Cardiff City Footballer Feared Missing after aircraft disappeared near Channel Island
Guernsey ATC did nothing wrong.
The flight was filed under visual (VFR)rules, so flying ‘looking out the window’. It’s entirely normal to offer alternative routes and heights for weather (and traffic) avoidance. So yes, business as usual for this flight, and any other making similar flight.
The report stated the manoeuvre was to maintain VFR not regain it. That indicates he was still flying with references to good ground contact or a defined horizon.If he then flew into cloud or a shower that reduces visibility, disorientation can occur fast enough to lose control regardless of any CO problem that may have degraded the pilots faculties.
edit auto correct
The flight was filed under visual (VFR)rules, so flying ‘looking out the window’. It’s entirely normal to offer alternative routes and heights for weather (and traffic) avoidance. So yes, business as usual for this flight, and any other making similar flight.
The report stated the manoeuvre was to maintain VFR not regain it. That indicates he was still flying with references to good ground contact or a defined horizon.If he then flew into cloud or a shower that reduces visibility, disorientation can occur fast enough to lose control regardless of any CO problem that may have degraded the pilots faculties.
edit auto correct
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Uk
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The argument that Ibbotson had thousands of hours and was thus experienced enough, even without holding a CPL, has been heard before. Experience doesn’t prove ability.
How many times have we read of pilots who have forged licences, Parker penned their hours, or just plain not held a licence at all and been caught many years later? By then we hear the same argument...blogs has proved he can cope by his experience, so what’s the problem?
As in this case...no legal licence...no vote.
How many times have we read of pilots who have forged licences, Parker penned their hours, or just plain not held a licence at all and been caught many years later? By then we hear the same argument...blogs has proved he can cope by his experience, so what’s the problem?
As in this case...no legal licence...no vote.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Age: 60
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The “can of worms”
Of course whilst Henderson is quite rightly being prosecuted after many years of making money out of the illegal charter business, the worms in the can mentioned by Henderson in his text message wriggle on- at least three of the witnesses called to court have been facilitating the illegal provision of unlicensed charter flights throughout Europe, only more recently under the guise of cost sharing, one case with which I am familiar where the pilot had no valid licence, no medical and the aircraft was significantly out of check, suffered an inflight failure and landed at a very strange choice of unserviced airfield ..... of course if I or anyone else were to name names here I’ll be shut down within hours as several of the culprits appear to be registered users of pprune. The CAA of course didn’t bother their arses until the unfortunate Sala was killed, that said it still appears unclear whether they will now properly investigate the entire criminal setup, easy to start with those listed witnesses from this case who are or have been the registered owners and sometimes maintainers of aircraft on both the US and UK register, perhaps regular attendees at European race events and football matches. Just saying, this accident was entirely preventable had the CAA taken a firm stance and engaged with the police several years ago.
More likely because your initial post was,( in my unprofessional opinion), libelous.
I formed my opinion based on the reported quotes. I think it's reasonable to assume that the quotes in the press are accurate; they'd be exceedingly unlikely to fabricate them.
It's my opinion that to argue to a jury that holding a PPL vs CPL has no reflection on the competency of the pilot is extremely misleading. The standards which a pilot is trained to are clearly higher for a CPL, and Ibbotson had never demonstrated these standards.
Similarly, to try and convince a jury that an AOC has no relevance to the safety of an operation is misleading. This flight would not have happened if following AOC rules.
I'm perfectly happy to change my opinion if someone points out errors in my thinking. Mr Spence's argument of "well nobody objected" is unconvincing. It smacks of "it's only wrong if you get caught".
Last edited by Katamarino; 29th Oct 2021 at 16:14.
Katamarino - you said
You have a touching faith in the press. Whilst it may be unlikely that they'd fabricate quotes (although not unknown), it's perfectly possible for them to get quotes wrong - especially quotes from court proceedings, where they're not allowed to record, and have to write everything down.
airsound
I think it's reasonable to assume that the quotes in the press are accurate; they'd be exceedingly unlikely to fabricate them.
airsound
Wells said 'Midlifec'. I can't make up my mind whether this is due to laziness, incompetence , lack of resource or wilful ignorance on the part of the relevant authorities. It is appalling.
