Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

AAIB investigation to Hawker Hunter T7 G-BXFI 22 August 2015

Wikiposts
Search
Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

AAIB investigation to Hawker Hunter T7 G-BXFI 22 August 2015

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 28th Mar 2017, 20:48
  #741 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Biscuit74, you say you are surprised that he displayed it under the circumstances.

That's an important point right there. I suspect that too many "good eggs" are doing stuff they really shouldn't but nobody wants to call them out on it, due to multiple other things that they are apparently good at.

What we might be witnessing here is a combination of AH (and others) believing his own press, and also the CAA falling into the same trap, where they think they are policing the airshow business simply because they have some rules and nothing has gone wrong.

When it becomes unthinkable that your hero can't actually walk on water, you are not going to notice when things start to go bad.
airpolice is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2017, 20:50
  #742 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
2Sheds, why don't you start a thread on air displays and what is and is not required to entertain people?
airpolice is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2017, 21:09
  #743 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Ex Europe
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Many years ago a highly respected display pilot came incredibly close to disaster

He had a few of his aircraft sat on a taxiway and they were going to do a static photoshoot

One aircraft, a Sea Fury, was just a little bit out of shot

Quick as a flash the pilot jumped into the cockpit, had the engine running almost at full tilt and spun the plane on its axis and into the right position for the shot

That could have gotten him into all sorts of issues...not least had there been anyone close to the Fury at the time....he did not shout "stand clear" or anything, he just got in there, started her up and spun the thing on its wheels without a second thought

Complacency breeds contempt

The pilot of the Hunter at Shoreham maybe of a similar mindset, the "I can do this with my eyes closed" type

Display flying is inherently dangerous even at the most well organised shows...God knows I have lost a few friends over the years at well organised dispalys and air races to know that sometimes you can be a little too relaxed, maybe stretch your ability way beyond your capability....and sometimes the adrenalin from "giving the paying crowd something special" can cloud the judgement in even the most experienced pilot

Complacency of "I can do that" turns into the contempt of "I can do that BETTER"

Shoreham by virtue of its location is a tough airfield for displaying, its not the most open or the least built up...major roads, housing etc, so its always been a tough call performing there, afterall even the Red Arrows cringe at the thought

You can add legislation and safety advice and rules til one is blue in the face but when you have a falible human being at the end of the line sitting in the cockpit and who by nature of the beast can get a little carried away with what they are doing cos "I can do this" complacency, then tragedy will almost always strike eventually

Shoreham Airshow will always be difficult, as are many airshows for a variety of reasons and the powers at be can legislate and throw rules at airshows til the cows come home but its not going to prevent accidents completely...not when you have a human being at the controls ultimately in charge of his or her plane

Personally I hope that airshows continue for decades to come, yes there will be more deaths and injuries but you can say that about every single thing in life and you cannot ever make anything 100% safe

The old chestnut about lessons being learnt...yes there are many from Shoreham to take on board and for pilots and organisers to try and prevent another tragedy

Can they ever make airshows 100% safe.....no, its impossible

Is that reason enough to stop performing at airshows...absolutely not

Just as every carcrash does not stop everyone from driving a car

You can do as much as possible to prevent another Shoreham but complacency will always be there lurking to catch out a pilot who feels "I can do this BETTER" and when they try, they crash & burn

Its not legislation or safety rules needed....its basic complacency that has no place in the cockpit
configsafenot is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2017, 00:59
  #744 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by airpolice
Jeez, really? Don't you think it might be relevant to this discussion?

Is it really a lot to ask?

That's not just thread drift, that's casting off and steaming away on a new course.
Yeah, it's a lot to ask. I've read a few excerpts, though I allow that there may be information in there relevant to what I wrote, of which I am unaware.

In any case, I doubt that the AAIB has extended itself to the point of commenting on the "consumer expectation" aspect of airshows, as a causal factor. Spectators will watch what we an industry will offer. Add "death defying" to the ads, and they want more. The spectators will not ever say to the industry: "Hey, don't take so much risk, we're happy with graceful flybys.". They're not that knowledgeable, nor disciplined. We, the industry, must discipline ourselves, or risk adverse regulators will do it for us.

