Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Hawker Hunter Crash at Shoreham Airshow

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Hawker Hunter Crash at Shoreham Airshow

Old 14th Sep 2015, 18:16
  #781 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,084


Neither you nor anyone else here has any idea what is in Andy's display authorisation.
Thats not true is it? The AAIB special bulletin gives the following:-

He held a valid Display Authorisation (DA), issued by the UK CAA, to display the Hawker Hunter to a minimum height of 100 ft during flypasts and 500 ft during Standard3 category aerobatic manoeuvres.
You have mentioned motives before, perhaps someone is just trying to understand why, on a hot day with full tanks on display No.1 you might start low? Why try and blur that?

All this talk of "you can start from 100 feet and pull up into your figure" is just poor because how is one assessing that? I don't see how that methodology allows for very accurate / consistent entry, let alone how the FDD or DAE does the same when trying to fulfill the requirements of their roles. As indeed it proves given what has followed.

Its fair enough to defend a friend or whatever but to actively ignore some fairly obvious elements doesn't make you professional at all.

Last edited by Pittsextra; 14th Sep 2015 at 18:34.
Pittsextra is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2015, 18:28
  #782 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 1,954
I think we are all familiar with the attitudes in the US to aircrews being held to account for their actions Ken. I won't list the examples.
You've completely misunderstood. I have no problems holding aircrew accountable for their actions or inactions. Let me repeat what I clearly stated the first time: I find public speculation about legal prosecution of the pilot based on the flimsiest of data and essentially zero understanding of display flying patently offensive.
KenV is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2015, 18:34
  #783 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 1,954
The unfortunate pilot and his family would be well advised to contact a firm of solicitors who are experts in this particular field of the law and in the meantime to say absolutely nothing whatsoever to anyone regardless of whom they are.
To me, such "advice" is equally offensive as the speculation. Maybe worse. It certainly paints the pilot as guilty of something and as having something to hide. I don't know how it works in the UK, but in the US all testimony provided in an accident investigation canNOT be used in a court of law precisely to ensure that all the facts are known so such an accident can be prevented. The lawyers have to use other sources of evidence.
KenV is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2015, 18:43
  #784 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK and where I'm sent!
Posts: 519
Pitts,

It's no surprise that you would chime in on that. If you believe that's the full extent of AH's DA then you know less about the subject than I previously believed.

The remainder of your post is purely argumentative and has little or nothing to do with CM's well made point concerning the poor taste of TS's inappropriate conjecture about prosecution. To answer one of your relevant questions, the DAE assesses all those aspects of the display and it is his call as to whether or not the entry heights are safe. He does not simply assess the display and the pilot, he has a significant teaching and mentoring role as well - both before and after DA is issued in many cases. So, all this talk of "you can start from 100 feet and pull up into your figure" is not POOR because it is very carefully assessed in a long and thorough process. I gather, regardless of your name here, you've never been involved in it. You may research it a little more carefully before rubbishing it here.
Mach Two is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2015, 18:45
  #785 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Baston
Posts: 1,585
QUOTE

in the US all testimony provided in an accident investigation canNOT be used in a court of law precisely to ensure that all the facts are known so such an accident can be prevented

If I understand this it seems incredible, as it puts an investigation above the law.

Perhaps I misunderstand?
langleybaston is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2015, 18:50
  #786 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,084
Mach - once again there seems to be words being added which I didn't express.

To be clear I highlighted that the point CM made that people have "any idea what is in" AH's DA. Well they do have an idea because the AAIB have given us at least "some" idea.

Sorry Mach but that is not being simply argumentative it is correcting the facts of the matter. As for assessing 100ft to 500ft you tell me how you do that from the ground and how that becomes the smart way to do things?

You are running me over for it and suggesting I have no idea (why you gather or assume to know me only you know) but are you really suggesting that this won't be an element of focus later? Its a serious point sincerely asked.
Pittsextra is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2015, 19:24
  #787 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 165
Correct it cannot - the same applies in the UK, for example hearsay will be examined in an investigation to get a fuller picture, but it is inadmissible in a court of law.

The reasonableness is the test - to be found guilty of any offence you have to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Hearsay does not pass this test.
dagenham is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2015, 19:44
  #788 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: europe
Age: 62
Posts: 641
Personally I think this a rather unpleasant matter to be discussing on a public forum when almost every contentious point can only be treated as speculative at this point in time, and because we are talking about a professional colleague who right now has a heap of drama to deal with.

