Not sure you'll find a 'bent loop' in an aresti catalogue...Or even a quarter clover but that name caused carnage last time it was mentioned.
In fact isn't that part of the issue? What is the plan around flying a 'bent loop'? Is it roll upwards? roll downwards? 90deg off? roll to a heading? Roll to a feature? It didn't fit the same pattern as the display prior...
There is a lot of effort and head scratching for limited value add. The actual target gate height had been given by the pilot in interview as somewhere in the order of 4-5000ft. So the delta between that and actual is huge to the point that it wouldn't even look the same from looking out of the window never mind the altimeter - of which one under read and the other was tested as being accurate.
A few have suggested that the starting height wasn't accepted as low and one cited an prior AAIB report - well it may seem given the current reports recommendation that views have changed and certainly to date nobody is giving a process that is repeatable (and recognised by any FDD) in the respect of flying by at nought feet to enter his aerobatics at a different height. Certainly not one that would match what was seen here at any rate.
As for the influence of 'g' at the top of a loop it is close to zero.
You kind of have to think that either there was little by way of a plan should things not go well or as JF suggests errors were not recognised.
Last edited by Pittsextra; 9th Mar 2017 at 01:04.
Reason: bent loop.. What the fook is that?