I am sickened by this incident. When one flies a vintage aircraft or attends an airshow, one accepts the risks. These were uninvolved people just driving for work or play. It's completely unacceptable to them and to their distraught families that they died as a result of other peoples sport or hobby.

Well said Shytorque.

I have been deeply affected by this accident. more than by any other of late. I have retired from a long and varied piloting career, and have always accepted the risks and dangers as part of the job.

The difference here is the totally random nature in which Fate goes hunting.

The dead had nothing to do with this airshow, or its risks at all. Simply sitting in a traffic queue and taken in a mad, shocking, fiery instant.

My heart goes out to those poor unfortunate people, and their families and friends who are left behind to pick up the pieces and carry on.

And of course to the pilot and his kin. Whatever turns out to have been the cause of this tragedy, he has to live with it.

Really? shall we get this into persective. "aircraft enthusiasts fantasies" - get real. Airshows are THE NUMBER 1 spectator sport in the UK - more go to airshows than football. Oh yeah and more fans - many more have died at football matches than airshows.
This is a horrific, tragic accident. It was 24 hours ago. 7 people died -the first at a UK airshow since the 50's. some perspective on that - 10 have died on UK roads since and another 10 tomorrow and another 10 on tuesday and so on. 10,000 a year die completely preventably at the hands of the NHS.
What about the chinese container port explosion that killed many innocent bystanders-have you stopped buying cheap chinese imports until their industries improve health and safety? Nope. Thought not.
Lets have a report - lets learn what happened and put steps into place (if needed) to try and minimise the chance of it happening again (note - minimise - not prevent - nothing is 100% preventable) but lets not vilify the airshow community for something that, whilst horrific and has a lasting effect on those involved, is still a vanishingly small risk to those involved.
I'm more worried about getting mown down by a sleepy truck driver on the M25 tomorrow than I ever will be from any aviation activity.

So to all those wishing perimeter roads to be closed, if we take the argument to its extreme. Are the "spotters" shown here


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...25_634x356.jpg




at mortal danger on the A15 which despite having wigwams to stop traffic, is not a sterile zone when AC approach Waddo from the East, even during air shows. The same could be said for many many other airfields and displays.


Very sad incident but one that could happen anywhere AC are at low level, not just performing a display.


Kegworth was only a miracle that innocent users of the M1 were not involved, but the M1 and link road have not been put into a tunnel to protect them although there is nothing to say it wont happen again

Plenty of other places where runway thresholds have been displaced, arrestor beds installed, traffic lights placed on roads though. :cool:

A good measured article if anyone is interested putting some much needed accuracy and perspective on the tragedy of yesterday. Considering the "white heat" of the media.

Read the "Blog" Titled UK Airshow Safety:

Struggling to get this to post..... So here's the Google link:
Vintage Aeroplane Writer
vintageaeroplanewriter.com/
6 days ago - The Vintage Aviator Collection built RAAF Museum' RE8 replica; incredibly authentic on the grass at RAAF Point Cook. This, I'm now sure, ...

I'm not sure why all these posts about risk and who is taking it ??

We live in a life of risks and accept it, some chosen and some not in your control. If you somehow quantify a specific risk, then maybe you can argue it was unreasonable to most of us and not just yourself who could have avoided it.

As others have already said, in the midst of a sequence of aircraft losses at air shows, this incident is by far the most unsettling. Yet others have rightly pointed out that caution is the watch word, we don't know all the facts; there may have been a control failure, pilot incapacity etc.
But what niggles , what unsettles is the unpalatable thought that eleven completely innocent souls had their dreams expectations lives violently snatched from them and NOTHING ... ABSOLUTELY NOTHING will be learned from the event.
I suspect a pilot botched a loop as innumerable pilots before have and for exactly the same painfully well known reasons. The distraught relatives of the victims may well secretly wished their love ones cars had been fitted with ejection seats so they too could have banged out at the last moment. In case any think I am an aviation hater far from it. I love planes, love air shows and love flying my Pitts.

(PS 757 driver--your statistic re deaths in the NHS is wrong. The number is far higher....and the number of preventable deaths far far lower.)

First and foremost, my commiserations to all victims, families and friends.

Secondly, a suggestion that a major portion of the second half of the loop appears to lack sufficient pitch rate, except for the last few seconds when the rate then appears to increase considerably.

de-lurking...

How would the air show community react to (for example) a change in the minimum height requirements for specific maneuvers though?

