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, 13:03
  #221 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 133
Those saying this aircraft is old or falling to pieces, unless otherwise proven, seemed to be in excellent condition and order.
It was maintained at North Weald, I personally know one of the engineers - a meticulous type with a wealth of vintage mil jet experience on the spanners. These same guys maintained the Gnat that went in this month also. Words cannot describe how they must be feeling right now.
Hawker 800 is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 13:08
  #222 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 33
Apologies RiSq, it was indeed Effluent man who knows what happened
gawbc is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 13:36
  #223 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: W.London
Posts: 21
Whatever the cause of this accident the fact is that this was a well maintained aircraft flown by a very experienced, skilled and careful pilot (who I really hope makes a complete recovery) and such accidents, though fairly uncommon, will always happen at airshows from time to time. That's in the nature of aerobatic flying and pilots accept that risk which is greater than normal flight operations. The emphasis has therefore quite properly been on minimising the risk to spectators as these are obviously the major at-risk group. Following the Shoreham accident more attention will now have to be given to the safety of people beyond the actual airshow and that must mean reviewing the locations of airshows along with the types of aircraft involved.

Though I'm sure it's absolutely not how they're really feeling I'm afraid that the interview with John Turner on Today this morning did make the British Air Display Association appear rather complacent. "We have to wait for the enguiry to report" and "we'll review the rules with the CAA in due course." We don't want a knee-jerk reaction such as banning all on-shore displays but we do know what happened on the A27 even if not why it happened and I think the public will expect an immediate review of existing airshows.

You can never remove risk entirely but you can identify and minimise areas of potential hazard. Though not a significant risk for normal arrivals and departures I'm afraid the proximity of the A27 to a relatively small aerodrome and its position relative to the display line does look like a hazard that wouldn't apply to most others used for airshows.

Last edited by 150commuter; 24th Aug 2015 at 14:29.
150commuter is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 13:39
  #224 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 54
I think the authorities have to fix the problem they have and not over-react.

The pilot was displaying in the wrong place with too few safety margins. It's that simple.

They have a 5500 ceiling because of Gatwick who are at the moment experimenting with varying traffic over Sussex day to day (presumably because of airliner noise). Perhaps they are a little restrictive with the ceiling, given they don't have a stable pattern over the county.

Pilots from Shoreham are during the summer buzzing up and down the coast to Brighton - the place where everyone lets go - and of course that culture has gotten to them. I raise my eyebrows at pilots doing manoeuvres over Brighton with seemingly little oversight.

Control is not something I associate with pilots flying our of Shoreham. But that could be changed.

Alternatively, putting the show over the water at Lancing might be good for everyone and successful.
rideforever is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 13:55
  #225 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 133
Pilots from Shoreham are during the summer buzzing up and down the coast to Brighton - the place where everyone lets go - and of course that culture has gotten to them. I raise my eyebrows at pilots doing manoeuvres over Brighton with seemingly little oversight.

Control is not something I associate with pilots flying our of Shoreham. But that could be changed.
Wow, what a sweeping statement. Thank you for the insight in to the culture of a Shoreham pilot... You really are putting them in a good light.

think the authorities have to fix the problem they have and not over-react.
The only part of your garble I can agree with.
Hawker 800 is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 13:57
  #226 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Wallingford
Posts: 64
Good rant FJ2ME, ALARP is a good and sensible yardstick and let's hope that reasonable judgement prevails when the authorities make difficult decisions (as they will most certainly have to) about future safety regulations at airshows.

Although not relating to this tragedy (I believe there were other factors at play), a starter would be to ban downward vertical manouevres with low pullouts in high inertia aircraft, full stop! There have been too many tragedies from these manouevres. Half or full Cuban Eights look nicer and are a lot safer.
118.9 is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 13:57
  #227 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 5
Does anyone know if the plane was fitted with a Flight Data Recorder?

Last edited by bateleur; 24th Aug 2015 at 16:56.
bateleur is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 14:17
  #228 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hades.
Posts: 753
a starter would be to ban downward vertical manouevres with low pullouts in high inertia aircraft, full stop!
and
Half or full Cuban Eights look nicer and are a lot safer
Not sure which half cuban you've been doing but the one I was taught has a significant downward manoeuvre akin to the second half of a loop which I assume you're referring to in reference to this accident.

and are a lot safer
Nope, just as easy to bugger up, twice if you do the full cuban.
helen-damnation is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 14:22
  #229 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Southwold
Age: 67
Posts: 58
Above The Clouds,

As possibly the only Councillor with any knowledge of airshows I did indeed register my unease. However if you go around resigning over every issue that you are outvoted on it becomes ridiculous, you end up behaving like spoilt kids. I made my doubts over safety known, luckily with Lowestoft I was wrong, but as this incident shows it was luck.

