Hawker Hunter down at Shoreham
However if there is any truth that they declined to participate in a Shoreham display for the implied safety reasons then this may well have serious implications for all concerned with the Shoreham event.
On another forum, someone said they'd been banned for frightening sheep. This may well also be inaccurate.
I'm no expert, but their routines do tend to consist of rather large-scale manoeuvres compared to others, and the airspace volume available at Shoreham is limited by parts of the London TMA nearby and overhead, and the higher ground of the South Downs just to the north.
And indeed it has been said in the past by someone on behalf of the airshow that they can't perform there due to the proximity of Lancing and Worthing and airspace.
The fact that they won't fly low over these towns while changing formation doesn't make it dangerous for other aircraft flying singly to do routines that remain much closer to the airfield.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seafurysmith:
...At NO point did the Hunter fly at the crowd or over it, this is simply wrong! I was there and it flew straight down the display axis and then straight up into a vertical climb and then rolled 90 degrees into a quarter clover to the north of the airfield. This in complete accordance with his published display routine. It did not run in from the North as the BBC are still showing on their graphics, ran in from the sea down the display line and well away from the crowd!
...At NO point did the Hunter fly at the crowd or over it, this is simply wrong! I was there and it flew straight down the display axis and then straight up into a vertical climb and then rolled 90 degrees into a quarter clover to the north of the airfield. This in complete accordance with his published display routine. It did not run in from the North as the BBC are still showing on their graphics, ran in from the sea down the display line and well away from the crowd!
There are enough landmarks visible in the DT video that I imagine the AAIB experts will have little difficulty determining all the relevant parameters from it (esp. in combination with the other footage).
Accident?
Stuckgear,
Utter rubbish. They died because of an accident.
Are you assuming that there was no 'blame' in this incident?
IMHO, accident is over used.
Until the final report no one can know.
Utter rubbish. They died because of an accident.
Are you assuming that there was no 'blame' in this incident?
IMHO, accident is over used.
Until the final report no one can know.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: London, Monte Carlo and Bermuda (I wish!)
Age: 80
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We went regularly to Greenham Common, Fairford, Farnborough, Duxford, Cosford, Lakenheath, Old Warden and many, many more. Wonderful airshows held over many years. They were huge, with vast numbers of people, traffic chaos, but hours and hours of pleasure seeing all manner if aircraft in the air and on the ground. Luckily we never saw a crash, ever.
Yes, there will always be danger and there must be controls to protect the public, but Shoreham resulted in an additional level of horror due to the death and injury of people not directly involved in or with the airshow, and the graphic pictures which were taken, but it would be a tragedy if the pleasures of air shows are to be denied to the general public. I hope that the AAIB will be able to produce its report as soon as possible. In the meantime I don't go to airshows any more, but not because of fear. I dislike the traffic chaos getting to and from, the enormous crowds, seeing the same old aircraft in diminishing numbers, and the feeling that it was all much more pleasurable in the old days.
Yes, there will always be danger and there must be controls to protect the public, but Shoreham resulted in an additional level of horror due to the death and injury of people not directly involved in or with the airshow, and the graphic pictures which were taken, but it would be a tragedy if the pleasures of air shows are to be denied to the general public. I hope that the AAIB will be able to produce its report as soon as possible. In the meantime I don't go to airshows any more, but not because of fear. I dislike the traffic chaos getting to and from, the enormous crowds, seeing the same old aircraft in diminishing numbers, and the feeling that it was all much more pleasurable in the old days.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Airstrip One
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the interests of accuracy: In the 1968 Breguet Atlantique crash at Farnborough, the aircraft's crew were killed as was an RAE employee going about his normal business on the ground.
I guess he doesn't count as a spectator.
I guess he doesn't count as a spectator.
Possibly to do with the fact that manoeuvres with nine aircraft take longer and use more airspace than a singleton ... ?
Tourist #420
Henry
You have seen the red arrows low level over central London, yes?
Sometimes in close formation with Concorde etc?
You have seen the red arrows low level over central London, yes?
Sometimes in close formation with Concorde etc?
Somewhere in the risk assessment of those Red Arrows flypasts must be consideration of flying single-engine over London (not normally allowed). Perhaps the reliability of the engine in straight-and-level flight is a factor, similar to the risk assessment of ETOPS.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stuckgear,
Utter rubbish. They died because of an accident.
Are you assuming that there was no 'blame' in this incident?
IMHO, accident is over used.
Until the final report no one can know.
Utter rubbish. They died because of an accident.
Are you assuming that there was no 'blame' in this incident?
IMHO, accident is over used.
Until the final report no one can know.
I am assuming nothing. I am not out sharpening a pitchfork apportioning blame to anyone or anything.
An accident occured. It was and remains tragic for those directly involved, indirectly involved and those who witnessed it.
Like you, i would rather wait for the final report rather weigh in half truths, misinformation and half baked, third hand incorrect conjecture.
Last edited by stuckgear; 29th Aug 2015 at 20:41.
R/T?
Is anyone aware of any Transmission from AH during the manoeuvre - e.g Ooops! or referring to any failure / anomaly - or alternatively can confirm the NO such transmission was made.?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Class D airspace
Age: 67
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on Guys
Turn the speculation-o-scope to low will you?
The media storm is over, and proper analysis is under way.
AAIB will be in print within a week or 3, and meanwhile spare a thought for AH - critical but stable, and for the families of those not yet formally identified.
If you are going to comment on an aspect of the aviation, FFS look at the videos properly and read what else has been said first.
The you may rightfully conclude that all that can be said as an interested bystander has already been said.
