Originally Posted by
falcon900
The point is that there are others whose actions deserve scrutiny. I am most definitely not in the camp of those who may be seeking to exonerate him, but it would be fair to say that his actions have already been subject to a fair degree of scrutiny, including in a court of law.
The significance of the traffic lights is that the risk of a displaying aircraft crashing there had been identified before the show. The safety case upon which the decision to go ahead with the show was based called for the lights to be set to Green so there would not be the usual line of stationary cars waiting for them to change during displays.
The lights were not set to Green, nor as I understand it was this even requested of the council. As had been identified as a risk, an aircraft crashed into a line of cars waiting for the lights to change, with the tragic and significant loss of life which has kept this incident in the spotlight for so much longer than the Gnat incident.
The failure by the organisers to implement the safety case did not cause the aircraft to crash, but it was a major contributor to the magnitude of the consequences.
Your really are talking horse manure. Bloke was pole bending a control column on the edge of a stall. the video evidence was clean from the first day. If he had done that in a car, he would be in prison and no jury would have believed the rubbish from his defence Lawyer. It was the fault of the prosecution lawyers not to say that if he had "Blacked out" that the flight path of the aeroplane would have been like Jon Eggins Hawk at BOU and the aircraft unloaded in ptich. Hill was pulling the stick all the time. If he had been in a car , the jury would have sent him down.