Hawker Hunter Crash at Shoreham Airshow
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne
Age: 54
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Are you serious? It's a criminal offence, the punishment includes potential imprisonment and it leaves you with a criminal record. Certainly in the UK anyway.
Sorry Para. Offence yes. Crime no. You might get a criminal record but it won't show up on any crime stats and isn't recorded as a crime. Anyway, that takes us away from the point I was making. There are many prosecuting agencies in the U.K. It's not always about criminal behaviour.
(15 year constable)
Sorry Para. Offence yes. Crime no. You might get a criminal record but it won't show up on any crime stats and isn't recorded as a crime. Anyway, that takes us away from the point I was making. There are many prosecuting agencies in the U.K. It's not always about criminal behaviour.
(15 year constable)
Last edited by Tashengurt; 23rd Aug 2015 at 20:54. Reason: clarity
I think one of the easiest way to negate some risk at airshows, is to put a complete ban on spectators outside the showground/airfield (within a certain distance of the airfield/show boundaries).
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Dorset
Age: 25
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was at Bournemouth today, watching the Reds from the west side of Bournemouth pier (where there is no exclusion zone on the water, unlike the other side of the pier) and during one of the synchro pair displays the Hawk travelling from east to west passed his team mate and did a fairly wide roll out, coming low over the pier and losing a fair bit of altitude, only recovering at an altitude similar to the height of some of the yacht masts (10s of feet high and very close) and for a brief moment I feared the worst. Just shows how easily these accidents can happen to the best of the best.
Tom
Tom
Basil
I'm not seeking to ban people from their own gardens, but if you've been to an airshow recently you will no doubt have seen people watching from just outside the show gates, or in adjacent fields.
Indeed some of the shocking video footage from this incident has been provided by people doing just that (from very close to or on the A27 in some instances).
You are in far more danger watching shows from such vantage points and proverbial 'naughty Fields' under the display line on many occasions, than you are inside the official showground, where distance rules separate you from the display lines for your own safety?
Indeed some of the shocking video footage from this incident has been provided by people doing just that (from very close to or on the A27 in some instances).
You are in far more danger watching shows from such vantage points and proverbial 'naughty Fields' under the display line on many occasions, than you are inside the official showground, where distance rules separate you from the display lines for your own safety?
As a non-pilot, unless you count 60 odd hours on Cessnas, and I dont, I feel a little diffident about asking this question on this thread.
However, I find it difficult to follow some of the arguments on this accident, as I did on the recent Gnat accident, because of my lack of knowledge on certain terminology which is obvious familar to experienced pilots, particularly with FJ experience. I would very much like to know what "pulling to (or through) the buffet" means, as well as "pulling max alpha". If anyone would care to take the time to explain these terms in relatively simple language I'd be grateful. This could be done by PM if you prefer not to clog up the thread.
Thanks a lot.
TTN
However, I find it difficult to follow some of the arguments on this accident, as I did on the recent Gnat accident, because of my lack of knowledge on certain terminology which is obvious familar to experienced pilots, particularly with FJ experience. I would very much like to know what "pulling to (or through) the buffet" means, as well as "pulling max alpha". If anyone would care to take the time to explain these terms in relatively simple language I'd be grateful. This could be done by PM if you prefer not to clog up the thread.
Thanks a lot.
TTN
Hawk98 posted:
Was there yesterday and one of the singletons was slightly over-zealous when lining up for an opposition maneouvre, having to turn back away from the beach and around the pier (not sure how far up/down the beach the A-axis officially extends). Also, the Reds gypo breached the A-axis during their display on the Saturday at RIAT, much to the consternation of experienced spectators. As you said...
Just shows how easily these accidents can happen to the best of the best.
I've resisted posting on this thread for as long as I can. Once again there has been a disaster, a crash, people have died. And once again dozens of experts who have been members here for many years and that have found the need to contribute, maybe, a handful of posts over those years, suddenly pitch up with a whole wealth of knowledge and opinion. You are, of course, very welcome.
I have just spent the last hour catching up on this afternoon's posts here and, as usual in these circumstances, too many people have crawled out of the woodwork to draw conclusions (and, worse, express them in public) and translate those opinions into table-thumping demands to ban displays, question the quals, currency and capability of display pilots, cite legal precedent, conduct their own risk assessment of the site and its suitability. Well done, no argument with your reason.
But before you all sound off, why not wait a few days to consider the facts of this particular case, show some respect for those involved (and that does mean just adding a statement of respect to those affected) and wait a short while for, at very least, a preliminary statement from the AAIB and the other services involved.
