Hunter Crash at Shoreham,..
 

Is this the one to start the Ban on old Jets doing aero's,

Personally I hope not.... but two old Jets hitting the ground in almost as many weeks,... doing similar Aero's will be a target for the greater uninformed..IMO

Very sad for the pilot of the Hunter his family and the public plus their relatives who were very sadly inadvertently involved in this conflagration , plus the people who organised the show..!
PRB

Shocking video of crash - it does seem to me that there is common thread of mis-calculated altitude in this and previous airshow crashes ( Mosquito, RR Spitfire, P-38 Lightning).

I am not a pilot or airshow organiser but isn't this something that could be avoided? (and I suppose it more frequently is, thinking of the number of successful airshows).

I certainly mean no disrespect to the pilots, in making these comments, but just wonder how such a basic thing seems to repeat.

RIP and condolences to all involved in this awful incident, tragic loss of life/full health and sad loss of a beautiful plane.

I love seeing classic/vintage aircraft flying but always feel that there is a time for all old planes to stop doing aerobatics.

This may or may not have been miscalculated altitude (height, presumably, rather than altitude), but the Mossie crash at Barton most certainly wasn't.

Top of the loop I felt uncomfortable. Backside I thought he might just have got away with it. Oh... By far the worst thing I have ever witnessed.

In one of the last pictures taken, as the Hunter is flying low over some rooftops - it maybe a sun glare on the cockpit, but it looks like the white helmet of the pilot is well forward in the canopy, possibly meaning he's slumped forwards - LOC ?
Just speculation.

1. I'm unable to download videos to view the final flying sequence.
2. Was the aircraft carrying drop-tanks?
3. Were the drop-tanks empty or fuelled?
4. Any restrictions on aerobatics whilst carrying drop-tanks on the Hunter?

Yes, the Hunter did have drop tanks as did the Gnat at Oulton Park 3 weeks ago.
like most on Pprune I have an inherent love of any flying heavier than air aircraft/Heli/Glider/Ultralight, but I don't get any high from watching an old Jet perform in such ways, I know people will say "Well its the only way to show the great unwashed just what they( the old Jets and older types) could perform like",
but is it really needed, a few circuits and slow and then fast passes would be just as interesting without putting too much strain and pressure on those flying to be even more adventurous, for an example look at how graceful and fully shown off the Vulcan is.

I make no criticism at all of any of the people involved in any air shows, but some how this flying of Older a/c has to be as risk free as possible, so that the children of today and tomorrow can see what has gone before to protect the heritage of our free world. The Nanny State will already be hands up in horror at what sadly occurred at Shoreham.

Probably not the best example, most of the displays of XH558 are decried as 'tame', except for those of one pilot in particular.

He did the Saturday display at RIAT and on the Sunday it was specified on the tannoy that the display that day would not be the same...

I agree that old jets shouldn't be put under much stress but there is very little crowd interest in jets that just fly back and forth. Even the Viggen, for all its brute power, has trouble holding crowd attention with this year's rather flat display routine.

As a non-professional, it is concerning the number of incidents that have happened with civilian owned / operated vintage jets in recent years. I would rather see the Vulcan flown sedately rather than pushed to it (or the crew's) limits.

Perhaps to stem the attrition rate of vintage aircraft, their crews - and in yesterday's sad events, members of the public who weren't even involved with the airshow itself - new rules should be devised to ensure that in some way, these military aircraft are flown and maintained by crews under the direct control / management of the RAF. They could ensure that the pilots and their aircraft are not pushed to, and perhaps beyond their limits better than now, and permit displays to continue to take place without draconian knee-jerk regulations being necessary.

The RAF certainly knows about maintaining ageing aircraft but given their resourcing and MoD risk-aversion I fear their response would be to deny permission for anyone to fly anything.

Anyway academic now as after decades of pushing airshows away from their venues and out over neighbouring villages in the name of safety the CAA have now come to the conclusion that non-attendees might be at risk.

You would have thought this to be obvious when the best photos from RIAT are taken from Totterdown Farm...

evansb,

With respect to restrictions on aerobatics when carrying fuel tanks, it depends on which tanks. If just 100g tanks on the inboard pylons then no. If Swiss 150g tanks or 230 g tanks on the inboard pylons, yes, and if any tanks on the outboard pylons then yes. A simple answer but I don't think that any more detail is relevant to this thread but send me a pm if you want hard numbers (so as not to have thread drift - nothing sinister!).

Copied from the flypast forum, if you can help please do

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.

" Yes, the Hunter did have drop tanks as did the Gnat at Oulton Park 3 weeks ago"

I am not being pedantic here. For your own clarification, the Gnat has slipper tanks, not drop tanks. They cannot be jettisoned when fitted and flying.

I'm wondering if there was perhaps some hydraulic fluid leakage. There are some pics and a video just posted on Youtube by a user called High Flight that show the Hunter recovering from that final loop and flying away from from the camera, flaps partially deployed with a mist of some sort adjacent to the flap on the starboard wing. I did notice that the flaps were definitely partially deployed during the loop.

Whatever the cause, it's a tragedy for all concerned and while we all mourn the loss of life, I hope it doesn't prompt a knee-jerk reaction resulting in the ban of displaying certain types of classic aircraft.

Deployment of partial flap on the Hunter when manoeuvring (eg looping) is normal.
I didn't spot the 'mist' you mention, though.

Hey Kristal,
To the great uninformed Air spotters like most of us, a tank is a tank whether Slipper or Ullage , drop, or overwing but I am sure most people will see the Gnat as fitted with the common used name of drop tanks, sorry for my wrongly named item of extra exterior appendage...:ok:

Since this is neither History nor Nostalgia, suppose we ask that the speculation on this be confined to the 23-page thread here:
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...-shoreham.html

Well Allan, please lead off on whatever you feel is relevant in the context of the title of this thread within this forum.


Edited to add: I do feel that the techniques of operating and flying, as well as the systems of, a sixty year old aircraft are of interest to most people here.
.

Didn't happen when I did a loop in a Hunter (XF 321 out of Farnborough); mind you we were at about 10,000 ft and pulled 5.5g at which point I 'greyed out'! Is there a 'g' limit on the flaps?