My deepest sympathies to all those touched by this crash.
For now I'm not going to comment on how the aircraft arrived in the position it did. I do however find myself surprised by the video of the ejection. I am very familiar with MB seats and the sequencing thereof but know very little about the seats fitted to the CT 114.
The large smoke plumes and lack of an early seat separation were a surprise to me. I would have expected seats of that vintage to use sequenced charges (or even a single charge) as they moved up the rails and for an immediate drogue deployment with separation occurring as soon as tumbling stopped.
Difficult to accurately assess height and ROD but it looked like a better result should have been obtained.
So the question is, did the seats work as specified? In which case they are probably not suitable for use in the "high risk" environment of a formation display team.
Several have commented on the Snowbirds use of what is essentially a vintage jet for their displays. I am not against that providing the risks are minimised. Lets face it the alternative would probably be a Harvard 2 or disbandment. I wonder if the fitment of something like an MB Mk 8 seat has ever been considered for the Snowbirds CT 114. I know it is available as a retrofit for the T37 which also has (albeit different) a Weber seat.
Perhaps the conversation was along the lines of " we struggle to justify the costs of the Snowbirds as it is, if you insist the current seats are unsafe we will just can the team".
Whatever happens as a result of this accident I hope the Snowbirds continue. I'd love it to be in the CT 114 but I think it will cost money. Hopefully that money can be found.