We all have homes and loved ones. Maybe time to close the bar?
Turn the speculation-o-scope to low will you?
The media storm is over, and proper analysis is under way.
AAIB will be in print within a week or 3, and meanwhile spare a thought for AH - critical but stable, and for the families of those not yet formally identified.
If you are going to comment on an aspect of the aviation, FFS look at the videos properly and read what else has been said first.
The you may rightfully conclude that all that can be said as an interested bystander has already been said.
We all have homes and loved ones. Maybe time to close the bar?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,868
Received 2,820 Likes
on
1,202 Posts
Copied over from the flypast forums, if you can assist please do so.
AAIB & Police appeal for Shoreham video or stills
Two requests:
1) If you witnessed the accident at the Shoreham airshow on Saturday 22 August 2015 you may contact the AAIB using our [email protected] email address.
We are particularly interested in any photos and videos that you may have taken showing the accident.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) Anybody with pictures or video of Saturday's crash is asked to contact Sussex Police via this dedicated e-mail please.
[email protected]
JUST PROVIDE A NAME AND CONTACT NUMBER, DO NOT ATTACH THE FOOTAGE.
Two requests:
1) If you witnessed the accident at the Shoreham airshow on Saturday 22 August 2015 you may contact the AAIB using our [email protected] email address.
We are particularly interested in any photos and videos that you may have taken showing the accident.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) Anybody with pictures or video of Saturday's crash is asked to contact Sussex Police via this dedicated e-mail please.
[email protected]
JUST PROVIDE A NAME AND CONTACT NUMBER, DO NOT ATTACH THE FOOTAGE.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wales
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote... If the engine was not developing full thrust, this would have a significant impact.
Not too sure about that.... On the downward part of the loop gravity plays a very important role, and the aircraft will pick up speed at about 20kts per second. Also the higher the speed the more the radius of curvature increases. So applying power whilst descending could create a bigger radius. Even gliders can perform loops and they have no power at all.
For what its worth, the climb and descent each took about 10 seconds.
The following reference gives details of the take-off distance of the RR Avon 207 variant (10150lbs st.)at MAUW, of 1090metres.
The T7 version, with the RR Avon 122 only has 7750 lbs st. The 02/20 runway at Shoreham is just 1036 metres.
see... http://www.hunterteam.com/hawker_hun...tech_specs.htm
.
Not too sure about that.... On the downward part of the loop gravity plays a very important role, and the aircraft will pick up speed at about 20kts per second. Also the higher the speed the more the radius of curvature increases. So applying power whilst descending could create a bigger radius. Even gliders can perform loops and they have no power at all.
For what its worth, the climb and descent each took about 10 seconds.
The following reference gives details of the take-off distance of the RR Avon 207 variant (10150lbs st.)at MAUW, of 1090metres.
The T7 version, with the RR Avon 122 only has 7750 lbs st. The 02/20 runway at Shoreham is just 1036 metres.
see... http://www.hunterteam.com/hawker_hun...tech_specs.htm
.
Last edited by phiggsbroadband; 28th Aug 2015 at 15:38.
Tourist - yes, I'm sure I've heard that somewhere....it may have been along the lines of 'no ejection unless/until you are sure your a/craft is going in the drink'.
It would be kinda poor form for a military pilot to bang out over central London and let his a/craft do it's own thing. I think the routes to get to the Mall take into account water and open areas as much as possible.
Anyway, there must be some on here who can confirm or otherwise.
It would be kinda poor form for a military pilot to bang out over central London and let his a/craft do it's own thing. I think the routes to get to the Mall take into account water and open areas as much as possible.
Anyway, there must be some on here who can confirm or otherwise.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it is perfectly possible that a fine upstanding pilot in the Reds might do everything in their power to stick it in the drink.
I can also imagine that one might opt to go in with it in an effort to save lives.
I can't, however, imagine anyone signing an illegal order that pilots must die with their aircraft.
Perhaps just a higher emphasis on sticking with the aircraft and making every effort before banging out?
Bit of a pointless order since no pilot of that standard is ever going to just bang out over London without making every effort anyway.
I can also imagine that one might opt to go in with it in an effort to save lives.
I can't, however, imagine anyone signing an illegal order that pilots must die with their aircraft.
Perhaps just a higher emphasis on sticking with the aircraft and making every effort before banging out?
Bit of a pointless order since no pilot of that standard is ever going to just bang out over London without making every effort anyway.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Valencia, Spain
Age: 82
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From my association with Hunters over 50 years ago I recall they were not permitted to fly inverted for more than a few seconds because the engine would flame-out due to fuel starvation. Something to do with the design of the fuel pumps I recall. While practicing for an air display S/L Max Bacon rolled inverted over the runway with the intention of doing an inverted loop, which he had already done successfully on previous practices. From my viewpoint in a building near the end of the runway he disappeared and suddenly there was silence followed by a double bang - apparently the engine had flamed out but at what precise point I could not see. He ejected at the top of the outside loop and the aircraft impacted the runway intersection with only the wings left visible. This happened at RAF Tengah, Singapore.
Just found this: http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=58229 it appears I got the pilots name wrong, Perhaps Max was the CO of 20 Sqn at that time. It was a long time ago. This report implies there were 2 accidents but same aircraft and pilot involved!
Just found this: http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=58229 it appears I got the pilots name wrong, Perhaps Max was the CO of 20 Sqn at that time. It was a long time ago. This report implies there were 2 accidents but same aircraft and pilot involved!
Last edited by Ka-2b Pilot; 28th Aug 2015 at 17:20. Reason: Added more info.