FIT TO FLY??
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: In the sun
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FIT TO FLY??
There surely has to be a lot more to this than the DT covers?
Mother of plane crash cadet says RAF 'utterly failed' her son - Telegraph
I personally enjoyed many hours AEF with the ATC and would be saddenned if this lack of effective personnel management resulted in a dramatic reduction of that activity as a result of this tragedy and the "risk adverse" culture we seem now to exist within.
How was it possible for this 62 year old guy to be at the controls, where were his buddies to tell him it was clearly time to hang up the goggles long before? A severe medical condition for over 30 years??? Come on, it beggars belief and tarnishes the RAF's already downtrodden image for safety and duty of care.
Mother of plane crash cadet says RAF 'utterly failed' her son - Telegraph
I personally enjoyed many hours AEF with the ATC and would be saddenned if this lack of effective personnel management resulted in a dramatic reduction of that activity as a result of this tragedy and the "risk adverse" culture we seem now to exist within.
How was it possible for this 62 year old guy to be at the controls, where were his buddies to tell him it was clearly time to hang up the goggles long before? A severe medical condition for over 30 years??? Come on, it beggars belief and tarnishes the RAF's already downtrodden image for safety and duty of care.
Yes there is a lot more to this than published in the DT, in fact a Google search reveals the following within the first half dozen returns:
AAIB Report on the accident
Convening Authority comments on the BoI findings
Best you read them thoroughly.
YS
AAIB Report on the accident
Convening Authority comments on the BoI findings
Best you read them thoroughly.
YS
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 425 Likes
on
224 Posts
The medical standards for flying cadets have already been reviewed and changes made as a result of this accident. They have have been effectively been brought in line with public transport regulations.
The chap who passed the Flt Lt as fit to fly clearly has a lot to answer for.
On checking back, he did my first CAA Medical (for PPL) at a large airbase in Oxon around 20 years ago - now that I think about it, others that I had subsequently were much more thorough, but considerably more expensive
On checking back, he did my first CAA Medical (for PPL) at a large airbase in Oxon around 20 years ago - now that I think about it, others that I had subsequently were much more thorough, but considerably more expensive
This link appears to work better: http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...d%20G-CKHT.pdf
I note that to jettison the canopy of the Tutor requires '3 separate actions', the last of which is to reach across the body using your 'inboard' arm to move the canopy handle.
In the heat of the moment, following the severely disorientating motions likely to be experienced immediately after a mid-air collison, can pilots really be expected to perform these 3 actions without error? Surely a single 'jettison' system, which works reliably throughout the entire flight envelope, should be fitted? Didn't we learn that with the Spitfire?
Is any action in hand to improve the Tutor's canopy jettison system? Given that the Tutor is a military operated civil registered aircraft, does the MAA have any say in the matter?
I note that to jettison the canopy of the Tutor requires '3 separate actions', the last of which is to reach across the body using your 'inboard' arm to move the canopy handle.
In the heat of the moment, following the severely disorientating motions likely to be experienced immediately after a mid-air collison, can pilots really be expected to perform these 3 actions without error? Surely a single 'jettison' system, which works reliably throughout the entire flight envelope, should be fitted? Didn't we learn that with the Spitfire?
Is any action in hand to improve the Tutor's canopy jettison system? Given that the Tutor is a military operated civil registered aircraft, does the MAA have any say in the matter?
Last edited by BEagle; 22nd Feb 2012 at 08:45.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have read thoroughly!
Nothing mitigating in my opinion, pretty damning infact! Very, Very sad for all concerned, ask yourself this? Had you known in advance of the instructors condition(s) would you have allowed your own child to fly?
What I mean by that is is, we trust that all persons in the chain assuming responsibility for our children have made every effort to protect them, this clearly was not the case.
Absolutely diabolical failing within the service, I understand this mothers anger!
Nothing mitigating in my opinion, pretty damning infact! Very, Very sad for all concerned, ask yourself this? Had you known in advance of the instructors condition(s) would you have allowed your own child to fly?
