Re: Pilot's status as a private licence-holder only, now the focus...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Wales-Bales
If icing wasn't the reason for the pilot requesting a descent from 5,000ft to 2,300ft, what else could it have been?
Perhaps he thought he was too high, he had already told a friend that he had a tendency to do that.
Or maybe he wanted to to a pretty girl he'd seen in a boat?? How the feck can you state (seemingly unequivocally) that it must have been icing or what else could it have been? It could have been anything.
Re: Pilot's status as a private licence-holder only, now the focus...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
xsnaggle
Perhaps he thought he was too high, he had already told a friend that he had a tendency to do that.
5,000ft is a standard VFR flight plan and it's the one that the pilot filed. If icing occurs you either have to descend into warmer air, or you can climb higher above the clouds, but you would need an instrument rating to fly IFR. The advantage of flying higher is longer gliding distances in the event of an emergency, which is good for single-engine planes.
BTW he was too high when landing.
Re: Pilot's status as a private licence-holder only, now the focus...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
xsnaggle
How the feck can you state (seemingly unequivocally) that it must have been icing or what else could it have been? It could have been anything.
Requesting a descent (or ascent) is standard practice for cases of icing. If it was anything else, they would have been requesting an emergency landing at the nearest airport, not continuing the flight at 2,300ft.
Re: Pilot's status as a private licence-holder only, now the focus...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Wales-Bales
If icing wasn't the reason for the pilot requesting a descent from 5,000ft to 2,300ft, what else could it have been?
Dunno. I've only read messageboard speculation. You are possibly correct but its not because of your good knowledge of the conditions and wider implications.
Re: Pilot's status as a private licence-holder only, now the focus...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Harry Paget Flashman
Dunno. I've only read messageboard speculation. You are possibly correct but its not because of your good knowledge of the conditions and wider implications.
You can read the same aviation forcast charts as the pilots do, plus there was an eyewitness account of the conditions from a pilot who flew in the area one hour prior to the disappearance. The wider implications are playing out right now, the pilots experience and his licence status, the legality of the flight, did he have Ian instrument rating, who owned the aircraft, who paid for his flight, insurance implications, etc, etc,.
