Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Another crash - Helicopter I-EDIC vs Jodel F-PMGV in Italy

LeSving wrote:

True, but it still reduces the amount of unknowns. This is important when something happens.

Assuming everybody flies FPL as they exactly filed (which no one does these days, pilots/atc use real-time technologies)

ESSEX, United Kingdom

there are possible situations in that the president would be liable and even subject to criminal prosecution.

Under the laws of which country?

Every country in Europe is different. Very different cultures and legal systems.

In the UK that would be almost impossible. In the Peoples’ Republic of Upper Volta, they probably they just impale you on a stake. In other countries, say in Europe, you probably get something in between the two extremes

I can well see that the operator of an aircraft is liable, jointly and severally with the pilot. There are various precedents for that around the place. The aeroclub president may well be the designated responsible person for the Operator, and may have a strict liability if the plane crashes somewhere. But that is a civil liability, not a criminal liability. And this is what insurance is for… I would expect a French aeroclub to be very well insured under their nationwide scheme.

This Italian court was a criminal court.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

Regarding the STAY on the flight plan, can that be used for random wandering across an international border?

I don’t see why not.

How do you comply with the requirement (which is also somewhat dubious) to make a new radio contact as the border is crossed?

Where is that requirement stated? I’ve seen claims from time to time that there is such a requirement, but never seen a reference to an actual rule. There is certainly no such requirement in SERA.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Radio mandatory when border crossing

I have never seen it prescribed that specific stations (or class of stations e.g. FIS) must be called when crossing a border, despite this being widely taught in UK schools (“must call London Info” bollox). If e.g. flying from Shoreham to Le Touquet one clearly meets the requirement simply by changing the radio from Shoreham directly to Le Touquet. What would obviously not meet such a requirement would be a flight from UK to Switzerland, all non-radio. There may not be an easy to find reference but I cannot believe that would be legal. Didn’t some guy get busted for just that a few years ago, flying a Long-EZ?

Taking the subject flight, France to Italy, it is probably somewhere between the two cases above. The French portion of the flight may be legal non-radio. And the Italian portion of the flight may be legal non-radio if you departed in Italy which this guy didn’t. But crossing the border non-radio? There are concessions where a flight plan is not required – here – but you still can’t do it non-radio AFAIK.

In this case the Italian portion of the flight was very brief and it sounds like it was normal practice for French club traffic to pop over the border without a flight plan and without radio.

What may be relevant in this case is whether the PIC had any intention of flying to Italy. It’s gonna be an interesting grey area for somebody to argue about, for sure. But at most it would be a trivial offence. It would be a criminal offence though, because all aviation law (EASA FCL, SERA, etc) is criminal law.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

Radio mandatory when border crossing

So where is the rule? People are taught to do lots of things they are not required to do.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

I don’t know and don’t have time to go through a load of AIPs now. A number of pointers to further research are in the link I posted above.

Try flying Sweden to Italy non radio (VFR obviously). Mode S. Post your reg on EuroGA so everybody can watch you on FR24. If there is an answer you will find it

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

I know this is an edge case, but since we have a Schengen border here, the Polish VFR AIP ENR 2.8 local copy requires a FPL and radio contact with ATS: It is obligatory to file a flight plan including information on the intention to perform an operation within the ADIZ and maintain a two-way radio contact with the teritorially competent ATS unit.

Last Edited by tmo at 07 Feb 21:05
tmo
EPKP - Kraków, Poland

Ibra wrote:

Assuming everybody flies FPL as they exactly filed (which no one does these days, pilots/atc use real-time technologies)

There is such a thing called a radio. Old fashioned, I know, but it works just fine, and it’s even real-time

ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

tmo wrote:

I know this is an edge case, but since we have a Schengen border here, the Polish VFR AIP ENR 2.8 local copy requires a FPL and radio contact with ATS: It is obligatory to file a flight plan including information on the intention to perform an operation within the ADIZ and maintain a two-way radio contact with the teritorially competent ATS unit.

Sure, but that’s not a border crossing requirement but a requirement to fly in the ADIZ, whether you cross the border or not. (I didn’t know any European countries had ADIZes anymore, but the Polish ones seem to be along the external EU border only.)

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

There is a report on the court case here. Bizzarely, the website blocks any kind of text selection and thus translation. However one can print it to a PDF and that can be google translated – here.

Doesn’t sound good. They have thrown everything at him, as well as ordering damages to victims which would bankrupt most people.

What does the French aeroclub community think of this?

Curiously the article says there was another survivor, apart from the accused.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top