restrictions that they have. And the other person is counted as Flight crew not pax. And you can't have anyone else onboard eg 2 pax in the back on a trial flight.
If the instructor is PIC and legal and you are DUAL everything is fine.
You cannot be PIC with anyone else onboard if outside 90 days unless you are an instructor yourself (and there are a heap of technical issues you need to make sure about before thats even legal) It basically has to be a training flight with all the restrictions that they have. And the other person is counted as Flight crew not pax. And you can't have anyone else onboard eg 2 pax in the back on a trial flight.
If the instructor is PIC and legal and you are DUAL everything is fine.
Sincere condolences to Mr Walker.
I am selfishly concerned to learn how I can prevent such a tragic end to one of my flights.
Landing count currency per se does not seem to be an explicit issue on this occasion.
Weight and balance did not directly contribute.
Fuel planning does seem to be contributory.
Met awareness does.
Get-home-itis does.
Cockpit drill does (altimeter setting)
Reliance on P2 and GPS for Nav does.
So confronted with low cloud base, no fuel for an alternate with better weather, neither nav kit nor rating for IMC, and P2+GPS not performing, is there an RVA service available? Having flown one as part of the instrument hours in my PPL course, it would be my ultimate safety net. I need a compass, a gyro and an altimeter setting. And whilst they are currently unlicensed, I need to keep my PPL instrument skills current.
I thank pprune for an opportunity to think this all through in the safety of my home.
But I have read through a lot of extraneous 'who is to blame?' stuff. We are all human, we all make mistakes. Working out whose mistake was the one that matters, or what the legal situation is, is fascinating but for me, much less important. We don't need to work out whose fault it was if we can avoid an accident.
My PPL course also told me about skill, knowledge, wisdom, judgement and experience. Looking at what went wrong is not just hindsight, it is potential foresight. Speculating about what could have gone wrong (but didn't, or might not have) is also potential foresight. These second hand real and imagined experiences are where I get most value from pprune.
And where, sadly, we are looking at a fatal accident, the sincerity of our condolences is demonstrated by a determination to do everything possible to prevent the same thing happening again. Working out who is to blame for what doesn't help.
I am selfishly concerned to learn how I can prevent such a tragic end to one of my flights.
Landing count currency per se does not seem to be an explicit issue on this occasion.
Weight and balance did not directly contribute.
Fuel planning does seem to be contributory.
Met awareness does.
Get-home-itis does.
Cockpit drill does (altimeter setting)
Reliance on P2 and GPS for Nav does.
So confronted with low cloud base, no fuel for an alternate with better weather, neither nav kit nor rating for IMC, and P2+GPS not performing, is there an RVA service available? Having flown one as part of the instrument hours in my PPL course, it would be my ultimate safety net. I need a compass, a gyro and an altimeter setting. And whilst they are currently unlicensed, I need to keep my PPL instrument skills current.
I thank pprune for an opportunity to think this all through in the safety of my home.
But I have read through a lot of extraneous 'who is to blame?' stuff. We are all human, we all make mistakes. Working out whose mistake was the one that matters, or what the legal situation is, is fascinating but for me, much less important. We don't need to work out whose fault it was if we can avoid an accident.
My PPL course also told me about skill, knowledge, wisdom, judgement and experience. Looking at what went wrong is not just hindsight, it is potential foresight. Speculating about what could have gone wrong (but didn't, or might not have) is also potential foresight. These second hand real and imagined experiences are where I get most value from pprune.
And where, sadly, we are looking at a fatal accident, the sincerity of our condolences is demonstrated by a determination to do everything possible to prevent the same thing happening again. Working out who is to blame for what doesn't help.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You cannot be PIC with anyone else onboard if outside 90 days unless you are an instructor yourself
And you can't have anyone else onboard eg 2 pax in the back on a trial flight.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Any passenger is just a passenger pure and simple.
