Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Non-Airline Forums > Accidents and Close Calls
Reload this Page >

Hawker Hunter down at Shoreham

Accidents and Close Calls Discussion on accidents, close calls, and other unplanned aviation events, so we can learn from them, and be better pilots ourselves.

Hawker Hunter down at Shoreham

Old 24th Aug 2015, 11:42
  #201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: ireland
Posts: 17
David a carter.

You seem to be the only one making sense in your post,well done.
For those who suggest "acceptable risk" as mentioned by 757 driver ,what nonsense.
There should be NO Risk to anyone except display pilots be it spectators at the show or people not involved in any way.
500 feet minimum and display only over water or zero population.
If not NO SHOW.
dusty crop is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 11:56
  #202 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: DORSET
Posts: 191
Oldlurker- re Red Arrows, yes, from West Overcliff Drive, the singleton does fly overhead over the crowds, and after the cloverleaf they do overfly urban areas, in fact part of the excitement is the overflying and trying to work out where the singletons have gone!
The point I am making is that these are state of the art planes flown by the RAf top guns, we do not want to see a tragedy.
sharksandwich is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 11:56
  #203 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 5,385
dusty:

There should be NO Risk to anyone except display pilots be it spectators at the show or people not involved in any way.
That's absolutely impossible to achieve.

Edit to add: short of banning all displays...
wiggy is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 11:57
  #204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In an ever changing place
Posts: 1,038
Effluent Man
For many years I was a Councillor and was involved with the now defunct Lowestoft Air Show. I had some safety concerns at the time but these were allayed to a large extent by the fact that it took the form of a lateral display offshore.

Shoreham is very different and offers a completely different set of risks. I think that had we been presented with a Shoreham type setup I would not have been happy to have gone along with the display.
So you didn't voice those concerns at the time but now after this tragic accident you decide too, was that to keep your Councillors position ? truly staggering some of the posts in this section of PPRuNe.
Above The Clouds is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 11:59
  #205 (permalink)  

Rotate on this!
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 60
Posts: 402
As an SLF, a self admitted non pilot, were you witness to this incident
Not other than reported events, but that's irrelevant.


were you involved with the airshow
No, but that's irrelevant


did you know anyone involved personally
No, but that's irrelevant

did you know the pilot?
No, but that's irrelevant.


Was there any point to those questions?
Does the answer to any of them preclude me from opinion or comment?

This was a ghastly tragedy and the loss of the airframes themselves, and any concern for that aspect of this event is absolutely astonishing.
SLFguy is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 12:04
  #206 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: SE England
Posts: 48
I've just had a fairly heated conversation on this topic with someone who thought it was ok because :-

(a) It had been going on for a long time (since the 60s)

(b) The pilot was highly trained and would be exonerated.

(c) People like airshows. (i.e. attendance was about 20,000)

(d) Accidents like this are very rare.

(e) Calls for a ban were irrelevant because they were 'after the fact'... the sort of meaningless phrase trotted out by people who don't know what they're talking about.

To my mind low level aerobatics in an old jet fighter is of a different order of risk to doing the same thing in a Pitts Special or a Zlin.
This was an accident that was going to happen.
I feel extremely sorry for the relatives and victims.
a1anx is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 12:07
  #207 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: global
Posts: 62
To my mind low level aerobatics in an old jet fighter is of a different order of risk to doing the same thing in a Pitts Special or a Zlin.
Can you justify this statement?
Charlie Pop is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 12:17
  #208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 124
Reluctant correction

I didn't want to post here originally and I don;t consider a lot of what's written here to be worthy of reply. However, for those calling for airshow activity to be demonstrably zero risk, then you are either being wilfully obtuse or have absolutely zero understanding of risks and probabilities. I'm afraid this is an unfashionable view in today's blame culture, but there is ABSOLUTELY NO ACTIVITY ON EARTH WHICH IS ZERO RISK. Ask an insurance actuary.

