Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

PA46 Malibu N264DB missing in the English Channel

Based on some past cases, the maintenance company would sue if they were named, I am sure, regardless of what (if anything) was wrong with the plane. So best to not go there. No point. But yes it is likely that if there were INOP items, somebody will know about them…

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

I am fairly sure this is what happened

I don’t think that is far from the truth, on declaring emergency on a PPL after getting caught in IMC, I think it is more a UK pilot/atc cultural thing?

France/Germany, don’t have “sight of surface” restrictions on their licences: PPLs do ask for help and ATC are used to “non-virgin” PPLs who get themselves stuck up/inside/down the layer or spiraling on tight holes (part of French PPL syllabus), yes, you will be surprised by the amount of VFR traffic getting up/down between 2000ft and 6000ft layers with some few calling for assistance “car la double couche va se refermer” in the other hand I rarely saw anyone flying VFR when cloud-bases are less than 1500ft even OCAS…

Last Edited by Ibra at 05 Mar 21:38
Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

No sight of surface for VFR in the UK either, since early 2012 IIRC.

By “FL150” I meant an emergency IFR clearance. Jersey airspace would probably do it quickly enough, even if London Control (and particularly Solent) will resist as hard as they can.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

In Germany we have this special weather phenomenon, which makes sure there‘s always (some) sight of surface below vectoring altitude. Or ‚between layers‘.

Last Edited by EuroFlyer at 05 Mar 21:56
Safe landings !
EDLN, Germany

As an accident investigator (I’m not) I would want to know if the pitot heater was ‘ON’.
Could tell a lot of stories.

Regret no current medical
Was Sandtoft EGCF, North England, United Kingdom

One wonders if not IR should be compulsory for airplanes above a certain level of performance. The PA46 already has a type rating in the EU and needs an endorsement in the US where insurances also have their say who may operate them, so why not make a valid IR a precondition for flying planes like that? Apart from the fact that for the most part flying VFR in such a plane is a pure waste of ressources.

LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

WarleyAir wrote:

As an accident investigator (I’m not) I would want to know if the pitot heater was ‘ON’.

That would be hardly a reason for someone to call ATC with clear intentions to change for a specific height: as mentioned earlier it is the signature of a Duck !

Unless I fly AF447, I still feel ASI is a secondary instrument I don’t think it will cause a sudden loss of control in IMC compared to loosing gyros? or getting airframe ice? or AP disconnect? does losing the ASI disconnect the AP on a PA46? I doubt the AP on that aircraft have any speed/throttle modes…

I had wrong ASI reading few weeks ago with mix of VMC/IMC (I was told pitot water is not completely drained, I did suspect pitot heat at first but that tuns out to be working), it did not feel dramatic just something you notice it after 1h of flight and you live with it if one has a wild card, you only need the ASI to climb or to notice a dive

Tough under ASI indication may lead to loosing height either unintentionally: you push on stick without looking at 2000ft remaining on altimeter? or intentionally: you to suspect engine/wing icing and try some height changes, especially if you have planned in FIKI rather than CAVOK?

Last Edited by Ibra at 06 Mar 00:43
Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

I respect every bodies views, but I for one would consider the loss of ASI a major issue (iced-up pitot head).
Particularly if I was battling to get out of IMC and into VMC

Last Edited by WarleyAir at 06 Mar 01:13
Regret no current medical
Was Sandtoft EGCF, North England, United Kingdom

Why is it so hard to accept that, in all likelihood, this VFR pilot on a VFR flight lost control after entering cloud or trying to avoid it, at night, entirely without the assistance of some failure?

And why do some ask for more regulation (mandatory IR? Seriosly?) for this particular type of aircraft, when the type had nothing whatsoever to do with the accident?

Biggin Hill

Agree with Cobalt!
No matter how many laws will be implemented there will always be things that go wrong. Soon there would be very many complex rules for each circumstance. Wait, we already have that, and accidents continue to happen.

If this accident has any correlation to rules not followed I don’t know. We can learn from it to not fly under pressure, low level, vfr, over water at night if there is any sign of weather/imc.

always learning
LO__, Austria
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top