I have not read the accident report deliberately so this reply is not biased by that - Yes the pilot in command is at the end of the day the person in charge - even if he is a new PPL and the passenger is a 20,000 hour Instructor/ATPL, but I would not go along with the above quote - any pilot who is flying as a passenger and sees something not right must make his concerns known, this can even be as an airline passenger alerting the flight deck via the cabin crew that there is for example a build up of ice on the wings. In the case of sitting next to a PPL in a deteriorating situation I would be raising questions such as "are you sure you are happy with this situation" or a statement of " I am not happy with what is happening - are you sure you would not like me to take control", As the situation gets worse I may eventually get to the stage where I would try to take control - but that would only be when I reached the stage where I was convinced the pilot flying was going to kill me if I did not! At the end of the day though, it is the designated pilot in command who is responsible for what happens.
Last edited by foxmoth : Yesterday at 14:53.
Any passenger is just a passenger pure and simple.
I have not read the accident report deliberately so this reply is not biased by that - Yes the pilot in command is at the end of the day the person in charge - even if he is a new PPL and the passenger is a 20,000 hour Instructor/ATPL, but I would not go along with the above quote - any pilot who is flying as a passenger and sees something not right must make his concerns known, this can even be as an airline passenger alerting the flight deck via the cabin crew that there is for example a build up of ice on the wings. In the case of sitting next to a PPL in a deteriorating situation I would be raising questions such as "are you sure you are happy with this situation" or a statement of " I am not happy with what is happening - are you sure you would not like me to take control", As the situation gets worse I may eventually get to the stage where I would try to take control - but that would only be when I reached the stage where I was convinced the pilot flying was going to kill me if I did not! At the end of the day though, it is the designated pilot in command who is responsible for what happens.
Last edited by foxmoth : Yesterday at 14:53.
As it stand the PIC on this flight appears to have remained PIC. He may well have succumbed to peer pressure due to the presence of a more experienced pilot but that did not relieve him of the ability to say NO.
I suspect the bending of the rules that went on to facilitate the flight require scrutiny, but at the end of the day it was still down to the PIC to make the go no go decision. It is called freedom of choice.
The same freedom of choice that drive them to continue on when it was known the weather was deteriorating and not to refuel. All mistakes made that spiraled into the incident pit that cost the crew there lives.
Hindsight always gives us 20/20 vision......
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Manchester
Age: 40
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect the bending of the rules that went on to facilitate the flight require scrutiny, but at the end of the day it was still down to the PIC to make the go no go decision. It is called freedom of choice.
The way I see it is that the CFI (or 'de facto' CFI) shouldn't have asked for the flight to go ahead in those conditions. BUT, at the end of the day he only asked, as bose-x said it us freedom of choice, the old saying springs to mind, 'Would you jump into the fire if I asked you too?'
I cannot understand why delving into the working practice's of this 'certain individual' regardless of their nature, which has be insinuated on here, bares any relevance as to why this accident happened.
Maybe I blind or naive, but to me, from reading the report, the chain of events that occurred that day make it obvious why it happened and I think that an awful lot of Students and existing Private Pilots can learn from what happened.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, BUT - If three or four 'leaders' (i.e. older, more qualified, louder, more authoritative, cooler, etc.) convince someone to jump into a fire, they are frequently held to account for contributing to the incident.
The AAIB report has the aviation facts but is a bit thin on the human interactions that may have lead to the decisions taken. Hopefully, the Coroner will establish these broader facts.
I think the lessons from this incident are much more general life skills than specifically related to aviation. Group think/peer pressure/ etc. can lead to catastrophically bad decisions in sport, driving, drinking, life in general - not just aviation.
The AAIB report has the aviation facts but is a bit thin on the human interactions that may have lead to the decisions taken. Hopefully, the Coroner will establish these broader facts.
I think the lessons from this incident are much more general life skills than specifically related to aviation. Group think/peer pressure/ etc. can lead to catastrophically bad decisions in sport, driving, drinking, life in general - not just aviation.