Page 3 of 3

Re: 50 hours and no solo

Posted: Sun Oct 13, 2019 7:42 pm
by rookiepilot
PilotDAR wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2019 7:28 pm If an OC holder broke a Canadian regulation, then yes, we depend upon TC to regulate them - out of business, if appropriate. TC enforces TC's safety regulations. Those regulations don't really apply to the commercial side of business conduct, and TC isn't going to get involved in that side - it's not their mandate.
Fine. I don't agree with their mandate. Now, Talking about safety.

My understanding on the St Catherine's case, is notwithstanding the other facts of the accident flight, the flight itself was illegal under the Cars.

Did TC take, in your view, appropriate action against the OC holder?

Re: 50 hours and no solo

Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 5:03 am
by PilotDAR
Did TC take, in your view, appropriate action against the OC holder?
I have no view, I don't know the details of the situation in sufficient detail to know who was responsible for what. Sometimes I simply trust people to do the job assigned to them the best they can. Sometimes I'm disappointed. I've also learned first hand in life that usually, it's better to fix the problem, than to fix the blame.

Re: 50 hours and no solo

Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 5:50 am
by Aviatard
rookiepilot wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2019 7:42 pm
My understanding on the St Catherine's case, is notwithstanding the other facts of the accident flight, the flight itself was illegal under the Cars.

Did TC take, in your view, appropriate action against the OC holder?
Which of the CARs was violated? I don't know what action was taken. Is there a report somewhere?

Re: 50 hours and no solo

Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 8:23 am
by rookiepilot
Aviatard wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 5:50 am
rookiepilot wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2019 7:42 pm
My understanding on the St Catherine's case, is notwithstanding the other facts of the accident flight, the flight itself was illegal under the Cars.

Did TC take, in your view, appropriate action against the OC holder?
Which of the CARs was violated? I don't know what action was taken. Is there a report somewhere?
Per the report: (quote photofly)

"The instructor/PIC was conducting his first night flight for nearly 10 months. He could not have met the requirements of regulation 401.05 in respect of the carriage at night of the two passengers who died with him.

This was his first ever flight into IMC. And he was doing it from the right seat."

Re: 50 hours and no solo

Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 8:25 am
by rookiepilot
PilotDAR wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 5:03 am
Did TC take, in your view, appropriate action against the OC holder?
I have no view, I don't know the details of the situation in sufficient detail to know who was responsible for what. Sometimes I simply trust people to do the job assigned to them the best they can. Sometimes I'm disappointed. I've also learned first hand in life that usually, it's better to fix the problem, than to fix the blame.
You appear to me to be a lot more understanding of one of the worst GA accident situations I've certainly ever heard of, than I am.

Sometimes black is black, white is white. Not gray.

Re: 50 hours and no solo

Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 8:48 am
by AirFrame
rookiepilot wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 8:23 am"... And he was doing it from the right seat."
I wonder how that's relevant... Did the plane not have dual instruments?

Re: 50 hours and no solo

Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:39 am
by rookiepilot
AirFrame wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 8:48 am
rookiepilot wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 8:23 am"... And he was doing it from the right seat."
I wonder how that's relevant... Did the plane not have dual instruments?
https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.avia ... 017&akey=1

Re: 50 hours and no solo

Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 10:22 am
by photofly
AirFrame wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 8:48 am
rookiepilot wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 8:23 am"... And he was doing it from the right seat."
I wonder how that's relevant... Did the plane not have dual instruments?
It was a 160HP Piper Warrior. How many of those have you flown with dual instruments?

Allegedly there was a vacuum pump failure, and the normal position of the (electric) turn coordinator is on the far left of the instrument panel. The only licenced pilot was sitting in the right seat, and even he had never flown in real IMC before.

Let's see you fly through a frontal system, at night, on partial panel, in an underpowered piston single, with the only instruments on the other side of the airplane.

How can it not be relevant?

Re: 50 hours and no solo

Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2019 6:29 am
by AirFrame
photofly wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 10:22 amLet's see you fly through a frontal system, at night, on partial panel, in an underpowered piston single, with the only instruments on the other side of the airplane.

How can it not be relevant?
Okay, okay, unbunch the panties. The quote stopped at "he was doing it from the right seat" as if that should mean anything specific. Maybe it should have mentioned that it only had one set of primary instruments. It was an honest question, not intended to trigger anyone.

Thanks Rookie for the link to the report.

Re: 50 hours and no solo

Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2019 6:42 am
by photofly
Sorry. I thought I'd exorcised all my existential angst on the other thread, but apparently there was a bit left over.