At the moment, this is about a disastrous air accident. If you really want to start discussing the future of air shows, displays and the manoeuvres authorised, the safety regulations, suitability of sites, the litigation aspects and the quals and supervision of the pilots, why don't you pipe up with your views and start threads about these issues? Why do you need to wait until such a tragic moment to jump on your high horses and drag the thread away from this, one accident to your (in some cases, clearly, long-held) personal soap-boxes about air displays - or have you simply suddenly come to these conclusion?
Last point. Whoever's comment it was about display pilots regularly missing or ignoring gates, if you know that for a fact, you should have acted on it years ago. If you don't know it for a fact, don't state it in public as if it is.
Out.
I have just spent the last hour catching up on this afternoon's posts here and, as usual in these circumstances, too many people have crawled out of the woodwork to draw conclusions (and, worse, express them in public) and translate those opinions into table-thumping demands to ban displays, question the quals, currency and capability of display pilots, cite legal precedent, conduct their own risk assessment of the site and its suitability. Well done, no argument with your reason.
But before you all sound off, why not wait a few days to consider the facts of this particular case, show some respect for those involved (and that does mean just adding a statement of respect to those affected) and wait a short while for, at very least, a preliminary statement from the AAIB and the other services involved.
At the moment, this is about a disastrous air accident. If you really want to start discussing the future of air shows, displays and the manoeuvres authorised, the safety regulations, suitability of sites, the litigation aspects and the quals and supervision of the pilots, why don't you pipe up with your views and start threads about these issues? Why do you need to wait until such a tragic moment to jump on your high horses and drag the thread away from this, one accident to your (in some cases, clearly, long-held) personal soap-boxes about air displays - or have you simply suddenly come to these conclusion?
Last point. Whoever's comment it was about display pilots regularly missing or ignoring gates, if you know that for a fact, you should have acted on it years ago. If you don't know it for a fact, don't state it in public as if it is.
Out.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK and where I'm sent!
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Courtney mil, well said. I am one of those fairly long-standing members and I don't post that often, but I agree with your point about using this thread to bang the drum about related issues. It is hard to define acceptable thread drift but I do agree that a number of lurkers here are turning this into an anti-air show rant.
If you have strong feelings about displays, start a thread about your issue. This one is not the right place for it.
If you have strong feelings about displays, start a thread about your issue. This one is not the right place for it.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I sincerely hope the death toll for this totally tragic situation doesn't increase beyond what's been reported.
That includes poor Andy too, who didn't get out of bed on the day in question intending for it to turn out the way it so unfortunately did. That simple yet irrevocable fact passes too many idiots by as they rush to board the outrage bus. Any number of events could have led up to this crash and it's for the AAIB to determine in time.
Thoughts and condolences
PS - CM you absolutely nailed it chap, whilst I was also posting.
That includes poor Andy too, who didn't get out of bed on the day in question intending for it to turn out the way it so unfortunately did. That simple yet irrevocable fact passes too many idiots by as they rush to board the outrage bus. Any number of events could have led up to this crash and it's for the AAIB to determine in time.
Thoughts and condolences
PS - CM you absolutely nailed it chap, whilst I was also posting.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,035
Received 2,903 Likes
on
1,244 Posts
And so did you.. Well said.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: FL, USA
Posts: 357
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What MSOCS said, in spades. Particularly ref Andy, whom I remember hosting at BoBD outside my Sqn many years ago at the visiting aircrew tent.
Similar 'outrage' and knee jerk followed the Reno crash here in USA.
For the experienced display gurus here (not me): question. That video released from the road seemed to show a very 'squashed' quarter-clover, much less than 90. The camera seemed to be much more on the axis of the maneuver than the telephoto distance vid. Opinions? The reason I ask is that I recall the Abingdon accident was partly caused by maneuvering at the top of the vertical to adjust alignment, bleeding energy below sufficient for the correct pitch rate? Just a thought, and trying to get back to discussion of the circumstances, rather than future legislating.
Condolences to all.
Similar 'outrage' and knee jerk followed the Reno crash here in USA.
For the experienced display gurus here (not me): question. That video released from the road seemed to show a very 'squashed' quarter-clover, much less than 90. The camera seemed to be much more on the axis of the maneuver than the telephoto distance vid. Opinions? The reason I ask is that I recall the Abingdon accident was partly caused by maneuvering at the top of the vertical to adjust alignment, bleeding energy below sufficient for the correct pitch rate? Just a thought, and trying to get back to discussion of the circumstances, rather than future legislating.
Condolences to all.
This morning's papers are, inevitably, looking for reasons for the crash - and reasons to curtail, or even ban, airshows.
