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 21st Dec 2015, 17:50
  #941 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: France
Posts: 170
Received 18 Likes on 2 Posts
CAA response to AAIB Shoreham report above:

http://www.caa.co.uk/News/CAA-statement-on-AAIB-special-bulletin/

They seem quite dismissive about the maintainence (AMOC) compliance!
Ddraig Goch is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 17:50
  #942 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
May not have caused the accident, but it wont read well in court for the operator.
Hangarshuffle is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 17:52
  #943 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Away from home Rat
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The can of worms seems to be the maintenance documentation, the inspection work that wasn't carried out that should have been or a variation applied for, life expired parts being fitted, no variation applied for and items not replaced when replacements did arrive. The airframe was not airworthy to the standards and procedures deemed necessary to the MPD the airframe was issued the permit to fly against in the eyes of the AAIB. The CAA disagree as stated in their reply. Someone is wrong somewhere. I suspect more worms will be found in other facets of this accident.
Alber Ratman is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 18:06
  #944 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: cardiff
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In its simplest terms out of date parts and not replacing them when available invalidates the Permit to Fly , with invalidated Permit aeroplane should not have been flying that day, so yes it does affect the accident, if only that it may have been another aeroplane on the day.



Ttfn
ivor toolbox is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 18:11
  #945 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In an ever changing place
Posts: 1,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ivor toolbox
In its simplest terms out of date parts and not replacing them when available invalidates the Permit to Fly , with invalidated Permit aeroplane should not have been flying that day, so yes it does affect the accident, if only that it may have been another aeroplane on the day.
I can see the insurance companies washing their hands already.
Above The Clouds is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 18:27
  #946 (permalink)  
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,874
Received 60 Likes on 18 Posts
But as he didn't appear to have used it, is it relevant pertaining to the accident.
As I mentioned on the other thread, this is not about the seat use per se but the organization and culture surrounding the accident. Following an accident, the regulatory and supporting documentary evidence are key pieces of the puzzle in establishing how the aircraft was flown and operated. What the CAA are saying here is that enthusiasm and good intentions are no substitute for regulation and control. But as others have noted, what the CAA have actually revealed is that for these omissions and oversights to have been quite as systematic across vintage FJ operations as they appear to be, nobody at the CAA was paying attention until 2 tragic accidents occurred in a short space of time.
Two's in is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 18:34
  #947 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: cardiff
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Indeed, what's more it (the report) taken to extreme may mean an end to Vintage swept wing jets flying if operators or maintenance organisations can no longer source seat spares, oh initially it might be UK registered only, but once the EASA lot take notice who knows.

Ttfn
ivor toolbox is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 19:02
  #948 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
The CAA have questions to answer regarding (what appears to be) very poor oversight of the maintenance organisation. My guess, the AAIB will have some findings against the CAA.
woptb is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 19:10
  #949 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,769
Received 2,763 Likes on 1,173 Posts
Exactly, and when you tell people that you can ignore sections of maintenance manuals it all gets woolly, add to that ambiguity in the system over lifed item requirements and it gets even murkier
NutLoose is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 20:16
  #950 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Classified
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
.............

Last edited by Radix; 18th Mar 2016 at 02:04.
Radix is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 20:25
  #951 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 79
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
So, were the explosive part dates 'best before' or 'do not use after'?

Was there a chance (or a certainty) that the explosive parts would not work?

The fact that recovery was delayed until 'safety checks' were carried out, suggests that these items might have been 'unreliable'.

Last edited by G-CPTN; 21st Dec 2015 at 20:41. Reason: Deletion of incorrect deduction (by me).
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 20:29
  #952 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oxford
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Radix
Well one problem was the 52 week lead time on replacement items. So the choice was: disable the seat, or let it go for a bit longer, whilst the replacements are delivered.
Or ground the aircraft...
tmmorris is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 21:12
  #953 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Interesting though these findings are, I don't see any smoking gun and neither do I see (significant) evidence of a culture of complacency or mis-management on behalf of either the a/c operator, maintenance provider or the regulator.

Some ambiguity and confusion maybe, leading to different interpretations of the rules. Thus far very little similarity with the Thunder City operation, for example.

What I'm waiting for are the findings on the suitability of the display venue itself and some analysis of the regulations that determine who gets a PDA and what is required to maintain currency.
andrewn is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 21:33
  #954 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 80
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by G-CPTN
,
The fact that recovery was delayed until 'safety checks' were carried out, suggests that these items might have been 'unreliable'.
The penny has just dropped. The delay for safety checks could not have any connection with the date of the cartridges.

That the cartridges might be out of date would not be known.

The safety checks apply any time there are explosives in that situation, ammunition, practice bombs, bang seats or whatever.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 21:38
  #955 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Southern Europe
Posts: 5,335
Received 17 Likes on 6 Posts
...and especially the case when the explosive devices have been involved in a crash and in the vicinity of fire, PN.

I think some of you are reading rather too much into what is a very clear statement by the AAIB. Again, remember what their role is and, more importantly, what it is not.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 22:34
  #956 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
The maintenance organisation 'appeared' to not fully understand the 'hard life' requirement of the seat pyrotechnic cartridges. It seems (according to the AAIB report) they (the approved maintenance organisation) sought clarification as to whether they could remain fitted/in service from the regulator.A8-20 is detailed regarding maintenance of AAES.

The maintenance for Ex Mil,PFA aircraft which exceed 2730Kg MTWA, must be conducted by organisations approved under BCAR's Ch. A8-20.
The maintenance, modification and operating records + the maintenance schedule are made available to the regulator ; If approved, the CAA would have issued the initial permit.

Last edited by woptb; 21st Dec 2015 at 23:16.
woptb is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 22:57
  #957 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,769
Received 2,763 Likes on 1,173 Posts
Don't forget even if the Cartridges were in date and Serviceable it wouldn't have changed the circumstances one iota, you would still be left with a seat that was live lying next to the aircraft.

Also remember civilian aircraft also carry explosives from very cartridges to ballistic chutes.

There is a guide but it does not touch on much seat wise

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...1/20569401.pdf

I have seen one that covers all egress entry and fire points for all military stuff past and present, but even that government item is wooful and covers really relevant stuff like Harriers.... Not.


A80-20 etc are undergoing upheavals at the moment as it goes over to a more EASA style format.

http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/modalapp...=detail&id=220
NutLoose is offline  
Old 22nd Dec 2015, 09:24
  #958 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
As with any accident,many stones are turned over and other problems are revealed,besides those contributing factors that (perhaps)led directly to the outcome. I would suggest that if there was a lack of effective oversight, then it should be of major concern to the regulated and regulator.
woptb is offline  
Old 22nd Dec 2015, 12:25
  #959 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 80
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Nutty, exactly, in-date or out of date would affect the crash rescue in exactly the same way. The only thing known positively by the rescue services was the unknown condition of the explosive devices, ie a known unknown.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2015, 07:50
  #960 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Out of date or unserviceable ?

The decision to extend the life of the ejection seat pyrotechnics is an interesting one.

The original manufactures will have considered a number of factors when setting the limitation, these are likely to be based on the harshest military operation environment with a good measure of safety and a bit of allowance for the deep pockets of the military budget. Once you start operating the aircraft occasionally without the temp cycles of high level flight and store the aircraft in a comfortable environment the safe life of such devices is likely to extend, it is for those who extend the life of these devices to base this decision on reliable data.

It is vital that the black and white attitude to shelf life is not taken and the date on the packet is viewed in the light of current operational conditions as this can move the date in ether direction to ensure reliable performance.
A and C is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.