I've been fortunate enough to watch almost four decades of Jersey International Air Displays, and it's been interesting (if that's the right word) to see how accidents (particularly Ramstein) have changed it over that time.

Because of the location of the airport here relative to the display area and because most of the island has been built on, there's always going to be a risk of an out-of-control aircraft killing people when it hits the ground; I've got photographs of vintage jets behind me (parallel to the the sea wall where most of the spectator are) before they cross in to the display area, and the Red Arrows often fly directly over my house.

But those aircraft are usually flying straight and level and not starting or finishing any maneuvers, and the reaction of most of aviation enthusiast friends (who don't want air shows banned) to this tragedy is variations on "why was a display aircraft pulling up from a loop near a road?" (instead of merely flying over it) in a "did anyone fully consider what might happen if someone attempts a loop over there and something goes wrong?" sense.

The but-but-but-more-people-have-been-killed-by-something-else-etc. (the JIAD hasn't killed anyone) arguments seem to have been directed at people who think air shows should be banned, but my concern is that some people in the air show community will react to calls for any new restrictions (which will come; accidents often expose deficiencies in established procedures, and they will need to be addressed) with an argument that isn't relevant. It's happening here a bit (but not from the person I quoted).

Closing roads isn't that extreme. For the JIAD, the dual carriageway (most busy road on the island) next to the beach is closed and the entire beach (a huge area when the tide is out) if off-limits

Whilst this is a tragic accident, I have no doubt the AAIB will do as thorough a job as they always do, though I would not envy the team the unpleasant circumstances they're likely to be encountering at the moment. There's not a lot of point repeating others valid comments, although there may be a few questions that don't seem to have aroused much query.

1. Any significant airshow attracts a large number of people around the wider perimeter/area, either trying to get a better vantage point for their filming, or to avoid the ticket price. They often position themselves deliberately under, or beyond, the display line to maximise the thrill; experience; photo location etc. . . and RISK!

2. I believe all airshow Directors in the UK are obliged to issue a display authorisation to each pilot/team, although I also understand that one Director may be able to pass on such authorisation for other airshows once practiced & performed (happy to be corrected on this). I would expect this display will have been scripted so that both pilot & commentator would know the order and type of manoeuvre being performed?

3. From my aerobatics many years ago, a loop was always a continuation of the entering direction of travel - I do believe this pilot pulled up heading approx 200 deg but impacted heading approx 020deg, all parallel with the 02 runway as per the display line. NOT a "loop the loop" by any description, though I'm no longer familiar with the correct term. If I've completely mis-interpreted the camera angle, I stand to be corrected.

4. I would also wonder what height/speed one might expect to enter such a manoeuvre, as it will have required a certain vertical requirement, in the conditions of the day, the margin of which could be as little as 20 ft between spectacular & disaster?

I've personally witnessed two aircraft spear-in at airshows, and knew they didn't stand a chance when my stomach contracted a number of seconds before they impacted. Both were fixed wing and trying to pull tighter having effectively mis-judged their line/wind/height/performance. It's sadly quite obvious to many aviators, and horribly unsettling on every occasion, particularly if one is due to fly shortly afterwards. It's also very sobering and reminds us that we hold a huge responsibility to operate as professionally as we can every single time we get airborne. I've viewed footage of many others, often in tandem with reading the meticulous reports generated by AAIB and other nation equivalents in order to learn the lessons from the misfortunes of others. Vary sadly, in due course, we're going to have to learn some more lessons from this one.

Having watched the numerous videos online, it does appear to be a very low entry height and slow pitch rate, with an accelerated pitch response later in the loop, along with very low airspeed.

'IF ' this proves to be pilot error and a loop was continued when it should have been thrown away, then this pilot should face charges for the innocent loss of life as a result of his actions.

We all love aircraft and aviation, but you have to act responsibly anytime you are in control of something so potentially lethal, especially at a public event.

It is such a sad loss of innocent life.

Sorry Zorab64, these were innocent people completely uninvolved with the airshow going about their business. Totally unacceptable that they died in such a manner.

New footage on BBC shows a pitch down at bottom of loop. G induced incap ?
Tragic in every way, but the UK aaib will find out what happened. I hope these " vintage" aircraft can continue to be seen in their element where they belong.

And it should be pointed out there is a suitable entirely risk-free airspace ideal for aerobatic demonstrations just a few miles away - the sea front.

Bournemouth moved their air displays from airport to sea-front many years ago with great success. In my view the same should now happen at Shoreham.