The correct and proper method for such analysis is to reduce risks to As Low as Reasonably Possible, or ALARP as we military folk refer to it. That may indeed mean cancelling the activity. The subtlety and judgement is in the word reasonable.

I'm sorry if this makes some of you uncomfortable, but those people in the Shoreham area over the weekend were statistically more at risk of a car-car road collision or being struck by a road vehicle whilst a pedestrian, than of the unfortunate outcome of the day. Indeed, those complete cretins who have profited from photographing and videoing the immediate aftermath instead of responding to the injured were at a higher risk being run over on the road or inhaling toxic smoke than anything else they did that day.

What I am certain will occur is a detailed and careful investigation into the event, its build up, and its supervision, and a set of reasoned recommendations by professional experts will be made. Anything else, based on what you read here, or in the red-top rags is just conjecture, including in fact this post of mine.

Rant off.
FJ2ME is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 12:19
  #209 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 64
Posts: 1,571
David a carter.

You seem to be the only one making sense in your post,well done.
For those who suggest "acceptable risk" as mentioned by 757 driver ,what nonsense.
There should be NO Risk to anyone except display pilots be it spectators at the show or people not involved in any way.
500 feet minimum and display only over water or zero population.
If not NO SHOW.
So, basically, no more airshows

There is no such thing as zero risk, except by grounding all aircraft and keeping spectators safely tucked home in bed watching a CGI-version of aerobatics or videos of classic Farnborough to see what you're missing

Please keep some sense of a proportion so close to this incident
robin is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 12:20
  #210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 6
Does anyone have any thoughts on how the pilot survived? If it was a stall (and wings level) close to ground that might explain it to some extent but there also appeared to be a fireball or was that from a vehicle? Just curious as vast majority of crashes like that would be fatal based on videos I've seen.
cloudhawke is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 12:24
  #211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Up North
Posts: 225
@ a1anx

Unfortunately, you have just trotted out one of those meaningless phrases!

This was an accident that was going to happen
So easy to say now that it has. I'm building my own picture of events through some of the more informed posting on this thread. Shame I have to wade through so much [email protected] to get there.

FJ2ME - very well put
Ballymoss is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 12:25
  #212 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: SE England
Posts: 48
FJ2ME Reluctant Correction

I didn't want to post here originally and I don;t consider a lot of what's written here to be worthy of reply. However, for those calling for airshow activity to be demonstrably zero risk, then you are either being wilfully obtuse or have absolutely zero understanding of risks and probabilities. I'm afraid this is an unfashionable view in today's blame culture, but there is ABSOLUTELY NO ACTIVITY ON EARTH WHICH IS ZERO RISK. Ask an insurance actuary.
Yes, but there is a difference between becoming the victim of someone else's risk and suffering as a result of a risk you took yourself.

BTW you mention insurance I guess the aircraft, pilot and airshow organisers were all insured.
a1anx is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 12:35
  #213 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Kent
Age: 63
Posts: 9
As one who was there I can tell you there were no road works on the A27 at that junction. Traffic management cones only in use to separate the through traffic from show traffic, No traffic lights in use, there are only Pedestrian Crossing lights there and they were hooded and NOT in use. Large signs telling you not to cross. There were many blue police signs in place warning people NO VIEWING! meaning no stopping, no watching, no photography on the entrance/junction both ways. I saw them and walked back to the beach. If anyone stood there to watch they were in complete contravention of the Police Signs/advice.


A very sad and tragic day for all involved and affected. But like others I do NOT want air shows stopped because of a rare and unique event, and I have sadly witnessed many over the years. Lets wait and see what the AAIB reports. Thanks to this Forum and some of the informed experience of others who have at actually done it at least its clear to me now why he had flap on as he ran in overhead me to display seemed odd to me then as he didn't seem to be going especially fast?
Seafurysmith is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 12:36
  #214 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Highbury, London
Age: 62
Posts: 61
@robin: re Farnborough 1952, it's a sad coincidence that the organisers' response was to carry on directly after the accident with Neville Duke flying the nuts off a Hunter. That was a very different era, where the WWII mentality prevailed and the RAF was still content to lose a trainee pilot every week in a Meteor.