Notwithstanding this, of course I understand the trauma, sadness and tragic loss, but obviously cannot comprehend the magnitude, that is being endured by the families of the innocent bystanders who so unfortunately lost their lives. These people are quite rightly seeking answers, but I believe the last thing they want to be reading now is uninformed and misinterpreted conjecture printed in red tops that is sourced, in part, from these pages, and the result of which might lead them to believe something that is later established not to be the case.
deefer dog is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2015, 20:23
  #789 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Suffolk
Age: 69
Posts: 22
Deefer Dog, wise words from one so young.

Would anyone care to explain the purpose of this discussion? I am a retired RAF Fastjet pilot who has flown the Hunter and performed LL aeros. I have now seen all the videos posted and come to the conclusion that the accident could have been caused by several factors or events, but from these videos and the AAIB initial report I am unable to say with any certainty at all what the cause of the accident was.

The AAIB will have access to all that I have seen and much more and they will publish the definitive cause of this tragedy and any contributory factors in due course. Until then we should be hoping / praying, whatever you do, for the recovery of AH and the poor souls that died and their families, and leave all the rest of the crap I have been reading to the ambulance chasers.

Nuff said
Odanrot is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2015, 20:55
  #790 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Oxford
Age: 81
Posts: 287
Deefer,

Spot on!!

Bill.
Bill Macgillivray is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2015, 23:50
  #791 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 175
...but to actively ignore some fairly obvious elements doesn't make you professional at all.
Sorry, but you come across as rude and obnoxious with that statement. Just who are you to judge somebody's level of professionalism for doing the right thing by refusing to speculate on a fatal crash that involved a fellow fast-jet pilot?

Keeping quiet and allowing the experts to do their job in peace is far more professional (and respectful) than running ones mouth when they don't have access to the facts.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if AH's family were lurking on this thread, and I can't imagine how bad they feel when reading speculation from people who really should know better.
JointShiteFighter is offline  
Old 15th Sep 2015, 05:34
  #792 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 165
JSF

You are quite right, but also this has impact for many more. I was over for a brief visit to the south coast and travelling down the A27 to Brighton on Friday before the show and travelled back the very next day. I was talked out of going to watch the show by my partner and spent the lunch in a pub and watched the emergency response go by.

Equally, there is enough potential fault to go around - the road was clearly signposted - no parking or watching the airshow from the A27 for the reasons clearly demonstrated by this tragic turn of events. So the risks to bystanders ( clearly not those driving on the A27) was clearly pointed out, what did the police do to manage this etc etc. you could go on - the simple fact, as every ticket states is that Air displays like motor racing are dangerous and clearly you take risks by attending.

The impact on everyone local has been tremendous, the impact of this is far beyond PPRuNe,everyone has the right to answers and there is a process for that to happen. What is most important is to understand what actually happened, in a fair, accurate and transparent way, learn the lessons and take the appropriate actions. Not only out of respect to Andy but also out of respect of everyone who has been impacted by this event.
dagenham is offline  
Old 15th Sep 2015, 06:19
  #793 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Sunny Side
Posts: 0
Sorry, but you come across as rude and obnoxious with that statement.
Sorry JSF, but you may also be guilty in that respect. PE's response to CM seemed reasonable. You may not like what he is asking, but that does not make him rude and obnoxious. I would suggest that it also does not make him unprofessional.
I have mentioned it before, but there is still a real feeling of people closing ranks here and refusing to contemplate or ask the difficult questions. I don't hold by the "wait for the investigation" view. Constructive discussion can be of enormous benefit in the meantime.

S-D
salad-dodger is offline  
Old 15th Sep 2015, 08:26
  #794 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 58
Posts: 211
"Constructive discussion can be of enormous benefit in the meantime."

That would indeed be true, if we were in possession of all the facts, and it is patently obvious to most of us that we clearly are not.

Why can't all you armchair experts understand that the reason all the proper experts aren't commenting is that they are fully aware that all they really know is that they don't know enough to comment?