Can anyone on this thread explain to me why the aircraft was carrying two drop tanks? The two distinct smoke plumes suggest to me that they both exploded on impact, which suggests they were fuelled. Was this entirely necessary? Does the Hawker Hunter not have an onboard fuel tank?

Completely agree. I have been flying and involved (in a small way) with airshows for 35+ years. I am horrified and ashamed by this incident. The apologists talk about an 'RAF Ace' and BA Pilot, 'high standards for airshows in the UK' and 'infinitesimal risks' - all of which is admirable and probably true. However, whatever way you look at it, completely uninvolved people have been killed because of others failings and THAT is a crime.

At Duxford A P-38 Lightening came to grief at the bottom of a loop with the tragic loss of the pilot.
More research needs to be put into loops with older aircraft.

We can discuss as much as we want here - market forces will take care of whether or not that kind of airshow will be possible in the future. Insurance premiums will probably rise to a level that many airshows will be unable to afford flying displays.

That was a roll not a loop.

Putting more research into air display loops does seem advisable though, irrespective of the age of the aircraft.

Experienced pilots, please tell us what's happening here and whether that is what you'd expect or not Shoreham air crash: Man films Hunter hitting A27 road - BBC News

Sea front?
 

This was a tragic and so far inexplicable event. Unfortunately I was present at the 2007 Hurricane crash which occurred very close by.

For those suggesting the relocation of an extremely well-attended and well-organised annual RAAFA fund-raiser, I'd like an explanation of how it could possibly be held at the beach. I've watched the airshow at Eastbourne from the cliffs but it's an entirely different and far more limited event without static displays etc.

It's likely that useful lessons will be learned, as with any accident. However it would be a great loss if this event was curtailed or totally neutered in consequence. Let's recall that a significant component of the show is that it commemorates the events that took place in these same skies in August/September 1940, without which Britain would almost certainly be a very different place. As a pervasive amnesia and gradual dilution of public recollection overtakes us, this is something that must be preserved.

"Only way out"
 

Only just visited here, so maybe someone has already corrected this, but there is also an exit to the coast road (A259?) through a low bridge under the railway at the opposite (South-West) corner of the airfield.

The Radio Amateurs Emergency Network (who were asisting RAFA and the organisers, as they were 7 years ago when the Hurricane crashed on the South Downs just North of the airfield) were asked again by the police to help close exits.

The concern at that time, and probably again yesterday, was traffic flooding out would add to congestion and enable "punters" to add to the jams that would hamper the Blue Light Services reaching the scene - Fortunately the nearest fire department are very close to the A27 Bypass at the next Eastward junction.

(ExSim - born and raised in the area)

C4 news is quoting the police as saying there's still a lot of fuel in the aircraft.

Even speaking as a pilot and huge fan of air displays, the risks are clearly not "infinitesimal". Whether we like it or not this tragedy will prompt a major safety review. Specifically, present rules place much reliance on avoiding the "crowd line"; this crash shows a wider view is needed.

Good points Nick.
Looking through the AICs for this year's airshows, the top of the display airspace seems to be generally around 5500' QNH.
When I did my PPL course, that was generally accepted to be sufficient for aerobatics in a Cessna Aerobat.
When we did the shows at EGCD, I'm sure any fast-jets were given something like FL80-.
The Red Arrows airspace at EGXP, (R313), is SFC-9500'.

Whilst writing, I would appreciate being able to express my admiration of the people retrieving bodies from the accident site.

That is extraordinarily grim work.

Picture of flap deployment below:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/...0254681506.jpghttp://http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pi...0254681506.jpg

Re comment by ExSimGuy, a totally unrelated motorcycle accident to the south of the airfield closed the A259 and prevented exit (for low vehicles) via the very shallow railway bridge mentioned. This effectively led to the crowd being locked into the field for the best part of 5 hours, until a route was opened across the runway and out along a narrow track to join the A27 well to the west.

Even though the event provided loos, plenty of food and alternative entertainment to occupy the crowd during the wait, I wish to pay tribute to the patience and understanding shown by all present. It was a difficult and traumatic time (especially for those with children) and I saw nothing but calm and tolerance under the circumstances.

When we as a council insured the Lowestoft Air Show the premium was £25,000. I recall saying at the time that a premium of that size, although very small in relation to the potential claims nevertheless suggested that a degree of risk did exist. This incident certainly suggests that I was correct in that.

If that is a typical premium then I can only assume that the insurers are going to be extremely out of pocket on this and that the risk was very significantly greater than their actuaries calculated.

