Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
User avatar
By Katamarino
#1882357
Dave Johnson wrote:I may well have got the wrong end of the stick (I often do!) but my understanding was that the AAIB concluded that the most probable cause of the crash was pilot incapacitation due to Carbon Monoxide poisoning.
If that was the case, then I don't see how many licenses the pilot held, or how the flight was being operated, they would have been just as dead.
While there may well have been a contravention of regulations, but I don't see how that can be regarded as the cause of the crash.


If the regulations were not contravened, this aircraft could not have been used for the flight, and the accident would not have occurred.

Even if this aircraft was used, but with a properly trained and qualified pilot, he'd almost certainly have been properly using the pressurization system which would have prevented any CO ingress.

So, the contravention of regulations did directly lead to the crash.
A le Ron liked this
User avatar
By skydriller
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1882358
Katamarino wrote:If the regulations were not contravened, this aircraft could not have been used for the flight, and the accident would not have occurred.

Even if this aircraft was used, but with a properly trained and qualified pilot, he'd almost certainly have been properly using the pressurization system which would have prevented any CO ingress.

So, the contravention of regulations did directly lead to the crash.


Im not sure Im very happy with this train of thought. It does seem quite like the perhaps familiar to some, "Foriegners driving in the Middle East" laws, ie, if as a foriegner you are involved in an accident with a national, then regardless of what happened it is your fault, because if you, the foreigner, were not there, the accident would not have happened...

I have no issue with prosecution and conviction of illegal flight arrangements, but I do with the idea of being responsible for the crash leading to the death of the pilot and player.

Regards, SD..
anglianav8r liked this
User avatar
By Katamarino
#1882360
skydriller wrote: Im not sure Im very happy with this train of thought. It does seem quite like the perhaps familiar to some, "Foriegners driving in the Middle East" laws, ie, if as a foriegner you are involved in an accident with a national, then regardless of what happened it is your fault, because if you, the foreigner, were not there, the accident would not have happened...

I have no issue with prosecution and conviction of illegal flight arrangements, but I do with the idea of being responsible for the crash leading to the death of the pilot and player.

Regards, SD..


I don't think your comparison is valid. In your Middle East example, the foreigner is doing nothing wrong and is made a scapegoat.

In this situation, Henderson deliberately ignored rules which were specifically put in place to avoid what happened. AOCs don't allow piston singles because they are seen as less safe. Commercial pilots are required because they're trained to a higher standard. If he had followed the rules, this accident would not have happened.

Those rules are there precisely to break links in the proverbial chain.
A le Ron liked this
User avatar
By neil9327
#1882367
Was it purely the fact that money was being illegally made, that made this flight dangerous? I.e. had the pilot agreed to fly the guy for free, would this have prevented the crash?
User avatar
By SpeedBrake
#1882368
johnm wrote:There is a big difference between a cost shared private flight and an illegal charter flight from a legal perspective however from a practical perspective the difference is more nuanced.

The key is that the passengers understand the difference and what they are involved in.


Precisely my problem with the way flights are “marketed” on a well known cost staring website. I see people turn up at my local airfield cafe who believe they’ve booked a sightseeing flight and are jumping into an aircraft with newly qualified PPLs with less than 100 hours under their belt.
JJMurphy liked this
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1882369
neil9327 wrote:Was it purely the fact that money was being illegally made, that made this flight dangerous? I.e. had the pilot agreed to fly the guy for free, would this have prevented the crash?


He would not have made the flight for free.

They were running the operation to make money, not to be noble and ferry footballers around for free.

What I don't quite understand is that, in general, people bemoan that law enforcers seldom manage to do anything about 'the big guys' behind the scene and only deal with the 'small fry'

Here those organising illegal stuff are held to account and there is post after post with 'whataboutism'

What is that all about?
A4 Pacific, neil9327 liked this
User avatar
By SpeedBrake
#1882370
neil9327 wrote:Was it purely the fact that money was being illegally made, that made this flight dangerous? I.e. had the pilot agreed to fly the guy for free, would this have prevented the crash?


