As the interim report is now in the public domain we are free to talk about any part of the interim report, I will pick out a few paragraphs that are very relevant that we wouldn't previously have made comments on.Originally Posted by dml1954
(1) At about 2015:30 hrs, N264DB started to make a gradual left turn, which was followed at
about 2016:10 hrs by a right turn of approximately 180°. During this turn, data from two
independent radars (Guernsey and Jersey) showed the aircraft descend to an altitude
of about 1,600 ft at an average rate of approximately 7,000 ft/min. A few seconds later
(at 2016:34 hrs) the final secondary radar return was recorded, which indicated that the
aircraft may have climbed rapidly to about 2,300 ft. Two more primary radar returns
were recorded, timed at 2016:38 hrs and 2016:50 hrs respectively, but it is not yet known
whether they represent valid returns from the aircraft.
A descent of 7000ft is not a controlled descent rate, an ascent from 1600ft to 2300ft in a few seconds is not a controlled climb rate They are most likely attributed to the pilot having lost control in spatial disorientation or through disturbed airflow due to Ice build up causing the pilot to be chasing an artificial reading erroneously
(2)A PPL does not allow a pilot to carry passengers for reward; to do so requires a commercial
licence. The basis on which the passenger was being carried on N264DB has not yet
been established but, previously, the pilot had carried passengers on the basis of ‘cost
sharing’. Cost sharing allows a private pilot to carry passengers and for those passengers
to contribute towards the actual cost of the flight. Cost sharing brings benefits to private
pilots who, by sharing the expense of their flying, can fly more than they might otherwise
be able to, thereby increasing their level of experience. A higher level of regulatory burden
applies to commercial, compared with private flights (such as more stringent medical,
licencing and airworthiness requirements), and the additional requirements increase the
level of safety assurance. Therefore, although the UK, EU and US regulatory authorities
allow cost sharing, they apply restrictions to it.
As already stated in my previous posts, Dave Ibbotson was a PPL that disallowed him from flying paying passengers, so the emphasis on whether he was conducting a private flight or a commercial flight is highly relevant & something I have covered in previous posts.
(3)The pilot of N264DB held an EASA PPL, issued by the CAA in the UK, and an FAA PPL,
issued on the basis of his EASA PPL. It is thought that the pilot’s licence and logbook
were lost with the aircraft and so the ratings on his licences and their validity, and the
extent of his recent flying have not yet been determined.
Having seen a copy of Dave Ibbotson's EASA PPL I know that it clearly states 'DAY ONLY' & that is due to his colourblindness & I know exactly what licence privileges he had. His licence privileges didn't allow Night Flight nor Instrument only flight. ( I still have his licence copies on file & they are the same copies that the AAIB & CAA have been given in this investigation )
(4)The pilot had an FAA PPL issued on the basis of his EASA PPL. His logbook and licence
were not recovered from the aircraft, and the ratings on his licences and their validity
dates have not yet been established.
I find this paragraph slightly bizarre because I have seen a copy of his licence & the ratings attached, so I am pretty sure that the AAIB & CAA have seen the same details as I have.
Now, I will await the questions from anyone who thinks I put any speculation into my previous posts.... I have only ever stated facts that I could release & now the Interim report is in the Public Domain I can be part of an 'Open Chat'
Reply With Quote