Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

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

There may be somethings lost in translation-for a significant number of participants english isn’t their first language, although it may be by adoption (my case for example). I thought Le Sving’s comments showed empathy in trying to understand the earlier post, not any offence.

Speculating on recent accidents can be problematic-perhaps waiting for the relevant accident board finding might be better.

Enstone (EGTN), Oxford (EGTK)

Emir wrote:

Be upset how much you want but you’re the one disqualifying others. Obviously you perceive yourself as flying god judging the length of your post and description of super flying yo do.

As I said, I would surely do the training there if for no other reason than to understand the culture. Hence I am disqualifying myself also using your logic. At any rate, I won’t stop anyone from speculating “out load” on this board, except perhaps myself.

ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

In practice, I don’t see the value of an FPL before flying for “local VFR OCAS” that may cross the border without landing, one filled by air should do as one has to make RT contact anyway?

This is how most gliding clubs operating along the Alps do when close to French/Swiss borders, they operate OCAS like as in class E: require RT for VFR and a sort of clearnace for any cloud flying (IFR) from the relevant Geneva/Marseille info

The problem with the sad accident is the lack of RT, I don’t think an FPL sent 24h before flight would have made any difference unfortunatly, tough, I don’t buy the arugment that there only 10 aircrafts with very experienced pilots flying in the area, if some can’t speak on the radio they are as muppet as anybody else in the air, as far as I know no one is “expert in lookout” even birds !

Last Edited by Ibra at 29 Jan 01:03
ESSEX, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

It’s an interesting argument. In 2002 I had a prop strike, in a pothole, with an FI in the RHS. I was not differences trained for the TB20. The FI immediately said “I am glad I wasn’t in charge” and got out. Apparently, he was wrong, because the taxi was for the purpose of a flight and I could not have been PIC on the flight.

That’s an interesting story – care to develop or point me towards a previous recount of it ?

FAA A&P/IA
LFPN

LeSving wrote:

As I said, I would surely do the training there if for no other reason than to understand the culture. Hence I am disqualifying myself also using your logic. At any rate, I won’t stop anyone from speculating “out load” on this board, except perhaps myself.

I don’t know if you noticed but I refrained myself from any comment in this thread on type of operations done there exactly because of the fact that I don’t have any experience in flying low altitudes in that region regardless my gliding experience. But still I believe that the attitude “only we fly in this area and it’s up to us to define safety rules” doesn’t have place in aviation.

Last Edited by Emir at 29 Jan 08:07
LDZA LDVA, Croatia
The problem with the sad accident is the lack of RT

Are we sure about that? As far as I have read there was reported lack of comm by the French aircraft with Milano Information (or an Italian ATC unit, for that matter). Do we know more?

Last Edited by Antonio at 29 Jan 08:31
Antonio
LESB, Spain

Good point. What is relevant is whether both aircraft were on the mountain flying frequency used in that area.

Whether any of the two aircraft had filed a flight plan is completely irrelevant to the accident.

And the rule to talk to FIS for crossing the border in this kind of flying is, if it exists, unworkable and detrimental to safety.

Biggin Hill

I don’t think talking to FIS is mandatory for border crossings (in general), despite this being widely taught in PPL training. But some form of radio contact appears to be a general requirement.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

@Cobalt

I think the working hypothesis is that lack of flight plan can in general be a contributing factor, as the resulting lack of formal legality may encourage a pilot to keep radio and transponder quiet.

LFHN, LSGP, LFHM

This makes no sense. The lack of a flightplan was not contributing at all, because filing a flight plan would have made no conceivable difference to the outcome.

It also makes little sense to claim that the requirement for a flightplan somehow led to the crew flying “incognito”, so to speak, because the people on he mountain frequency are not ATC and are all part of the same “community” and wouldn’t know, nor care, if a flight plan has been filed.

In an “industry” which is so hidebound in regulations, there is the tendency to ask “were any rules broken” – rather than asking why the two aircraft crews presumably were not aware of each other, and if they were not on the same frequency, why.

The rules (he should talk to FIS) are actually detrimental to safety, because they would, if followed, prevent the two from being on the mountain frequency.

Biggin Hill
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top