What I mean by that is is, we trust that all persons in the chain assuming responsibility for our children have made every effort to protect them, this clearly was not the case.
Absolutely diabolical failing within the service, I understand this mothers anger!
I, too,have read thoroughly.
The basic question to be answered is why would any sensible system permit someone who could not adquately look out in the vertical plane perform aerobatics in an AIAA - and with a cadet on board?
The basic question to be answered is why would any sensible system permit someone who could not adquately look out in the vertical plane perform aerobatics in an AIAA - and with a cadet on board?
Gentleman Aviator
More to the point, my understanding is that civilian/VR(T) AEF pilots need (at least) a Class 2 medical.
Assuming that "Bertie" had one, how many others are out there aerobatting in unrestricted airspace with a comparable condition??
And he used to display Spitfires too .....
Assuming that "Bertie" had one, how many others are out there aerobatting in unrestricted airspace with a comparable condition??
And he used to display Spitfires too .....
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Was aerobatting authorised?
I know we were not permitted to do aerobatics in the Metor nav trainer. The pilots were very specific on that point before going into an aerobat routine.
I know we were not permitted to do aerobatics in the Metor nav trainer. The pilots were very specific on that point before going into an aerobat routine.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Two of my daughters have flown from that AEF in the past seven years. I'm not sure I'd have been at all comfortable with them flying having just read the AAIB report.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: landan
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sad tale.
I think the issue for those currently serving is for how long can we justify having retired senior officers taking up a flying post when so many front liners are being posted to ground tours.
I think the issue for those currently serving is for how long can we justify having retired senior officers taking up a flying post when so many front liners are being posted to ground tours.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have read thoroughly!
Nothing mitigating in my opinion, pretty damning infact! Very, Very sad for all concerned, ask yourself this? Had you known in advance of the instructors condition(s) would you have allowed your own child to fly?
What I mean by that is is, we trust that all persons in the chain assuming responsibility for our children have made every effort to protect them, this clearly was not the case.
Absolutely diabolical failing within the service, I understand this mothers anger!
Nothing mitigating in my opinion, pretty damning infact! Very, Very sad for all concerned, ask yourself this? Had you known in advance of the instructors condition(s) would you have allowed your own child to fly?
What I mean by that is is, we trust that all persons in the chain assuming responsibility for our children have made every effort to protect them, this clearly was not the case.
Absolutely diabolical failing within the service, I understand this mothers anger!
This was tragic accident, for which the RAF accepted procedural errors in the medical reporting chain was a contributory factor. The procedures have been tightened. The families grief and anger is understandable and justified, but pointing the finger at the RAF to the exclusion of all else does not put back the clock, nor prevent accidents of this nature happening again.
Flying is not risk free (very few ventures are). The safety standards of military Cadet flying are way higher than the standards of safety in general aviation. (Read the accident reports in GA...there are plenty of them). The medical standards in GA are absurdly low (I've worked in flying school...I've seen guys signing out aircraft as PIC, with pax, who could barely climb into the kite).
The RAF was guilty of a number of things in this accident...jobs for the boys perhaps being the worst. But the overall safety record for Cadet flying over the past 10-15 years is exemplary.
If you want zero accidents, then you have zero flying. End of story.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes
on
28 Posts
But the overall safety record for Cadet flying over the past 10-15 years is exemplary.
As has been alluded to by other posters this horrendous accident came about because of the 'jobs for the boys' attitude that prevails amongst the AEFs where retired SOs can continue to indulge their hobby pretty much to the exclusion of other lesser mortals. With so many serving pilots occupying made up ground jobs at the present time there is no valid reason why the AEFs couldn't be manned by them on a semi-permanent basis in order to keep them flying pending the arrival of new aircraft types in a few years when they will be needed.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 425 Likes
on
224 Posts
Sad tale.
I think the issue for those currently serving is for how long can we justify having retired senior officers taking up a flying post when so many front liners are being posted to ground tours.
I think the issue for those currently serving is for how long can we justify having retired senior officers taking up a flying post when so many front liners are being posted to ground tours.