On the "pilot error" issue , if I could clarify: I agree that the AAIB will indeed establish the cause of the crash. However where I do feel that his responsibility lies is on the positioning of the aircraft. He should not have been over the A27. That may of course not have been deliberate but I would argue that it was certainly an error.
Effluent Man is online now  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 14:33
  #230 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: MD
Posts: 65
re: Ejection. Not possible. Ejection seats on ex-military aircraft in civilian hands are either removed or disabled. It is not as simple as having an ejection seat. It (seat, pyros, chute) has to be maintained and is expensive, especially for historic aircraft.
iskyfly is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 14:41
  #231 (permalink)  

Controversial, moi?
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,546
re: Ejection. Not possible. Ejection seats on ex-military aircraft in civilian hands are either removed or disabled.
Incorrect.

Some may be but I have flown in a civilian owned JP with live seats.

I have no idea regarding the subject aircraft.
M.Mouse is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 14:44
  #232 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: LSZG
Age: 47
Posts: 86
re: Ejection. Not possible. Ejection seats on ex-military aircraft in civilian hands are either removed or disabled. It is not as simple as having an ejection seat. It (seat, pyros, chute) has to be maintained and is expensive, especially for historic aircraft.
Not for the Hunter flying in Switzerland. The ejection seat are being maintained and the holders are civil club, holders of the different Hunter. But as said, the clubs cannot afford to fit all the Hunter at the same time. This is why they share them

http://www.swisshunterteam.com/
MartinM is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 14:45
  #233 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: horsham
Age: 64
Posts: 5
I agree, the first time using 2 notches of flap was domo'ed to me I was amazed at the ammount of aft stick movement that was needed to keep the thing in the buffet.
This seems to have popped up in the wrong place; but I would guess he was outside the seat parameters anyway, 1000ft per 1000ft v/s ?

Last edited by merlin1; 24th Aug 2015 at 14:50. Reason: Wrong place
merlin1 is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 14:47
  #234 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,878
A not too dissimilar incident at the 1997 Ostend Air Show resulted in a banning of air shows in Belgium.

Unfortunately it can take a loss of innocent lives for sense to be realised!
Phileas Fogg is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 14:51
  #235 (permalink)  

PPRuNe Person
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,263
re: Ejection. Not possible. Ejection seats on ex-military aircraft in civilian hands are either removed or disabled.
Maybe in MD, but not here in Europe. If you search the info already in the public domain re this accident you will see that there were concerns that the seats were still live.
overstress is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 15:02
  #236 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Heathrow
Age: 33
Posts: 54
Question for someone that has done displays and carried out such manoeuvres as attempted on Saturday.

Is it mandatory you wear a visor when completing loops or at the very least some sort of sun shield? I saw someone mentioned that he flew up into the sun which may have temporarily blinded him. I find that a little hard to believe, but I was just interested to know if this was a requirement for aerobatics, especially on privately owned aircraft.
RiSq is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 15:11
  #237 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 69
Hmm.

Air displays to face restrictions - BBC News
PoloJamie is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 15:14
  #238 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: London
Age: 46
Posts: 33
me myself and fly is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 15:15
  #239 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: EGMH
Posts: 207
CAA statement

The thoughts of everyone at the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) remain with all of those affected by the tragic accident at the Shoreham Air Show on Saturday 22 August.
Following the accident we immediately began an urgent review and have, today, announced a series of immediate restrictions and changes to UK civil air displays.
As a precaution, on Saturday 22 August we took steps to ensure no further flights were made by Hawker Hunter aircraft - this temporary restriction remains in place.
Flying displays over land by vintage jet aircraft will be significantly restricted until further notice. They will be limited to flypasts, which means ‘high energy’ aerobatics will not be permitted.
The CAA will conduct additional risk assessments on all forthcoming civil air displays to establish if additional measures should be introduced.
We commenced a full review of civil air display safety yesterday and held an initial meeting this morning.
The safety standards that must be met by all major civil air displays in the UK are among the very highest in the world and are regularly reviewed. All air display arrangements, including the pilots and aircraft, must meet rigorous safety requirements. Individual display pilots are only granted approval following a thorough test of their abilities.
The CAA will continue to offer every assistance to the Air Accidents Investigation Branch as it seeks to establish the cause of the accident. The CAA will also act promptly in response to any emerging indications from the AAIB’s investigation.


Source: Guardian
susier is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 15:17
  #240 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 33
On the "pilot error" issue , if I could clarify: I agree that the AAIB will indeed establish the cause of the crash. However where I do feel that his responsibility lies is on the positioning of the aircraft. He should not have been over the A27. That may of course not have been deliberate but I would argue that it was certainly an error.
So you have clarified nothing other than your opinion, you simply know nothing about what happened from inside the cockpit.

Many airports have major roads just outside the fence. 20-odd years ago a Citation went off the end of Southampton's runway 20 and onto the M27.
On Radio Solent this morning an ex AAIB inspector suggested that perhaps there should be hatched areas for the approach to 02 (and possibly as a runoff from 20) and traffic lights so that when there was a movement the M27 could stop to allow the movement to take place.

That really did seem to be a knee jerk reaction.
gawbc 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.