So you have clarified nothing other than your opinion, you simply know nothing about what happened from inside the cockpit.

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.

Is it commonplace to ground all aircraft of the type following such an incident?

Seems a bit unusual to me to ground them. Will be interesting to see the preliminary report.

Could I ask UK experts why it is required to have the airshow at the actual airport? For example comparing this to Canada where I'm from, our annual airshow has performers use both Toronto City Centre and Pearson airport for staging but the actual show itself takes place over the lake, well away from roads and other infra-structure.

Jeez the rubbish on here is increasing by the hour
Re Ejector seats
CAA pub CAP 632 deals with operation of permit to fly ex-military aircraft on the civil register.

Chapter 5, page 17 clause 5.8 and especially the last sentence in the paragraph extract quoted below


"Where ejection seats are an integral part of the aircrew escape system, as
specified in the relevant Pilots Notes, Flight or Aircrew Manuals, it is
recommended that they be fully serviceable for all flights. Approval should
be sought from the CAA (Application and Approvals) at the earliest
opportunity if it is intended to operate with inert ejection seats (or other
escape systems). It is unlikely that the CAA will allow swept-wing aircraft
fitted with ejection seats to be flown unless the equipment is fully
operational."

It seems that there is some confusion regarding the type of manoeuvre attempted. Is the management of an airshow within the UK informed of the display programs of participating pilots and are they required to approve these display programs? If so, then the type of manoeuvre attempted in this case can be easily verified...

The 'confusion' you refer to is not experienced by those involved in display flying. It stems from uninformed comment on forums such as this.

Can you clarify how these air-show generate income? I've always assumed airport-based
shows make money from the crowd through the turnstiles.

Ref Helen-Damnation: the reason that a half-cuban or cuban is actually a safer figure to fly than a simple loop is by virtue of the fact that you are not pulling through the vertical when heading towards the earth.

A regular half cuban involves flying a 5/8 positive loop onto a 45 degree downline with a half-roll to erect flight and a recovery to straight and level. This recovery only requires a 45 degree pitch change when heading towards terra firma, rather than the 90 degree pitch change when pulling through a loop.

having looked at a number ov videos, I get the impression the descent phase of the display has strayed well off the display line, anyone else see it that way.

If it is, the question has to be why, what had already gone wrong.

Guardian video
 

Shoreham airshow footage shows fighter jet crashing onto A27 - video | UK news | The Guardian

What is that flash between 3 and 4 seconds in to the video?

Displays don't just take place on the display axis, otherwise there would be no turns.

If that is the case, would you kindly enlighten those of us who are less well informed as to which manoeuvre was attempted in this case? Was it a failed loop or something else?

The relatives of those who died and the injured survivors have a right to know.

This has been discussed elsewhere, including the parallel thread in the military forum. I don't have a copy of AH's display sequence, but the organisers of the show will have had. They, and he, would not have been 'confused' as to what was planned.

And they will be afforded full access to the entire findings of the enquiry.

from the AAIB website:

Seagull :rolleyes:

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g1...pswzs4dgum.jpg

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g1...ps8bn968is.jpg

The beach?
 

Rideforever wrote:
....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....

I find the first statement here inexplicable as I seldom, if ever, see anything but straight and level flight (military occasionally excepted) offshore along this coastline. I live in the area and probably see as much from ground level as anyone else walking regularly here. How the morally reprehensible standards of behaviour you see as manifest in Brighton manage infect the occupants of aircraft passing overhead is beyond my feeble comprehension.

The second statement - and I have no axe to grind - is just incomprehensible. What exactly attracts these undisciplined pilots to Shoreham? I think we ought to be told.

As for relocating the RAAFA show to the local beaches.. well, I'd love to know, and have asked the same question previously, how exactly could this be done? Relocate the static displays, concessions etc to the beach? Er, no. Have the 20,000 or so spectators rush a couple of miles across the A259 over to the beach to catch the displays and then run back? Probably not.

Overstress, yes I agree with you there but this manoeuvre (a loop?) would surely have been along the display line?

carjockey - see the recommendations from the investigation into the previous accident.

All the manouvres should have been made clear to the organizers in advance of the display.


Hurricane air show crash 'caused by unplanned manoeuvre' - Telegraph

It's easy to do with only a very few planes affected and it calms the public who believe what they read.

@Quentinc
The 'flash' is believed to be a bird much closer to the camera so out of focus passing across the viewpoint.
I saw an analysis of it as a 'still' somewhere on these forums showing it was not aligned with the path of the aircraft.
It was probably on another valuable post which has since been deleted.

Edit Siloesid made this comment redundant

How many can be accommodated at Lancing Beach Green ?
Otherwise Brighton ... apart from the i360 getting in the way.
These are only alternatives if needed.