'pilotmike' and 'katamarino' - I entirely agree with your comments with respect to the Commercial Pilot Licence and the testing, training and extra discipline required. I am an experienced private pilot; my partner, also originally a private pilot, became a CPL holder several years ago, The style and professionalism of her flying impresses me, and gives me confidence in her capability and judgement. I still have more flying hours than she has, in a wider variety of aircraft and circumstances, but I'd rate her flying judgement over mine any day. The careful professional way she prepares for sorties - her commercial work is not airline flying - is a pleasure to watch.
I wondered beforehand whether a CPL would really make any difference - it most certainly does. It is in my view a significant step up and beyond the PPL level, professional though I try to be in my approach.
I wondered beforehand whether a CPL would really make any difference - it most certainly does. It is in my view a significant step up and beyond the PPL level, professional though I try to be in my approach.
I agree with the points yourself and others have made re AOC CPL benefits. In a previous life I used to occasionally charter both fixed wing and rotary, the minimum requirement was the operator had to have an AOC to be on the list.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: On top of the world
Age: 73
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Post by Yellow Sun
Some 10 + years ago, a CAA Flight Ops Inspector commented to me "we know these things go on but as we're not allowed to question the culprits with a cattle prod behind the hangar, it's hard to catch them!". I doubt much has changed.
The CAA may have strong suspicions that unlawful activity is going on, but mounting an investigation that might stand any realistic chance of gaining the evidence to justify a charge, let alone proceed to prosecution would be eye wateringly expensive.
I would concur with anyone disputing that a Commercial Pilot's Licence simply allows the holder to be paid for their flying, and that it has no bearing on their ability to fly safely, especially under adverse conditions.
Training for - and passing the tests - for gaining a Commercial licence give the far greater knowledge and skills to Commercial pilots, allowing them to make better, safer judgements, especially under commercial pressures. All Commercial pilots are tested thoroughly for their theoretical knowledge and their flying ability, as well as judgement to a greater degree than a mere Private pilot's licence. Even the Class 1 medical is a far higher hurdle to pass than the lesser requirements of a Private pilot. Many perfectly able Private pilots are weeded out at the Class 1 medical as being unfit for Commercial flying.
Otherwise, what would be the point of requiring Commercial pilots to undertake an enhanced medical, as well as a long and arduous course of study, as well as an in-depth course of flying training in order to demonstrate the flying skills required to a considerably greater level than that required for the PPL? The theory course and written exams, as well as the flying course and test(s) cost at least Ł20,000 and 8 months of dedication and hard work. Many prospective Commercial pilots invest far more time and money than that. Gaining a Commercial Pilots Licence is sufficiently difficult that many never achieve it, despite putting their heart and soul into it. It is NOT an easily gained qualification, for the avoidance of doubt.
If it were merely a paperwork exercise, as has been reported, wouldn't it be far simpler all round for anyone wishing to be paid for their flying simply to stump up say Ł20,000 to buy a shiny new Commercial licence, then operate with impunity and without the greater knowledge and skills required for the Commercial environment?
Wouldn't that be simpler? For sure! As safe? Definitely not! Anyone suggesting it is merely a paperwork issue would either be ignorant of the facts or misrepresenting them. It is interesting that the jury in the recent Henderson case apparently aligned with these sentiments and found the defendant guilty, despite suggestions that inadequate licencing and qualifications weren't relevant.
To put the above into context, when I flew aeroplanes and helicopters as a Private pilot, I believed I was a good pilot, about as safe, knowledgeable and experienced as could be, able to undertake almost any flight completely safely - coincidentally with similar hours to David Ibbotson's reported hours. Then I underwent the ATPL training, comprised of studying for 15 difficult written exams, flying training, flight exams etc, and blowing Ł40+k in the process. If it gave me just one thing, it was the knowledge that I didn't know it all. It taught me that there were vast areas of potential risk that I was previously either unaware of - or more likely in denial: that I needed to be more careful than I had ever realised or admitted before, factors that needed more careful consideration than I had ever before believed possible. Mercifully I learned that I had SO much more to learn about inclement weather, commercial pressures, Aviation Law, and taking tough decisions when I had doubts about the aircraft's serviceability, that the ATPL training has thankfully kept me safe to this day. "There but by the grace of God".