A prerequisite for a constructive discussion is to have all the relevant data. Without that, its all bulldust and speculation - IMHO of course.
DaveUnwin is offline  
Old 15th Sep 2015, 08:47
  #795 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: front seat, facing forwards
Posts: 985
Originally Posted by salad-dodger
Constructive discussion can be of enormous benefit in the meantime.
To whom exactly?
just another jocky is offline  
Old 15th Sep 2015, 09:42
  #796 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Sunny Side
Posts: 0
That would indeed be true, if we were in possession of all the facts, and it is patently obvious to most of us that we clearly are not.
You are right, we don't know all of the facts. We may never know all of the facts. This type of crash will always happen in aviation, operators make mistakes, technical failures occur etc. But in this case, so much more went wrong to cause 11 deaths. Many other air shows and public events will take place before the AAIB reports. There are lessons already that can be taken away from this. Even if event organisers are already reconsidering the risks to surrounding areas, that is a start.

To whom exactly?
What a daft question.

S-D
salad-dodger is offline  
Old 15th Sep 2015, 09:48
  #797 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,084
There is a lot of emotion on here, in some regards that is understandable but when people get bent out of shape over the view that what was flown was a 1/4 clover or arguing about items that have been published in an AAIB bulletin it seems a little OTT. Just look in the last few posts - now we are getting all entrenched over AH's DA and yet some elements of that were in the AAIB bulletin. Maybe ultimately no rules were broken, maybe what was flown fits and ticks all the boxes - except its fair to ask why start low with full tanks, on a hot day? Regardless of what is in your DA.

I think a lot forget this is the internet and if you want an argument you will likely find one although in the main, insensitive as it may seem to some, many questions are entire fair.

Wait for the AAIB report, possession of all the facts, access to the facts, being professional and loyal to a fellow fast jet pilot and so it goes.

Well some points.

First of all the AAIB have published some facts. Those and the films that have been widely published allow people to take a view. Is it unreasonable on an internet forum to ask honest questions about what one can see or read? Do people honestly expect (given the scale of those impacted in this) for all this to go away until when? 2017? for an AAIB report? Seriously?

Possession of all the facts, well not withstanding that anyone is ever going to call when you have ALL of the facts. It seems to me that some wish to ignore what is already known and wait for a magic bullet that makes everything else go away. No doubt there could be a huge technical issue lurking behind all of this (in fact oddly when I suggested you might not be able to see the altimeter whilst rolling left someone said "you can't see it straight and level" - as if it was some badge of honor! OK so you can't see the altimeter in a Hunter... seems fairly fundemental to me) , however even then there are still valid points to be discussed from what we do know.

Starting height methodology, time in the display aircraft and what configuration its in, hot weather affects, the figures being flown and the defined start of such figure and the previous routine verse the accident one. None of those questions are a slur on the pilot. None. As has been pointed out their is a very well established structure to this and so AH is not standing alone.

To ignore these points is just head in the sand and I'm not sure how that helps the overall situation. In fact lets be frank the answers to any of those basic points could be obtained fairly easily with some straight talking - which is going to come given the magnitude of the event. My view is that as a group you become more credible later if you engage.
Pittsextra is offline  
Old 15th Sep 2015, 10:41
  #798 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,400
Pitts

That's all very well, but as we all know, this forum is monitored by the media, and a frenzy can be triggered by the asking of questions in a pejorative manner such as your :

"why start low with full tanks, on a hot day?"

This might seem, to the non aviator, to be an important question.

It suggests some kind of rashness on the part of the pilot just by the fact that the question is asked.



I can do it too.

"Why start with a vertical roll to the left on an east / west runway!?"

"Why was he wearing green rather than white gloves!?"


It could sound to the uninitiated to be relevant, but patently isn't.

Not all questions are equally valid, and the discussion is not helped by irrelevancies.

It isn't "closing ranks".
It is an effort to maintain clarity.
Tourist is offline  
Old 15th Sep 2015, 10:45
  #799 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: front seat, facing forwards
Posts: 985
Originally Posted by S-D
What a daft question.

S-D
At least I wasn't rude.

Genuine question though.

First time I've posted on this thread and still don't feel the need to give my opinion on events and was genuinely wondering who everyone thought benefitted from this discussion.
just another jocky is offline  
Old 15th Sep 2015, 10:53
  #800 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,084
Tourist - I know you were just trying to make the point but as you know temp on the day, weight and height are going to be of much greater focus than the colour of ones gloves.

Are you serious about being an irrelevant point, because its absolutely relevant. Perhaps one might also like to reflect that not everything that gets authority is spot on. For example the G-HURR crash.
Pittsextra is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.