Let us all remember that this forum is seen as a useful source of information by journalists, and post accordingly - being mindful of falling foul of legal process (and complicated online defamation laws).
Several comments in yesterday's papers' later online editions could only, as far as I can make out, have come from PPRuNe.
Let us all remember that this forum is seen as a useful source of information by journalists, and post accordingly - being mindful of falling foul of legal process (and complicated online defamation laws).
Several comments in yesterday's papers' later online editions could only, as far as I can make out, have come from PPRuNe.
XV490
I have followed this thread from the very start and I haven't seen anything that could be interpreted as defamatory. No one has been named outright for causing the accident and I believe that the discussion about the venue's suitability and CAA regulations has been pretty fair. What's your beef old chum?
Oh, and this tragic accident has been discussed on just about every aviation related forum in the world - which is quite understandable. I would far sooner see some open opinion in these types of fora than some of the so called experts that are dragged in for a TV/Radio news 'voxpop'!
It is a free country where opinion and open discussion is allowed - something that the aircraft and the pilot involved served in HMforces to protect over many years. I know that he has contributed to other aviation fora in the past to offer his opinion on matters (maybe not so significant as this). That's how the human race learns...through discussion. It's one of our unique capabilities on the planet!
LJ
I have followed this thread from the very start and I haven't seen anything that could be interpreted as defamatory. No one has been named outright for causing the accident and I believe that the discussion about the venue's suitability and CAA regulations has been pretty fair. What's your beef old chum?
Oh, and this tragic accident has been discussed on just about every aviation related forum in the world - which is quite understandable. I would far sooner see some open opinion in these types of fora than some of the so called experts that are dragged in for a TV/Radio news 'voxpop'!
It is a free country where opinion and open discussion is allowed - something that the aircraft and the pilot involved served in HMforces to protect over many years. I know that he has contributed to other aviation fora in the past to offer his opinion on matters (maybe not so significant as this). That's how the human race learns...through discussion. It's one of our unique capabilities on the planet!
LJ
what a terrible incident.
just a simple observation is that alot of very experienced professional pilots have misjudged loops in the past with similar outcomes or close shaves.
perhaps, if this is shown to be a misjudgement, one option is to reconsider the conditions for moves like this that are clearly at high risk of misjudgement by even the best.
of course at this stage it is too early to rule out other causes.
just a simple observation is that alot of very experienced professional pilots have misjudged loops in the past with similar outcomes or close shaves.
perhaps, if this is shown to be a misjudgement, one option is to reconsider the conditions for moves like this that are clearly at high risk of misjudgement by even the best.
of course at this stage it is too early to rule out other causes.
The main fact Courtney, is that people uninvolved with the airshow have been killed by a sport/hobby/passion we and others like us enjoy. In my humble opinion, that is not right.
Leon,
I am only suggesting caution because the words 'crime' and 'criminal' have appeared on this thread - which could be seen as accusatory by implication, even without naming names.
Online libel laws are complicated and, of course, differ from country to country. This site's mods are doubtless more au fait with them than I am, but I still reckon it's worth reminding folks to be careful.
That said, I believe that so soon after this tragic event - and with the pilot gravely ill in hospital - using the words above is, at best, insensitive and, at worst, extremely offensive.
A newspaper editor would think twice about publishing a letter containing such views - for fear of falling foul of clearly defined British libel laws. Later on, depending on how legal processes pan out in investigating this tragedy, it may be that such discussion would constitute contempt of court.
I don't have a beef, 'chum' - that's just the way it is.
I am only suggesting caution because the words 'crime' and 'criminal' have appeared on this thread - which could be seen as accusatory by implication, even without naming names.
Online libel laws are complicated and, of course, differ from country to country. This site's mods are doubtless more au fait with them than I am, but I still reckon it's worth reminding folks to be careful.
That said, I believe that so soon after this tragic event - and with the pilot gravely ill in hospital - using the words above is, at best, insensitive and, at worst, extremely offensive.
A newspaper editor would think twice about publishing a letter containing such views - for fear of falling foul of clearly defined British libel laws. Later on, depending on how legal processes pan out in investigating this tragedy, it may be that such discussion would constitute contempt of court.
I don't have a beef, 'chum' - that's just the way it is.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: South of the ex-North Devon flying club. North of Isca.
Age: 48
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This topic is staying fairly well reasoned and reasonable. There is another thread on the same topic in the general rumour section, which, well, errr, isn't. It's also been heavily moderated and doesn't show or read particularly well as tempers have flared and posts that have started off reasonably have turned into personal rants and name calling.
Last edited by Fluffy Bunny; 24th Aug 2015 at 07:56.