To that extent, I find myself fully supporting Katamarino's sentiments on the true value of Commercial Pilot's Licence. It demonstrates a level of knowledge, ability, experience and competence that merely holding a Private Pilot's Licence does not. It is more than a paperwork issue.
Training for - and passing the tests - for gaining a Commercial licence give the far greater knowledge and skills to Commercial pilots, allowing them to make better, safer judgements, especially under commercial pressures. All Commercial pilots are tested thoroughly for their theoretical knowledge and their flying ability, as well as judgement to a greater degree than a mere Private pilot's licence. Even the Class 1 medical is a far higher hurdle to pass than the lesser requirements of a Private pilot. Many perfectly able Private pilots are weeded out at the Class 1 medical as being unfit for Commercial flying.
Otherwise, what would be the point of requiring Commercial pilots to undertake an enhanced medical, as well as a long and arduous course of study, as well as an in-depth course of flying training in order to demonstrate the flying skills required to a considerably greater level than that required for the PPL? The theory course and written exams, as well as the flying course and test(s) cost at least Ł20,000 and 8 months of dedication and hard work. Many prospective Commercial pilots invest far more time and money than that. Gaining a Commercial Pilots Licence is sufficiently difficult that many never achieve it, despite putting their heart and soul into it. It is NOT an easily gained qualification, for the avoidance of doubt.
If it were merely a paperwork exercise, as has been reported, wouldn't it be far simpler all round for anyone wishing to be paid for their flying simply to stump up say Ł20,000 to buy a shiny new Commercial licence, then operate with impunity and without the greater knowledge and skills required for the Commercial environment?
Wouldn't that be simpler? For sure! As safe? Definitely not! Anyone suggesting it is merely a paperwork issue would either be ignorant of the facts or misrepresenting them. It is interesting that the jury in the recent Henderson case apparently aligned with these sentiments and found the defendant guilty, despite suggestions that inadequate licencing and qualifications weren't relevant.
To put the above into context, when I flew aeroplanes and helicopters as a Private pilot, I believed I was a good pilot, about as safe, knowledgeable and experienced as could be, able to undertake almost any flight completely safely - coincidentally with similar hours to David Ibbotson's reported hours. Then I underwent the ATPL training, comprised of studying for 15 difficult written exams, flying training, flight exams etc, and blowing Ł40+k in the process. If it gave me just one thing, it was the knowledge that I didn't know it all. It taught me that there were vast areas of potential risk that I was previously either unaware of - or more likely in denial: that I needed to be more careful than I had ever realised or admitted before, factors that needed more careful consideration than I had ever before believed possible. Mercifully I learned that I had SO much more to learn about inclement weather, commercial pressures, Aviation Law, and taking tough decisions when I had doubts about the aircraft's serviceability, that the ATPL training has thankfully kept me safe to this day. "There but by the grace of God".
To that extent, I find myself fully supporting Katamarino's sentiments on the true value of Commercial Pilot's Licence. It demonstrates a level of knowledge, ability, experience and competence that merely holding a Private Pilot's Licence does not. It is more than a paperwork issue.
I would concur with anyone disputing that a Commercial Pilot's Licence simply allows the holder to be paid for their flying, and that it has no bearing on their ability to fly safely, especially under adverse conditions.
Training for - and passing the tests - for gaining a Commercial licence give the far greater knowledge and skills to Commercial pilots, allowing them to make better, safer judgements, especially under commercial pressures. All Commercial pilots are tested thoroughly for their theoretical knowledge and their flying ability, as well as judgement to a greater degree than a mere Private pilot's licence. Even the Class 1 medical is a far higher hurdle to pass than the lesser requirements of a Private pilot. Many perfectly able Private pilots are weeded out at the Class 1 medical as being unfit for Commercial flying.
Otherwise, what would be the point of requiring Commercial pilots to undertake an enhanced medical, as well as a long and arduous course of study, as well as an in-depth course of flying training in order to demonstrate the flying skills required to a considerably greater level than that required for the PPL? The theory course and written exams, as well as the flying course and test(s) cost at least Ł20,000 and 8 months of dedication and hard work. Many prospective Commercial pilots invest far more time and money than that. Gaining a Commercial Pilots Licence is sufficiently difficult that many never achieve it, despite putting their heart and soul into it. It is NOT an easily gained qualification, for the avoidance of doubt.
