Hawker Hunter Crash at Shoreham Airshow
I should bloody well hope so. No amount of good wishes will dilute his angst.
In a tiny tiny way, my father's experience whilst driving gives me some insight. Driving at his usual sober pace in a built-up area, a child's soap-box cart/ bogey [call it what you will] shot out of a side road, having had benefit of a long steep hill. Dad's car hit the cart. The boy was injured.
My dad visited and visited in hospital. The lad made a complete recovery.
I don't think dad did, his driving became even more careful, even apprehensive.
These experiences never go away.
In a tiny tiny way, my father's experience whilst driving gives me some insight. Driving at his usual sober pace in a built-up area, a child's soap-box cart/ bogey [call it what you will] shot out of a side road, having had benefit of a long steep hill. Dad's car hit the cart. The boy was injured.
My dad visited and visited in hospital. The lad made a complete recovery.
I don't think dad did, his driving became even more careful, even apprehensive.
These experiences never go away.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The comments on the link showing the pilot out and about are heart warming
I'm not sure that's correct. For all we know he might have been photographed
coming out of the doctor's surgery, rather than socialising, or trying to get back to normality.
This is a good example of why we should not be deciding what caused anything, when we don't have many facts. The camera may or may not lie, but it can certainly mislead.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Publishing a current photograph of Andy Hill is quite another matter. Whatever the cause of the crash, it was an accident of which he was himself a victim.
Quote from me:
"Whatever the cause of the crash, it was an accident of which he was himself a victim."
Quote from Cows getting bigger:
"I don't think anyone is in an authoritative position to either confirm or deny that assertion."
Which assertion are you questioning, and why?
"Whatever the cause of the crash, it was an accident of which he was himself a victim."
Quote from Cows getting bigger:
"I don't think anyone is in an authoritative position to either confirm or deny that assertion."
Which assertion are you questioning, and why?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,993
Received 2,888 Likes
on
1,233 Posts
Airpolice, I was just being generic as one does not know why and where, but he was out of his home and moving about, hence the expression, one did not mean to infer anything negative, I agree with what people say though, he appears to be carrying the world on his shoulders.... Poor guy 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The real world
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a completely understandable news story, it was a very big, public news event just a few weeks ago and the fact that the pilot involved is "up and about" is very newsworthy, and of course very pleasing.
You can call it "trial by media" or you could say it is a pertinent question.
One would hope that he has at least been questioned at great length by the AAIB by now if not the police, all too often in these scenario's the investigators only have eye witness and mobile phone evidence as sadly in many cases the crew perish. In an aircraft with no flight data recorder I would imagine the pilot's testimony would have been a vital priority.
If he hasn't been interviewed then somebody should be asking why?
You can call it "trial by media" or you could say it is a pertinent question.
One would hope that he has at least been questioned at great length by the AAIB by now if not the police, all too often in these scenario's the investigators only have eye witness and mobile phone evidence as sadly in many cases the crew perish. In an aircraft with no flight data recorder I would imagine the pilot's testimony would have been a vital priority.
If he hasn't been interviewed then somebody should be asking why?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,993
Received 2,888 Likes
on
1,233 Posts
I believe they also have footage from the cockpit video cameras. one would be surprised if in an incident like this he actually remembers a lot about it.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: warlingham
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interviews
Just a thought. I wonder if the Privilege against Self-Incrimination is available to relevant persons when being interviewed by the AAIB. I can think of good public policy reasons why AAIB should be allowed access to all evidence and to obtain it using compulsion if required. Am not suggesting it has or has not been invoked in the current case.
PPRuNe Person
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The media can't help themselves in publishing sneak photos such as these, no good can come of it, except for their circulation figures.
Often in cases of car or aircraft accident causing brain injury there will be retrograde amnesia. The subject cannot recall events just prior to the accident. There would be no point in interviewing someone who is suffering this type of amnesia. My father fell off a roof at work, landed on his head and was in a coma for a week. All he remembers about the day was having breakfast, then leaving for work.
Often in cases of car or aircraft accident causing brain injury there will be retrograde amnesia. The subject cannot recall events just prior to the accident. There would be no point in interviewing someone who is suffering this type of amnesia. My father fell off a roof at work, landed on his head and was in a coma for a week. All he remembers about the day was having breakfast, then leaving for work.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: upstairs
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AAIB interviews
MAO Warlingham: interviews by the AAIB aren't taken under oath so the issue of a Privilege against Self-Incrimination is moot. Evidence to be used in court by the Police or HSE is taken under oath and the same questions may be asked then. I believe the answers aren't always the same though...
EAP
EAP
Unfortunately, the Rogers Hoyle appeal finding has changed things badly. Anyone giving evidence or making judgements as experts will always now be aware that their words will probably end up echoing in the places that the AAIB has always tried to to stay away from. There is a big difference between giving evidence to try to prevent an accident happening again without blame and finding your words in a litigation case. I suspect a single claim has changed the landscape at the expense of aviation and marine safety.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAO Warlingham: interviews by the AAIB aren't taken under oath so the issue of a Privilege against Self-Incrimination is moot.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EAP
Neither interviews with the AAIB nor the police are taken "under oath" as you put it. Evidence to be used in court is not taken under oath in either police or HSE investigations.
Witness statements taken during a police or HSE investigation contain a declaration as to the truth and interviews are conducted under caution.
Live evidence in court is given under oath.
Since Rogers v Hoyle, any person being interviewed by the AAIB where there is a suspicion of negligence on their part would be well advised to seek expert legal advice before doing so and should without doubt be legally represented in any police or CAA investigation by a solicitor who is a specialist in this field.
The position with AAIB reports is that at present they are admissible in civil proceedings but not in criminal proceedings. An interview with a pilot is annex 13 material and not in itself to be disclosed without a court order. Such a statement has not as yet been ruled admissible. The difficulty that arises is that summaries or extracts of the interview often appear in AAIB reports and the contents of the interview may have some bearing on the opinions formed and the conclusions reached.
Neither interviews with the AAIB nor the police are taken "under oath" as you put it. Evidence to be used in court is not taken under oath in either police or HSE investigations.
Witness statements taken during a police or HSE investigation contain a declaration as to the truth and interviews are conducted under caution.
Live evidence in court is given under oath.
Since Rogers v Hoyle, any person being interviewed by the AAIB where there is a suspicion of negligence on their part would be well advised to seek expert legal advice before doing so and should without doubt be legally represented in any police or CAA investigation by a solicitor who is a specialist in this field.
The position with AAIB reports is that at present they are admissible in civil proceedings but not in criminal proceedings. An interview with a pilot is annex 13 material and not in itself to be disclosed without a court order. Such a statement has not as yet been ruled admissible. The difficulty that arises is that summaries or extracts of the interview often appear in AAIB reports and the contents of the interview may have some bearing on the opinions formed and the conclusions reached.
any person being interviewed by the AAIB where there is a suspicion of negligence on their part would be well advised to seek expert legal advice before doing so and should without doubt be legally represented in any police or CAA investigation by a solicitor who is a specialist in this field.
any person being interviewed by the AAIB where there is a suspicion of negligence on their part would be well advised to seek expert legal advice before doing so and should without doubt be legally represented in any police or CAA investigation by a solicitor who is a specialist in this field.