Above the clouds said:-
Quote:
The Daily Mail states: "One of the cameras showed the aircraft was travelling at a 100knots while inverted at the top of the loop".
Thats good news then, as it seems the AAIB investigation is done and dusted.
Grasping at straws comes to mind.
Without wishing to start a (another) bun fight what part of page 5 of this AAIB report grasps at straws?
https://assets.digital.cabinet-offic...015_G-BXFI.pdf
Where is says:-
Initial findings indicate that the minimum air speed of the aircraft was approximately 100 KIAS whilst inverted at the top of the manoeuvre.
Actually over the top of a loop is usually less than 1g so reading too much into that speed without knowing other things is fairly meaningless but whilst not wishing to be an DMail apologist all they are doing is quoting the AAIB.
Those "knowing other things" will be already known, they aren't published because they (AAIB) used column inches to tell us about the ejection seat and a paperwork around the permit, which instantly got push back from the CAA. That the aircraft may or may not have had a technical issue has no relevance to the other process involved.
The push back seems to be "whats the rush" "wait etc etc" but what lessons at Shoreham could have been apparent from the Gnat accident at Oulton Park? What about the World Air Games fatality? Maybe none, maybe quite a lot, certainly time will tell. I find it bizarre what gets published and when.
As for the 2016 Shoreham airshow cancellation out of respect for the victims.... Again why say that now? A cynic might say the insurer aided that respect.