I've read the various thoughts about the location of the manoeuvre: I've seen the video of the manoeuvre: I've read the thoughts about such manoeuvres in such a vintage a/c. I've been a pax in a Hunter Display and flew Pu/s afterwards. I'm not an ex-military pilot. My first thoughts were that the g-pull up seemed very relaxed. My 2nd thoughts were that it started from a VERY low height. Combine the two and it might always have been a struggle to complete the recovery successfully. It would have been late in the downward vertical that the 'oops' moment might have become apparent.
It's been a while sine my airshow days, bit what is the minimum start height for such a display? In my looping days, and there are still some in less powered a/c, the idea would be to bottom out at the same height as entry, or higher; depending on height used to accelerate. This was a vertical manoeuvre entered from level flight, at a very low height. From the more experienced display pilots; what height would have been your plan to bottom out from the manoeuvre? The same as entry or higher? Spectacular if the same, but surely the initial pull would have been harder. Surely better to pull hard and relax than the other way round.

Nick H,

This (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvHp...ature=youtu.be) seems to be the most common view.

The one linked to by ex Sim Guy is even more interesting.

Shoreham air crash: Man films Hunter hitting A27 road - BBC News

I'm trying to work out when he rolls through 90° (very low?) and what happens at the top - in one video it looks as though he tries to pull through 'Cuban-style', and in the other as though he stall turns back round. That can't be right, surely?

Jackonicko, the first link you posted is to the same video as the one I posted. If you play it at 0.25 speed on a big display you can see the roll very clearly.

A lot of people have been calling this manoeuvre a 'Loop', but from the videos, it seems to start off as a loop, but then has a 180deg roll on the 'up portion', before going into the inverted.
Maybe some aerobatic pilots could give this a name, could it be part of a 'clover-leaf'?

He has been flying the Hunter for some years, flys the Jet Provost, flies and displays his own RV8. Was an Air Force QFI and flew the Harrier. He has a vast amount of display experience.

His experience and ability is obvious to anybody who has flown with him in any of those aircraft and also in his commercial role. He is also a modest and thoroughly decent individual.

Speculation about the cause of the accident is as pointless as it is distressing for anybody affected by this dreadful accident.

In the video clip it looks very much as if his final moments look more like a high speed stall than a fly into the ground.

FF

Sadly I think there are a number of factors to consider some have already been mentioned:

(a) The BBMF standards seem very sensible, these aircraft do not need to demonstrated to their limits, and note their currency requirements.

(b) The press seem to say the pilot was an ex harrier pilot BA captain, fine, but not in regular fast jet flying.

(c) The defendant of display pilot (PPL with 500 hours on a JP 3 (Newcastle)) claimed on media that AH must have been done to anything other than human error. Oh yes, he is apparently checked as display pilot on the Hunter T7?

(d) Previous fatality Hurricane, at Shoreham, PPL, Class two med, how can these people get approvals

Quote from phiggsbroadband:
"A lot of people have been calling this manoeuvre a 'Loop', but from the videos, it seems to start off as a loop, but then has a 180deg roll on the 'up portion', before going into the inverted.
Maybe some aerobatic pilots could give this a name, could it be part of a 'clover-leaf'?"

I'm also struggling to get my head around it, but this post on the Military thread suggests it was a "quarter clover":

http://www.pprune.org/military-aviat...ml#post9092279

[quoteQuote:
Shoreham air crash: Man films Hunter hitting A27 road - BBC News
In the video clip it looks very much as if his final moments look more like a high speed stall than a fly into the ground.

FF][/quote]

I've been thinking the same thing since seeing that clip.

I don't know enough about the stall characteristics of swept wing aircraft but the tail entering ground effect above the trees would give a really unwelcome nose down?

edited: thank Radix for the "high speed stall" reference.

All hopefully needless speculation as the AAIB should be able to deduce much from a chat with a hopefully recovering pilot.

Thoughts are with him living with the accident.

I'm sure the tombstone imperative will take effect and we will see more careful regulation of heights and flight lines in future, which while no real comfort to loved ones will at least be some positive.

To Funfly; Agreed ........... clearly a hi-speed stall under high g-loading causing the aircraft trajectory to suddenly flatten out due to loss of wing lift.
What a tragedy.
But can anybody tell me why the Hunter was carrying drop-tanks? these are intended for extended duration sorties, not air display maneuvers!
Besides adding weight and drag, they obviously affect maneuverability to some degree.

Tanks - to get to the air show and around the country. But flap under high G is unusual.