I doubt a report will explore this aspect of air display, perhaps its beyond the mandate of the AAIB. Airshow pilots are eager to satisfy the spectator expectation of an exciting display, within easy view - (low). Perhaps pilots are too eager to please sometimes, but they could be trying to please to unrealistic expectations.
9 lives is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2017, 09:48
  #745 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Norfolk
Age: 67
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The unique aspect of this incident is that it was not the spectators that got killed or injured, but uninvolved members of the public away from the display area. That is what has sparked public concern and an enquiry into why the regulations designed to prevent such accidents failed so spectacularly.
G0ULI is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2017, 09:49
  #746 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hadlow
Age: 60
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
At least two of those killed were there specifically to spectate. For the sake of saving a few quid they paid with their lives.
Super VC-10 is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2017, 14:54
  #747 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Norfolk
Age: 67
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Super VC-10
It might also be argued that they decided to spectate from that location because it was away from the danger of the officially designated display area. A circular discussion that in no way mitigates the failings of the regulations that were supposed to protect the public at large.
G0ULI is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2017, 15:05
  #748 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: The Home of the Gnomes
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Surely then it's also worth arguing that the "officially designated display area" includes the official crowd line and sterile area behind that which is nominally "not dangerous" - as the rules have seemingly ensured since the DH110 accident. Hence previous discussion about "naughty fields" at various venues.
Tay Cough is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2017, 19:22
  #749 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 76
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Super VC-10
At least two of those killed were there specifically to spectate. For the sake of saving a few quid they paid with their lives.
How can you be so certain and be so unkind both at the same time. You might as well have said those who lost their lives on Westminster Bridge in equal tragic circumstances so recently,must have been cheap skates crossing the bridge on foot and not in a taxi or bus. I must say I find the comment offensive to say the least.
Chronus is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2017, 19:33
  #750 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is Shoreham suitable for a beach display?
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2017, 19:42
  #751 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Ex Europe
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Airport to beach is around 2 miles, so maybe but its also one of the most built up and popular beach areas on the south coast, so the dangers attached to display flying at the airport are not really improved upon over the beach/seafront

Rock and hard place comes to mind
configsafenot is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2017, 20:44
  #752 (permalink)  
aox
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 227
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by configsafenot
Airport to beach is around 2 miles, so ...
The hangars are about 800m from the beach, and the northern runway ends about 1600m (1 mile).
aox is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2017, 20:48
  #753 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Ex Europe
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Its not open countryside or beach area though, so given that you have very little by way of free space whether it be fields or beach, there is always going to be issues....and it gets some mighty offshore gusts too which does not help in planning for or actually performing airshows there
configsafenot is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2017, 07:08
  #754 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The idea/question is about having the display totally over water, so the residents on the beachfront should be unaffected. There are many other such displays locations around the coast. The airfield could still be a place of interest with arriving & departing a/c. Just a thought for the future to ensure it continues; but is there enough parking & beach space for spectators?
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2017, 09:05
  #755 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by RAT 5
Just a thought for the future to ensure it continues...
However what you are proposing is an entirely different business model, a free seaside airshow, which are generally funded by local councils with whatever sponsorship they can pull in. This would not be a continuation of the previous Shoreham event, a fundraiser for RAFA.
Mike51 is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2017, 09:13
  #756 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Ex Europe
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
After the accident any council and potential sponsor might be alot harder to convince, which is a real shame as the show was always very well attended and RAFA earned alot of much needed financial help from it

No-one would blame local authorities and potential sponsors in getting cold feet, but maybe if the show is missed for a year or two and the organisers and anyone else involved or who are considering becoming involved along with the local community are able to sit down and discuss how to relaunch the show either as before from the airport or as a beach show, maybe it can be saved and RAFA can still benefit from it

Although it is a difficult show, it would be a huge pity to lose it completely both for the charities that benefit from it and the people who go to watch year after year and, of course, the local community....a pared down show whether beach or airport orientated would be better than losing it in its entirety
configsafenot is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2017, 12:30
  #757 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
After the accident any council and potential sponsor might be alot harder to convince,
The "Elephant in the room" is that the promoters of the airshow want to offer excitement, and the pilots want to be seen to fulfill their role in this expectation. But too much excitement, and it all goes the wrong way. No one, particularly promoters and organizers like to admit the possibility of, nor discuss accidents, and I have never seen the word "safe" as an element of promoting an airshow, but perhaps it's time.