Perhaps some more junior officers in front line posts should be "retired", which would free them up to volunteer for an unpaid job such as AEF flying. But I doubt they would want to do that as they would prefer to continue to make a living.
In this financial climate I can't see that MOD would remove all unpaid VR(T) pilots from AEFs, in favour of making an AEF a full-time posting, like all other squadron jobs.
As I posted earlier, the rules for medicals have already been tightened and upper age limits have very recently been introduced for flying cadets.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oxon
Age: 92
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is perhaps a generalisation to say that AEF pilots are retired senior officers. Some are but some are not - often ex service of junior rank but now airline etc and usually very much qualified and experienced and happy to give some of their free time to air minded youth. Think how many serving aviators had their interest whetted by visiting an AEF.
And interestingly 6 AEF had one VR(T) flying officer who's claim to fame was that he had been commissioned on joining the organisation, having retired as a master pilot. (Bill Ryall)
And interestingly 6 AEF had one VR(T) flying officer who's claim to fame was that he had been commissioned on joining the organisation, having retired as a master pilot. (Bill Ryall)
A sad tale indeed. I'm not sure the inquest has really got to the bottom of this particular accident, nor am I sure any of the hard lessons will be learnt, especially regarding the selection and monitoring of said instructors.
I read the AAIB report some months back and was intrigued by the comment that the Tutor sustainable 'relatively' (I use this word guardedly) minor damage during the collision was essentially flyable, also that some time elapsed (20+ seconds?) between the collision and its impact. Was any comment made at the inquest as to what may have happened to incapacitate the instructor?
The Tutor came down in a field a few hundred yards from one of my mate's house. The area is well used by Tutors out of Benson - I've seem them doing aeros in the vicinity on many occasions. Not sure its perhaps the best location to do so given it is right in the 'squeeze' between Brize and Benson MATZs. There is a high level of civilian traffic in the area during the summer months.
I read the AAIB report some months back and was intrigued by the comment that the Tutor sustainable 'relatively' (I use this word guardedly) minor damage during the collision was essentially flyable, also that some time elapsed (20+ seconds?) between the collision and its impact. Was any comment made at the inquest as to what may have happened to incapacitate the instructor?
Was aerobatting authorised?
26er
I think that you are getting very close to an important factor here and that is those pilots whose currency is due only to their AEF flying. I have always had a feeling of unease about those retirees who gravitate towards the AEFs having flown little or not at all for a number of years previously. I know from my own experience that senior officers anxious to get some flying can pose quite tricky supervision issues.
YS
It is perhaps a generalisation to say that AEF pilots are retired senior officers. Some are but some are not - often ex service of junior rank but now airline etc and usually very much qualified and experienced and happy to give some of their free time to air minded youth.
YS
Pilot with a medical condition that severely reduces ability to carry out a thorough look out, whether prior to aeros or not. A crowded AIAA full of powered and unpowered aircraft reducing the wisdom of authorised aeros anyway. An aircraft abandonment procedure that as BEagle reminds us harks back to the 1940's. The words holes and slices of cheese come to mind...
As to;
They are more likely to say:
Personally I'd put more faith in the CAA to tighten up aircrew medical examinations, and issuing mandatory modifications to make abandoning easier and safer. As to carrying out aeros in crowded AIAA airspace by AEF aircraft, that would be one for the MAA perhaps. Right, I'm holding my breath now.....
As to;
Given that the Tutor is a military operated civil registered aircraft, does the MAA have any say in the matter?
Flying is not risk free (very few ventures are)......If you want zero accidents, then you have zero flying. End of story.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 425 Likes
on
224 Posts
Not sure its perhaps the best location to do so given it is right in the 'squeeze' between Brize and Benson MATZs. There is a high level of civilian traffic in the area during the summer months.
Some will undoubtedly disagree with this, but perhaps inside the MATZ might actually be a less congested place for AEF aeros, rather than in a choke point in Class G airspace.
(Telephone directory already down the back of trousers, in preparation for a "lesson" by someone who considers himself "more in the know" on the defintion, legal standing and rules appertaining to a MATZ).