Re: Preliminary Accident Report
While this interim report concentrates solely on establishing the facts of the accident, one would hope that a final report will criticise the operation of the airshow. Had the airshow director observed the break out of fire in the jetpipe/rear fuselage and at a one third chord position under the tailplane (as was captured by photographers on the airfield), the display could have been terminated and the aircraft brought down, possibly before the failure of the hydraulics.
Surely, with such potentially lethal 1940s/50s technology being displayed in the presence of a large gathering of spectators, the display director should have been following the complete display routine like a hawk?
Further, the SACAA seems to be falling over itself to be seen to be taking action to reach an outcome "to ensure the continued safety of passengers transported in South African airspace". I would have thought that the safety of the public on the ground was its primary aim. The carriage of passengers in Lightnings, surely, will be banned forever.
The SACAA says it wants to involve "the manufacturers". Are British Aerospace really going to take any interest in, as I've already said, such potentially lethal 1940s/50s technology which was maintained 24/7 in a Cold War ambience by a vastly bigger maintenance organisation? And yes, I know, the Vulcan is from the same era, but it's a completely different machine.