McRae Crash & Fatal Accident Inquiry
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: England
Age: 56
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi
A very regrettable incident, but I think that the report is slightly misleading, and open to mis-interpretation. Anyone reading this may conclude that McRae was incapable of flying the aircraft which, I understand, is not true.
He had presumably, at some point in the past, undertaken a type rating and subsequently flown regularly enough to be perfectly capable of flying his Squirrel and therefore I'm guessing he was similarly perfectly capable and competent of flying the aircraft on the day.
What he hadn't done was renew his license or re-validate his type rating, which he absolutely should have done. I suspect however that even if he had, the accident would still have occurred as I find it unlikely that he would have failed his LPC, and therefore been grounded. (assuming of course that he would have even honoured the grounding if he'd failed).
I think most pilots will agree that the cause of this accident was less to do with the renewal of his license (a paperwork exercise after all) or the renewal of his LPC but more to do with his overconfidence and his piloting of the machine on the day.
A Very regrettable incident.
Joel
A very regrettable incident, but I think that the report is slightly misleading, and open to mis-interpretation. Anyone reading this may conclude that McRae was incapable of flying the aircraft which, I understand, is not true.
He had presumably, at some point in the past, undertaken a type rating and subsequently flown regularly enough to be perfectly capable of flying his Squirrel and therefore I'm guessing he was similarly perfectly capable and competent of flying the aircraft on the day.
What he hadn't done was renew his license or re-validate his type rating, which he absolutely should have done. I suspect however that even if he had, the accident would still have occurred as I find it unlikely that he would have failed his LPC, and therefore been grounded. (assuming of course that he would have even honoured the grounding if he'd failed).
I think most pilots will agree that the cause of this accident was less to do with the renewal of his license (a paperwork exercise after all) or the renewal of his LPC but more to do with his overconfidence and his piloting of the machine on the day.
A Very regrettable incident.
Joel
There are no limits
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Shrewsbury, England.
Age: 67
Posts: 505
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If he had renewed his LPC there is a strong possibility that this accident would not have happened.
(If the Reason Swiss Cheese model holds water)
The examiner may have revised Servo Transparency or the pilot may have been criticised for his overconfidence.
(If the Reason Swiss Cheese model holds water)
The examiner may have revised Servo Transparency or the pilot may have been criticised for his overconfidence.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see your reasoning - wrong attitude, then perhaps the Newspaper's headline would change only the date on which a different accident would take place.
Now try to see it from the viewpoint of the mother of the child who died. No paperwork .... he should not have been in the air .... my son would still be alive.
Unlikely to go well for the Pilot's reputation, this inquest.
Now try to see it from the viewpoint of the mother of the child who died. No paperwork .... he should not have been in the air .... my son would still be alive.
Unlikely to go well for the Pilot's reputation, this inquest.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We all know that the 5 year licence renewal is a revenue source for a government monopoly justifying it's costs. There is no need for it, and they don't even send a reminder. People are busy and you could have a bit of sympathy for someone being a month or two late.
However, in my book, flying without a LPC for 2 years is wrong and cannot be excused.
For all we know the guy could have been a great pilot or he could have been a menace. Without a recent LPC we will never know.
Tarman
However, in my book, flying without a LPC for 2 years is wrong and cannot be excused.
For all we know the guy could have been a great pilot or he could have been a menace. Without a recent LPC we will never know.
Tarman
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: UK
Age: 61
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Telstar, thankfully the reason we have such thorough, investigative inquiries such as this one, is to give someone of legal standing who is skilled in the disemination of evidence, the chance try to establish what "might" have caused such a tragic accident. Then we do not have to simply take the opinion of people like you who were not there, have never flown with the pilot, but are happy to simply "chip in" with hearsay comments in order to elevate themselves into some higher place on such a forum as this.
I understand that the hearing of evidence was completed in May, and that lawyers for the various parties are now making thier final submissions, for a Determination due in August.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Telstar - whilst the way you put it may appear slightly harsh, this whole issue has frightening similarities to the http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/446...=cumbria+crash that brought out so much emotion (but eventually settled down into a reasoned discussion & understanding) a few months ago.
The singular difference was that Mark Wier was flying solo but, from all the evidence to date, whether you knew & respected the man & his spectacular driving skills or not, most professional & experienced helicopter pilots will put a similar flying style warning marker on this tragic event.
As we're seeing in other walks of life, from Politicians to Media Moguls, no-one should be above the law and therefore feel able to abuse their profile - just because they have skills in one area, doesn't mean they can instantly transfer them to another. And before the brickbats come flying, that's just a general observation, not a comment on this case!
The singular difference was that Mark Wier was flying solo but, from all the evidence to date, whether you knew & respected the man & his spectacular driving skills or not, most professional & experienced helicopter pilots will put a similar flying style warning marker on this tragic event.
As we're seeing in other walks of life, from Politicians to Media Moguls, no-one should be above the law and therefore feel able to abuse their profile - just because they have skills in one area, doesn't mean they can instantly transfer them to another. And before the brickbats come flying, that's just a general observation, not a comment on this case!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ban Don Ling
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
" Telstar, thankfully the reason we have such thorough, investigative inquiries such as this one, is to give someone of legal standing who is skilled in the disemination (sic) of evidence, the chance try to establish what "might" have caused such a tragic accident. "
Mull of Kintyre. Board of Inquiry. VFR, CFIT - IMC. Non-qualified MPīs, verdict changed. "Legal standing". "Might". I am the least qualified, and will take the flak, but I am still confused.
