CAA review terms of reference issued. I note that the MAA will read across any lessons learned into military display regs. It seems, however, that are very few persons with display flying experience on the governance groups.
Airshow Review Terms of Reference | Safety & Risk Management | Operations and Safety
So these guys are going to report early in the new year, or rather well before any final AAIB report and all of the elements in that terms of reference already should have robust process around them so this seems utter idiocy.
Edited to add: The point being of course that this review then becomes a generic overview rather than specific to this accident which then one could question the motives of. i.e. is it simply to have a box ticked by the panel that provides a bill of health to the CAA process that was in place at the time? Of course that is a cynical view but if one looks at CAP403 flying display amendments here:-
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP%204...l%20events.pdf
and relate that to the AAIB's recommendations from the 2009 G-HURR accident and the CAA's response one wonders how things will get squared with the many parallel human factors cited as issues for this new review.
https://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/factor...%20revised.pdf
Of course they may conclude that current rules are entirely reasonable and then actually nothing should change, although that would depend upon the confidence in decision making thus far.