If it were merely a paperwork exercise, as has been reported, wouldn't it be far simpler all round for anyone wishing to be paid for their flying simply to stump up say Ł20,000 to buy a shiny new Commercial licence, then operate with impunity and without the greater knowledge and skills required for the Commercial environment?
Wouldn't that be simpler? For sure! As safe? Definitely not! Anyone suggesting it is merely a paperwork issue would either be ignorant of the facts or misrepresenting them. It is interesting that the jury in the recent Henderson case apparently aligned with these sentiments and found the defendant guilty, despite suggestions that inadequate licencing and qualifications weren't relevant.
To put the above into context, when I flew aeroplanes and helicopters as a Private pilot, I believed I was a good pilot, about as safe, knowledgeable and experienced as could be, able to undertake almost any flight completely safely - coincidentally with similar hours to David Ibbotson's reported hours. Then I underwent the ATPL training, comprised of studying for 15 difficult written exams, flying training, flight exams etc, and blowing Ł40+k in the process. If it gave me just one thing, it was the knowledge that I didn't know it all. It taught me that there were vast areas of potential risk that I was previously either unaware of - or more likely in denial: that I needed to be more careful than I had ever realised or admitted before, factors that needed more careful consideration than I had ever before believed possible. Mercifully I learned that I had SO much more to learn about inclement weather, commercial pressures, Aviation Law, and taking tough decisions when I had doubts about the aircraft's serviceability, that the ATPL training has thankfully kept me safe to this day. "There but by the grace of God".
To that extent, I find myself fully supporting Katamarino's sentiments on the true value of Commercial Pilot's Licence. It demonstrates a level of knowledge, ability, experience and competence that merely holding a Private Pilot's Licence does not. It is more than a paperwork issue.
Training for - and passing the tests - for gaining a Commercial licence give the far greater knowledge and skills to Commercial pilots, allowing them to make better, safer judgements, especially under commercial pressures. All Commercial pilots are tested thoroughly for their theoretical knowledge and their flying ability, as well as judgement to a greater degree than a mere Private pilot's licence. Even the Class 1 medical is a far higher hurdle to pass than the lesser requirements of a Private pilot. Many perfectly able Private pilots are weeded out at the Class 1 medical as being unfit for Commercial flying.
Otherwise, what would be the point of requiring Commercial pilots to undertake an enhanced medical, as well as a long and arduous course of study, as well as an in-depth course of flying training in order to demonstrate the flying skills required to a considerably greater level than that required for the PPL? The theory course and written exams, as well as the flying course and test(s) cost at least Ł20,000 and 8 months of dedication and hard work. Many prospective Commercial pilots invest far more time and money than that. Gaining a Commercial Pilots Licence is sufficiently difficult that many never achieve it, despite putting their heart and soul into it. It is NOT an easily gained qualification, for the avoidance of doubt.
If it were merely a paperwork exercise, as has been reported, wouldn't it be far simpler all round for anyone wishing to be paid for their flying simply to stump up say Ł20,000 to buy a shiny new Commercial licence, then operate with impunity and without the greater knowledge and skills required for the Commercial environment?
Wouldn't that be simpler? For sure! As safe? Definitely not! Anyone suggesting it is merely a paperwork issue would either be ignorant of the facts or misrepresenting them. It is interesting that the jury in the recent Henderson case apparently aligned with these sentiments and found the defendant guilty, despite suggestions that inadequate licencing and qualifications weren't relevant.
To put the above into context, when I flew aeroplanes and helicopters as a Private pilot, I believed I was a good pilot, about as safe, knowledgeable and experienced as could be, able to undertake almost any flight completely safely - coincidentally with similar hours to David Ibbotson's reported hours. Then I underwent the ATPL training, comprised of studying for 15 difficult written exams, flying training, flight exams etc, and blowing Ł40+k in the process. If it gave me just one thing, it was the knowledge that I didn't know it all. It taught me that there were vast areas of potential risk that I was previously either unaware of - or more likely in denial: that I needed to be more careful than I had ever realised or admitted before, factors that needed more careful consideration than I had ever before believed possible. Mercifully I learned that I had SO much more to learn about inclement weather, commercial pressures, Aviation Law, and taking tough decisions when I had doubts about the aircraft's serviceability, that the ATPL training has thankfully kept me safe to this day. "There but by the grace of God".