Mull of Kintyre. Board of Inquiry. VFR, CFIT - IMC. Non-qualified MPīs, verdict changed. "Legal standing". "Might". I am the least qualified, and will take the flak, but I am still confused.
Since when is it your instructors or indeed any instructors responsibility to check you are current ? I in 30 yrs have never had any instructor check I have done my annual check etc. In fact I have a CAA ppl and I haven't done a check ride for couple of years and nobody has checked up on me as it is the responsibility of the pilot surely ?
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Florida/Sandbox/UK
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course it is the pilot's responsibility to ensure he remains current if he is going to use the licence. No examiner is going to check up on a pilot as a matter of course. However, at the point of taking the LPC, the examiner will check the current status of the licence to determine which type of check (renewal or revalidation) and whether you meet the requirements to take that check.
I'm not saying that it is the examiners responsibility to ascertain whether or not he has flow whilst out of date.
I am simply stating that if i was an examiner carrying out a licence renewal or re-validation i would, as a matter of course, check that the licence was valid before i signed it. This is something that the examiners that do my LPC/OPC checks do and it seems like simple logic to me.
I challenge anyone so suggest that that is not a sensible precaution - apart from anything else, it is a good way of ensuring that said examiner does not end up being asked under oath why he signed a document that had expired.
Let me be clear - i agree completely that the primary and overwhelming responsibility lies with the licence holder, but that does not mean that we should miss opportunities to catch errors - otherwise what is the point of checking people if not to identify and correct errors. It is, after all a "Licence Proficiency check".
OH
I am simply stating that if i was an examiner carrying out a licence renewal or re-validation i would, as a matter of course, check that the licence was valid before i signed it. This is something that the examiners that do my LPC/OPC checks do and it seems like simple logic to me.
I challenge anyone so suggest that that is not a sensible precaution - apart from anything else, it is a good way of ensuring that said examiner does not end up being asked under oath why he signed a document that had expired.
Let me be clear - i agree completely that the primary and overwhelming responsibility lies with the licence holder, but that does not mean that we should miss opportunities to catch errors - otherwise what is the point of checking people if not to identify and correct errors. It is, after all a "Licence Proficiency check".
OH
I can't believe there is even a discussion about whether the TRE should check the licence when conducting an LPC - of course he should! Not only is it common sense and logical, it's a requirement stated in CAA Document 28 (Guidance for Helicopter TREs) and something a CAA Inspector will specifically monitor when conducting a TRE authority renewal.
(Sady the document is protected, so I can't copy the tex!)
(Sady the document is protected, so I can't copy the tex!)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I can't believe there is even a discussion about whether the TRE should check the licence when conducting an LPC" - there isn't !
I merely said that providing the licence has an in date valid period, it is possible for the RATING proficiency check to have expired.
Under those circumstances, if said Pilot is presented to an examiner to renew that licence it isn't the responsibility of the examiner to ascertain whether the Pilot has been flying whilst out of a valid proficiency check.
I merely said that providing the licence has an in date valid period, it is possible for the RATING proficiency check to have expired.
Under those circumstances, if said Pilot is presented to an examiner to renew that licence it isn't the responsibility of the examiner to ascertain whether the Pilot has been flying whilst out of a valid proficiency check.
Come on guys,
Do you really think that "the papers" in this case would have made the diffrence?
Honestly if that's the case, that's more than naive.
Now, I had my medical lapse on me once for a month, and therefore I was not legal to fly.... but guess what I didn't just fall out of the sky as a result and if I had done so, I recon you guys would blame it on my lapsed medical right?!? Great!!
This accident happened due to the personality behind the controlls, not due to that his License had lapsed. End of story..
I think this has been discussed (to death)before on one of the threads about the accident.
Do you really think that "the papers" in this case would have made the diffrence?
Honestly if that's the case, that's more than naive.
Now, I had my medical lapse on me once for a month, and therefore I was not legal to fly.... but guess what I didn't just fall out of the sky as a result and if I had done so, I recon you guys would blame it on my lapsed medical right?!? Great!!
This accident happened due to the personality behind the controlls, not due to that his License had lapsed. End of story..
I think this has been discussed (to death)before on one of the threads about the accident.
No - i don't think that the paperwork would have made a difference in the occurrence of this accident.
But that does not change my point of view on the specific, recent, discussion point which was the wisdom / requirement for an examiner to check the validity of licence before he signs off an LPC.
Furthermore: the paperwork will, however, make a massive difference to the aftermath of this tragedy - particularly for the Pilot's family, who will now be even more exposed to massive legal action (with all of the implications that go with that) as a result of the fact that his licence had expired - not to mention the additional heart-ache and stress.
OH
But that does not change my point of view on the specific, recent, discussion point which was the wisdom / requirement for an examiner to check the validity of licence before he signs off an LPC.
Furthermore: the paperwork will, however, make a massive difference to the aftermath of this tragedy - particularly for the Pilot's family, who will now be even more exposed to massive legal action (with all of the implications that go with that) as a result of the fact that his licence had expired - not to mention the additional heart-ache and stress.
OH