What happened at Shoreham is well known, so it should not be a stretch to discuss in the council/promoter meetings for airshow preparation. Perhaps a discussion which has the theme: "Let's dial it back a little, display the aircraft, but build in an extra layer of safety for everyone, no corner of the envelope stuff." Hopefully this would make the job of the Show Boss much less stressful, and the CAA's oversight role easier...
9 lives is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2017, 13:03
  #758 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 607
Received 10 Likes on 7 Posts
I'm afraid you are simply never going to stop aircraft crashing at air shows. It has happened before and will always continue to happen. I agree you need to look at the risks, and whilst I'm firmly of the opinion that the T7 crashed at Shoreham as a direct result of pilot error, you cannot and should not try to reduce the risk to others (non-aircrew) to zero.

It was right that after Ramstein the 'on crowd vector' was looked at. The Frecce's 3-way pass accident was possibly waiting to happen, and the outcome was always going to be serious, but you simply cannot sterilise the entire area under which a displaying aircraft could crash. Even coastal venues have an element of risk to the crowd. Whilst the JP at Southport dishing out of its barrel roll didn't crash, it could well have done and would probably have done so on land.

The appropriate display line (100, 230 or 450m from the designated crowd line) does not extend much beyond the venue's boundary. I can't see how you can police exactly what happens below it never mind the possible fall-out area that an aircraft -or part of - could reach.

Life is full of some risk. Didn't some jogger years ago get hit on the head (and killed) by a rogue umbrella caught in a gale on a deserted beach? Tragic, but simply unlucky. Have we tried to ban umbrellas or jogging? If there is a finite risk of something happening then you must accept that - very occasionally - it will happen?
H Peacock is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2017, 14:42
  #759 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
and the CAA's oversight role easier...
How much easier do you want it to be?

They might improve things by say, simply coming up with a number of hours flown, in a number of days, on a type. To establish what that number should be, they could ask an organisation with experience in such matters, like CFS. Then they could state that a DA is only valid when those preconditions are met.

I don't think that with current e-filing systems, it is too much to ask for ALL pilots to be asked to "validate" their licences by logging on once a year and entering some figures.

How much it would do for safety, I can't say. But it would be a start.
airpolice is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2017, 15:29
  #760 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm afraid you are simply never going to stop aircraft crashing at air shows.
Is true.

A mentor of mine (retired aerobatic/airshow pilot) would preach to we impressionables "No one ever died flying a normal circuit". While not strictly true, I took his point. It's the low altitude extreme maneuvering which is causing the spectacular (not in the favourable sense) crashes. I'm not advocating a ban on low altitude display aerobatics, though I'm not enthusiastic about seeing it flown in larger/vintage or high energy aircraft with very little room for error.

I opine that airshow spectators need to be trained to understand that "we just don't do that anymore" when it comes to extreme low level aerobatics, and high energy or vintage aircraft pilots planning to cut a margin of error very close. We will not offer to sell you this experience, join us at a show which we are all comfortable presenting with low stress.

and the CAA's oversight role easier...

How much easier do you want it to be?
If the CAA and airshow organizer are not being asked to approve low level aerobatics with very tight margins, it will be easier. Move it all up a few hundred feet, and cancel if low ceiling that day. If the spectators complain, say: "we just don't do that any more". Iphones and binoculars are easily employed to improve the view.

I was at Oshkosh in 1983, when a Siai Marchetti SF260 was fatally crashed right in front of me. The pilot was attempting to impress with a very low altitude spin. The show was stopped, and it spoiled the afternoon for everyone, and it ultimately delayed a lot of our departures for home, with a closed runway.

I recalled this when I organized very small local airshows in 1991 and 1992, when I was easily able to explain my rationale for no low level aerobatics to the two Transport Canada inspectors, from whom I sought the required authorization. Easy show, everyone enjoyed, and low stress for all of us.

Every now and then, society needs a kick start to changed behaviour. If the Shoreham accident report isn't it, I can't think what would be.
9 lives is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.