Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

PA46 Malibu N264DB missing in the English Channel

From what has come to public already and what has been told in private, I am totally stunned.
Forgive me when I now leave the public discussion to wait in reverence for the AAIB to do their job.

You‘re forgiven

An interesting point is that if a pilot’s 61.25 is on the based on an EASA type that does not require a type rating or additional training (are there any EASA types that simply require additional training) then does the 61.25 in itself avoid the need for the type rating or additonal training?

There is a very specific aspect to a 61.75 PPL and the requirement for an FAA Type Rating, which is not required for the PA46 even though under EASA FCL the PA46 does require a TR.

However under the EASA attack on N-regs legislation, you need to comply with EASA FCL requirements also, except where a derogation applies. This could get quite complicated, not least because the Channel Islands are not under EASA FCL, and France I believe has applied for the derogation, while the UK’s approach is much more ambiguous…

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

but while I agree the standard piston version does not require a type rating under either authority I thought it does require a high performance endorsement and an HPA, in UK airspace, and would need to be on both licences and would have needed to have been done in the appropriate aircraft when origanally undertaken otherwise the whole excercise would be pointless. It is certainly the case for twins, where each twin effectively has its own “type rating” so your MEP is not automatically valid on any twin and so, presumably is the underlying 61.75, and also true of SEPs. The MEPS and SEPS on mine are all covered by appropriate sign offs and I am not sure why this would be any different for the Malibu, as the both in the CIs and France the aircraft would have been operated under the priviliges of the 61.75 and not on the basis of a stand alone EASA licence in the state of grant of the EASA licence (in other words the UK).

The privately organized search starts. The oceanographer David Mearns leads the operation. He became known by finding the HMS Hood.
300000 GBP are available so far.
https://gsy.bailiwickexpress.com/gsy/news/underwater-search-should-start-sunday/

Berlin, Germany

Fuji_Abound wrote:

it does require a high performance endorsement

I always wondered if endorsements have any actual legal validity or if they are just to show others (clubs, plane owners etc.) that you can fly the thing.

EDDW, Germany

Alpha_Floor wrote:

I always wondered if endorsements have any actual legal validity or if they are just to show others (clubs, plane owners etc.) that you can fly the thing.

I guess they have as much validity as the law says they are required. I suspect without, the regulatory authority would be entitled to say that your licence was not valid which might be a compelling reason to be compliant.

highflyer wrote:

The privately organized search starts. The oceanographer David Mearns leads the operation. He became known by finding the HMS Hood.
300000 GBP are available so far.
https://gsy.bailiwickexpress.com/gsy/news/underwater-search-should-start-sunday/

If it’s like described (25 sq miles and 65 m of depth) then it’s very feasible. They need relatively calm sea (which they don’t have now) to be able to use side-scan sonar and once they locate the wreck it shouldn’t be a problem to dive and even to recover the bodies if found.

LDZA LDVA, Croatia

I assume there will be an existing complete seabed map (electronic) of the area showing all existing ‘junk’ down there (will be a lot).
They will then only be looking at ‘stuff’ that has ‘newly arrived’ so to speak.
Sure the fishing (trawling) industry need this info on a daily basis.

Regret no current medical
Was Sandtoft EGCF, North England, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top