Again, in a different era, late '60s, I was at Biggin with family being thrilled by the show. The Red Arrows did a vertical dive en-masse where they pulled out at equidistant headings around the compass. One came straight our way - I lost sight of him behind the crowd in front - then in a second roared directly over our heads about 30' up at most. I was just a kid, so that was "normal" to me (if a bit breath-taking), but the adults at large thought it rather close. Could you see that as acceptable today? Don't think so, things have moved on.
3rd_ear is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 12:37
  #215 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,384
Speculation... Some of the vids suggest that as he pulls up might have been looking into the sun. Not a good time to be temporarily blinded and unable to see airspeed.
cwatters is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 12:39
  #216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 133
[quoteYes, but there is a difference between becoming the victim of someone else's risk and suffering as a result of a risk you took yourself.
][/quote]

That's very true.

This, no doubt, is what will come out in the wash as potential changes to the way flying displays are conducted in future. In all honesty, I feel that the health and safety culture has gone to far in most cases but here there may well be room for improvement.

It takes a lot to keep these old jets flying. I just hope that they are not blanket banned from displaying as a kneejerk reaction in the interim. There are other solutions.
Hawker 800 is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 12:48
  #217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: EGMH
Posts: 207
Photograph of cockpit section? being lifted by crane.


http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/l...latest-updates


Last edited by susier; 24th Aug 2015 at 13:03.
susier is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 12:50
  #218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 33
RiSq, I understand what you are trying to say here, but ultimately the pilot made an error of judgment of massive proportions by flying over the A27. And not just over it but along it. I would be the first to agree that he had a huge amount of bad luck but he contributed to and compounded that by making bad decisions.
gawbc,
I refer you to post 87 with the diagram of Shoreham for the 2014 display. We don't need the AAIB to tell us that the Hunter was flying over the A27. Are you suggesting that it was intentional? Because that is the inevitable corollary of your post.
(By the way I know the A27 very well, I also know Shoreham well having flown in and out of in many times (do you? have you?) so don't need that map thanks).

How on earth do you reach that conclusion. I merely posted this because according to RiSq he knows what happened - pilot error - how can anyone on here know what happened? You have no idea whether something happened with the aircraft or not, so instead of speculating why don't you do the sensible thing and wait for the AAIB to tell us what really happened.

There are lots of incidences where on the face of it it looks like pilot error when in fact it was some malfunction.
gawbc is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 12:51
  #219 (permalink)  
aox
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 157
For anyone using the quote function, if it helps clarity you can get the person's username included, by adding inside the square brackets, after the word quote, =username, without any spaces

On some forums that can be done automatically, with a quote button next to reply, which pre-enters the quote in the reply field, but that doesn't seem to be implemented here.
aox is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 12:56
  #220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Heathrow
Age: 33
Posts: 54
It's important to note this particular aircraft was only released from the RAF in 1996. It's then been in the hands of wealthy individuals and has been on the circuit for quite some time.

Those saying this aircraft is old or falling to pieces, unless otherwise proven, seemed to be in excellent condition and order.

To answer the question about how he survived - That's a good question. From what I was told, it looked like the fuselage separated forward of the wings, with the momentum separating him from most of the carnage that followed. Not only this, but the unfortunate cars which were on the road (Particularly the Silver BMW) took the impact of the downward motion, taking a lot of energy out of the ground collision.

gawbc :

How on earth do you reach that conclusion. I merely posted this because
according to RiSq he knows what happened - pilot error -
Think you misquoted me - I never stated pilot error, that was the other person that actually quoted me. Please check your facts and amend your post.
RiSq is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.