I had noticed the fuel in this image and similar, also.

http://i1.mirror.co.uk/incoming/arti...est-Sussex.jpg

Police role at the scene
 

A few comments on here, one or two quite erroneous, about the role of the Police vis a viz AAIB...There is a clearly laid down procedure and taught at initial training to Police, on the roles and responsibilities..The scene and its security is always the responsibility of the Police. Its an absolute must though,that every assistance is given to the AAIB who have primacy in the investigation.

However, where there is loss of life, then the Police act for and on behalf of HM Coroner whose authority is higher than a High Court Judge.Some will be as good as gold and some will turn up at the scene and be rather pedantic..The Senior Police Officer at the scene often has a diplomatic balancing act to do..

This scene with its carnage and aftermath will not be easy to manage and deal with..so please understand there are many people trying..they may not get it right, all the time, but they will be doing their best...

Even that is not without risk. In 1980 the Red Arrows were displaying over Brighton beach and one of the aircraft hit the mast of a yacht. This is the pilot bailing out.

Air displays have an inherent risk. But is that not why many people go to them - to see mighty-machines and daring-do? Ever since Tony Blair's malign government there has been an aversion to any kind of risk. But I don't think you will find that many people will turn up to an air display in which no aircraft are allowed to fly, or a Formula 1 race in which overtaking was banned.

Life is a terminal disease with inherent risks - get over it.

Silver


http://aerobaticteams.net/images/red...ws-hawk-09.jpg

silvertate Your argument would have more weight behind it, if it was people watching the airshow that had been crashed into, not people minding their own business driving nearby...

First victim now named....RIP

Doing a loop over the A27 with slim margin for error seems unnecessary, and everyone else is paying the cost.

That is not a question of life's inherent risks but ego.

It seems better that people accept challenges rather than risks; the former gives a sense that you have something to gain out of it, the later that you have nothing.

I've nothing to get over Silver. In fact, I completely agree with you re the inherent risks (and TB's government).

The fact is that this will most probably be on the agenda of the council and local do-gooders. Questions as to whether the airshow should be relocated along the beach will be asked, no doubt. Personally, I wouldn't want to see the Shoreham Airshow relocated but no doubt things will change after this month's tragic incidents involving ex-mil jet hardware. Maybe it's time to let the current serving chaps show their 'derring do' in current hardware. The 'old boys' can stick to fast profile/plan view flybys more akin to a bad weather routine.

I've recently spoken to a friend of Andy's (BA colleague) and he said that he was off the critical list and on the 'serious condition' list. Fingers crossed for him.

So much could be said in sadness, but I'll restrict myself to this: I did a bit of an interenet search and ended up at Wikipedia (FWIW*). I could find very few casualties recorded amongst non-participants (by which I include spectators, whether official or unofficial), and none in the UK.

Is it really correct that this is the first time ever in the UK that passers-by, unconnected with the display, have been killed or seriously injured by a display accident?

MB

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._and_incidents

A very tragic accident for all concerned. I know damn all about display flying and even less about the Hawker Hunter. However, I do feel moved to remind some posters, who are clearly very keen airshow enthusiasts, that the people who lost their lives in this incident appear to be unconnected with the Shoreham event and were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. We all know that entry into events such as Airshows and Motor Race meetings implies an understanding of potential risk to spectators as well as competitors - these parameters were exceeeded yesterday and questions will be asked and must be answered in due course.

My sympathies to all those affected.

Yes, it's correct.

@Aerospace101
....and the effect of that banking or rolling prior to the aircraft reaching a vertical position would be, as well as altering the axis, to reduce the height at the top of the 'loop'.

I'd re-iterate that all roads around airshows within a sensible range should be closed during the airshow as a result of this.

If it makes events like Shoreham no longer viable then so be it.

Shoreham in particular looks a ludicrous place to hold an airshow in hindsight, it's surrounded by housing.

Two victims named;

Worthing United footballer Matthew Grimstone, 23
Matt Jones, 24

I think it would make all airshows no longer viable. Duxford and Farnborough certainly.

I am dubious about the "fuel leak" . In such atmospheric conditions the compression of moisture in the air produces these mirage type effects quite easily. Presumably the settings of the control surfaces in such manouvres as these being performed would exacerbate this.

If you search on airliners.net for WV372, the very first pic you come to is of the aircraft in a climb at Biggin Hill on 7 September 2014. In that pic, fuel is also very visibly venting from the starboard drop tank.

It has nothing to do with yesterday's accident.

Shoreham is a small airfield in a built up area with rising ground in close proximity to the north. Not an ideal venue for an airshow, particularly when high performance aircraft are being displayed. My heart goes out to all those affected by this tragedy.

Just a comment from a relatively dis-interested observer across the pond;

Been to many airshows, love them, but it is time that minimum altitude for all maneuvers be moved to 300' or above. If you're not at the front of the crowd, you can't see that inverted pass down the runway at 20' for all the heads and bodies in the way. Your kids can't see a darn thing below 200' for the same reason. My interest is in seeing a plane and pilot's skill, not his bravery.

I was at an airshow at Navy Dallas decades ago, when Bob Hoover did a routine in a borrowed Mustang. Nice, relaxed routine at around 300' or so, 16 pt rolls and the like, very precise. Most of the crowd yawned and went for refreshments. The un-educated are there for smoke and noise, and some are entertained by the idea somebody might go "splat". That's a shame.

It always seems strange to me that airshows and other potentially dangerous / risky events go go on for decades without anyone batting an eyelid, yet as soon as there's a significant accident, loads of people crawl out of the woodwork saying such things should not be allowed. Not only that, but there's the immediate clamour for someone to blame, rather than to analyse and understand to what actually happened.

Life is risky and some of it significant, which we accept as a tradeoff every day of the week, so get over it. This a major tragedy and not only for those who have lost their lives and their families, but for historic aviation and much more. Let's have less of the preaching and judgment, please...

Like everyone else, I'm deeply saddened by this awful accident and as a family man can only imagine the devastating consequences it will have already had, and will continue to have on so many people, many of whom were totally unconnected with the air show.

Speaking as someone who previously held an RAF aircraft display authorisation and instructed in aerobatics, albeit not in the Hunter, I can also imagine the terrible effect this will have on the pilot himself, both now and in the future and my sympathy also goes to him and his family.

As usual, there are many theories and possibilities why this might have occurred and of course all this will be very thoroughly investigated by the AAIB in due course. I do have my own personal theory which I have discussed elsewhere, but won't be posting it here.

:sad:

Life is risky enough without aircraft enthusiasts' fantasies creating unnecessary and unwanted hazards. That is the issue here. It doesn't matter what the root cause is, the margins of safety were obviously exceeded. There is no justification for putting other people's lives at risk.

What makes incidents like this cause more virulent reaction is the now ubiquitous documentary evidence. It brings everyone closer to the tragedy of the event, so we have to expect greater outrage. It doesn't make the outrage unjustified in this case.

Sorry to hear that, Shy, highly qualified opinion is valuable in any discussion.


Open questions:

Are we sure that at no time did the flaps go asymmetric? This happening at the apex would explain the extraordinary variations described so clearly by Aerospace101 post #113. This, followed by the inability to retract them on the decent might just tally.

This begs the question - Would it be normal to have the 20% ? flap into the top of the loop but then retract for the decent because of the elevator issue?