To that extent, I find myself fully supporting Katamarino's sentiments on the true value of Commercial Pilot's Licence. It demonstrates a level of knowledge, ability, experience and competence that merely holding a Private Pilot's Licence does not. It is more than a paperwork issue.
(https://assets.publishing.service.go...LAWX_08-21.pdf)
With a crew of 2 ATPL holders and a Commander who lectures on Safety Management Systems they managed to get themselves out of shape. Whilst I accept that none of us are immune from a bad day at the office, I have been critical of the Commanders actions and wondered whether any superior skills over a PPL holder were demonstrated on the day? If not, then does the fact that the CAA seem to have deemed it appropriate that no action needed to be taken against the Commander, are the CAA themselves indirectly supporting the position that there really is no difference between the skill set of a private pilot and professional pilot licence holder?
May I request you start a new thread on that one please. The sentences for the Sala case have not yet been determined, and the two events aren’t connected.
'pilotmike' and 'katamarino' - I entirely agree with your comments with respect to the Commercial Pilot Licence and the testing, training and extra discipline required. I am an experienced private pilot; my partner, also originally a private pilot, became a CPL holder several years ago, The style and professionalism of her flying impresses me, and gives me confidence in her capability and judgement. I still have more flying hours than she has, in a wider variety of aircraft and circumstances, but I'd rate her flying judgement over mine any day. The careful professional way she prepares for sorties - her commercial work is not airline flying - is a pleasure to watch.
I wondered beforehand whether a CPL would really make any difference - it most certainly does. It is in my view a significant step up and beyond the PPL level, professional though I try to be in my approach.
I wondered beforehand whether a CPL would really make any difference - it most certainly does. It is in my view a significant step up and beyond the PPL level, professional though I try to be in my approach.
Moderator
An element of CPL training is the decision to decline a flight for any of several worthy reasons. A PPL may learn this by osmosis over time, and good for them if they do. A CPL is taught, and examined on the topic for the license. I have seen many occasions when a PPL appeared eager to fly a flight that a CPL was reluctant to fly).
de minimus non curat lex
Have there been previous prosecutions by the CAA or convictions for similar activity? There may have been but it took the poor Sala family to suffer this avoidable tragedy to raise the profile of this type of activity. I hope it has an impact on public awareness as well as the CAA's policy of dealing with dodgy customers. I am sure we have all known a few
40 months at “Her Majesty Pleasure”.
Had previous aviation convictions
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Age: 60
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The same Robert Murgatroyd that helped a well known football agent and or the agents son with an aircraft purchase and the management of illegal charter operations.This whole rotten affair is full of individuals that have been and are up to their ears in dishonest illegal aviation operations and as I said previously a number of them were listed as witnesses in the Henderson trial. The CAA are so close to these crooks and yet nothing will probably be done about it.
The same Robert Murgatroyd that helped a well known football agent and or the agents son with an aircraft purchase and the management of illegal charter operations.This whole rotten affair is full of individuals that have been and are up to their ears in dishonest illegal aviation operations and as I said previously a number of them were listed as witnesses in the Henderson trial. The CAA are so close to these crooks and yet nothing will probably be done about it.
The same Robert Murgatroyd that helped a well known football agent and or the agents son with an aircraft purchase and the management of illegal charter operations.This whole rotten affair is full of individuals that have been and are up to their ears in dishonest illegal aviation operations and as I said previously a number of them were listed as witnesses in the Henderson trial. The CAA are so close to these crooks and yet nothing will probably be done about it.
Jack
de minimus non curat lex
The same Robert Murgatroyd that helped a well known football agent and or the agents son with an aircraft purchase and the management of illegal charter operations.This whole rotten affair is full of individuals that have been and are up to their ears in dishonest illegal aviation operations and as I said previously a number of them were listed as witnesses in the Henderson trial. The CAA are so close to these crooks and yet nothing will probably be done about it.
Start with the “cost sharing” rules & regulations.
Refine the ANO etc to clearly explain in unequivocal terms with anti avoidance legislation what “hire & reward” means & confine ‘grey charters’ to the dustbin of history.