Playing the devil’s advocate here: I think the general worry is rather that such flights would take place in total radio and transponder silence, even locally on 130.000 MHz. I doubt any pilot would think not contacting FIS has any impact (except perhaps delaying SAR ops). I’m talking in general, not about this specific flight.
Looking at the circumstances, landing direction, shades and extreme contrasts, low position of sun that time of day, it’s conceivable that visibility has played a role, as has been mentioned before. Or perhaps radio messages took place and there was a misunderstanding due to language barrier or just in general.
In my time in Megève (more than 50 hours flying time, 250 landings), we’ve always flown a thorough and full reconnaissance (three loops, high, middle, and low just above the field) on altisurfaces. (On altiport such as Méribel or Courchevel there are other procedures according to VAC.) So I don’t immediately understand how this could’ve happened under those standard procedures.
If you have a radio or transponder fitted why not let the others you are around?
Although, I value the liberty class G airspace offers, I prefer making some noise on radio as I don’t think “lookout is that effective” especially with traffic concentrated in some “chock points” defined by arifield routes, controlled airspace or ground terrain: in these places one tends to be more aviate, navigate, communicate then lookout?
Not sure what is the appropriate frequency but there should be one for a given place: Gliding, Mountain, FIS, AutoInfo, SafetyCom…but I agree FIS tends to be really wide for the purpose
If the flight is that illegal, one can still speak on the radio with a callsign like “Batman”? Being quiet does not help anybody including yourself
Emir wrote:
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.
So those who have no experience in one particular area or niche of flying are better fit making rules? Don’t think so.
@Mooney_Driver wrote:
If he was there as an FI, he was pilot in command
Is that always true if the pilot manipulating the controls is licensed to do so? Which regulation says so?
What about an FAA flight review or EASA revalidation flight with an instructor?
Is that always true if the pilot manipulating the controls is licensed to do so? Which regulation says so?
None, I am sure. It would be ludicrous because somebody with an FI qualification could never fly as a passenger. There are some grey areas as mentioned already, where a non-acting FI was pursued, post-crash, in the USA I believe.
What about an FAA flight review or EASA revalidation flight with an instructor?
That person has to sit in the front.
Well, for amusement, there are some funny stories. Many years ago, you could do an FAA checkride in the UK, in a G-reg. The FAA DPE did not ever have any Euro papers, so could not act as PIC. And in the UK the silly principle was applied that a checkride candidate was not PIC even if he could technically be (holding some other license, actual flight was VFR, etc). So an FI sat in the RHS and the DPE sat in the back. This, AFAIK, is also done in multi pilot aircraft checks i.e. the examiner sits in the jump seat; I have seen a video of one such check. And there was one such flight, a Cessna twin, which crashed with a fatality. The UK CAA then “had a quiet word” with the FAA to stop doing this, and after that there were just 4 options for the checkride
Old timers will no doubt remember better than I can.
The above is a digression but it illustrates some grey areas.
My personal experience flying in that area in the Alps is that ATC can not be reached while flying in between the mountains. For example, when departing Courchevel, you leave the tower frequency of Courchevel for the mountain frequency and only are able to establish contact with ATC at Chambery after passing Albertville.
We have a built-in powerflarm and it is very useful especially in the Alps, since most gliders have one. I don’t understand why that hasn’t become a standard for all aircraft flying in the mountains.
LeSving wrote:
So those who have no experience in one particular area or niche of flying are better fit making rules?
Great talent for twisting the words. I also love EuroGA because I practice my English here.
EuroFlyer wrote:
We have a built-in powerflarm and it is very useful especially in the Alps, since most gliders have one. I don’t understand why that hasn’t become a standard for all aircraft flying in the mountains.
Could cost be the major reason, or unawareness that cheap alternatives to commercial devices exist / are being developed? If so, would it help to advocate cheap (even DIY) and portable devices such as Stratux or SoftRF (parts are less than $200 in each case) to lower the bar of entry? Perhaps lobby together as a community and offer workshops to build and test these devices, or even offer them pre-built?
For those who haven’t come across these projects:
Great talent for twisting the words.
I never twist words, well, not on purpose anyway (unless I do it on purpose for the fun of it 
) Not this time though.