Money has a big influence. When you work for an AOC operator you are trained in commercial pressures and how to prioritise safety over pressure from the customer. In my Bizjet life I’ve had passengers in the back come up and talk at me over my shoulder when trying to land in very tricky conditions.

In this case, would Henderson have offered to make the flight if he wasn’t making £ on it? Likely not.
Would Henderson have roped in a pilot he knew wasn’t qualified (type rated) if he wasn’t making £ on it? Likely not.
Would Ibbottson have accepted the flight if he wasn’t making £ on it?
Would Ibbottson have continued to operate at night if there hadn’t been commercial pressure to get Sala back to Cardiff that night? Likely not.
By A4 Pacific
#1882384
neil9327 wrote:Was it purely the fact that money was being illegally made, that made this flight dangerous? I.e. had the pilot agreed to fly the guy for free, would this have prevented the crash?


We will never know for certain what actually caused this accident. (Not least because no recording devices were fitted to this aircraft) So it is impossible to say what precisely would have prevented it.

However what we do now know as a result of this recent court case is that this was an illegally operated flight. Illegal because many, many corners were cut/rules broken. Rules that the judge himself stated were “written in blood”. That being the blood from many previous hard lessons learned and the implementation of rules to prevent their recurrence.

Some of the rules that were broken involved the qualifications and relevant recent experience of the pilot. What is crystal clear is that, on that basis alone, and flying in the conditions leading up to the crash, a loss of control event was likely even without any contribution from CO, and even if this was an unpaid ‘private’ flight!

As I said, we do need to be mindful that there is an inquest still to come which will probably explore the likely involvement of CO. Now I have no intention of spoon feeding anyone, however people wishing to examine that aspect would do well to scrutinise closely all that the AAIB report has to say on that issue. Because even that matter is affected by the operator’s false declarations.
Last edited by A4 Pacific on Sat Nov 13, 2021 8:27 am, edited 3 times in total.
neil9327 liked this
User avatar
By Sooty25
#1882388
What annoys me about the whole episode is the simple stupidity and greed involved. I don't believe for one minute any of those involved were doing this to "help out", it was done to "earn a few quid" regardless of rules created for safety.

The football industry, the teams, the players and all those inbetween are awash with cash, so if anyone needs to cut corners, it isn't this lot.

I just googled for a quote, private jet, cardiff to nantes and back, with 24hrs between for mid next week. All legal, above board and offsettable against tax. These guys spend more than this in restaurants.

Image

I'm sure the rule book will be thrown at me should I ever infringe, yet that won't be a deliberate act and the only victims will be a few tonnes of Jet1 and a bit of inconvenience.

I only have sympathy for the naive Mr Sala. Mr Henderson should suck it up and do the porridge. The rest of the industry needs to learn from it.
Flyin'Dutch', SpeedBrake, MikeB and 2 others liked this
User avatar
By neil9327
#1882444
SpeedBrake wrote:
neil9327 wrote:Was it purely the fact that money was being illegally made, that made this flight dangerous? I.e. had the pilot agreed to fly the guy for free, would this have prevented the crash?


Money has a big influence. When you work for an AOC operator you are trained in commercial pressures and how to prioritise safety over pressure from the customer.


Ah I see. Makes sense and explains it.
I guess the cpl/atpl syllabus covers this aspect too.
By map5623
#1882455
neil9327 wrote:
SpeedBrake wrote:
neil9327 wrote:Was it purely the fact that money was being illegally made, that made this flight dangerous? I.e. had the pilot agreed to fly the guy for free, would this have prevented the crash?


Money has a big influence. When you work for an AOC operator you are trained in commercial pressures and how to prioritise safety over pressure from the customer.


Ah I see. Makes sense and explains it.
I guess the cpl/atpl syllabus covers this aspect too.


And also to be aware of the 'flying pigs'
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7