Hawker Hunter Crash at Shoreham Airshow
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK on a crosswind
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has been reported that he once flew Harriers operationally in HMF, so with a good background flying fast-jets, why wouldn't he eject if he was able to?
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hope this is the end at last of vintage military aircraft and vintage ex military pilots doing unnecessarily higher risk displays over the UK. Needs to be after this year.
BZ yet again to the fire and emergency services involved for keeping calm and carrying on (bravely).
BZ yet again to the fire and emergency services involved for keeping calm and carrying on (bravely).
The last time anything comparable to yesterday's tragedy occurred in the UK was the Farnborough disaster in 1952. The decision that day to continue the flying programme seems callous 63 years later - because our attitudes as a society have changed so very much.
I, for one, would not wish to speculate about the causes of what happened yesterday, but I would bet my last pound that it will lead to rule changes and new restrictions demanded by the tragic outcome - i.e., at least seven dead, who were going about their business on a public road beyond the airfield boundary.
As far as I'm aware, that makes it unprecedented in British aviation history: so whoever chairs the public inquiry is pretty much obliged to recommend measures to avoid anything similar happening again.
A terrible day - and my thoughts are with all those affected.
I, for one, would not wish to speculate about the causes of what happened yesterday, but I would bet my last pound that it will lead to rule changes and new restrictions demanded by the tragic outcome - i.e., at least seven dead, who were going about their business on a public road beyond the airfield boundary.
As far as I'm aware, that makes it unprecedented in British aviation history: so whoever chairs the public inquiry is pretty much obliged to recommend measures to avoid anything similar happening again.
A terrible day - and my thoughts are with all those affected.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GeeRam wrote:
Use of 23° flap in the Hunter whilst manoeuvring was quite common when I was taught ACM at Brawdy - just don't leave any flap down above M0.9 or you won't recover. Not relevant here though...
I think we used 320 KIAS and 23° flap for low speed loops - apart from my chum Ozzie who misheard the brief and tried 230 KIAS....once.
Use of 23° flap in the Hunter whilst manoeuvring was quite common when I was taught ACM at Brawdy - just don't leave any flap down above M0.9 or you won't recover. Not relevant here though...
I think we used 320 KIAS and 23° flap for low speed loops - apart from my chum Ozzie who misheard the brief and tried 230 KIAS....once.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
XV, in 1968 a French Atlantic crashed at Farnborough. We continued to display on the following days.
JP at Southport
Thanks to the poster who linked the JP vid at Southport last year. I was with my nephew on the beach and missed the rolling part but when I looked up noticed him in an odd position relativento the pier and climbing immediately away and clearing. I've thought since something was wrong but that vid confirms it, as it WAS low during the recovery.
Pontius,
Thanks for that fact.
I just wanted to point out that the flying programme continued at Farnborough in 1952 within minutes of the DH110 coming down and while the clear-up was in progress. That would be unlikely to happen today.
Thanks for that fact.
I just wanted to point out that the flying programme continued at Farnborough in 1952 within minutes of the DH110 coming down and while the clear-up was in progress. That would be unlikely to happen today.
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry lads but its true. This is an era that's probably, after this, coming to an end.
And I'm sorry but I for one will be glad.
There are so many crashes I can think of involving these old planes and their crews, that my former colleagues attended some of them/witnessed them.
The country has been very fortunate that people on the ground were generally usually missed - that ended yesterday.
I mean going back, I can think of both Sea Fury's in the 80's or 90's. The Firefly. The Mosquito. The Jetstream. The Blenheim. The Beaver..several Hurricanes and Spitfires. The Gnat and now the Hunter. Its a long list...The recent Lancaster fire - incredibly fortunate no one was killed. The Victor near take off thing..it just goes on and on.
You've been (or we have been-the non flying ground living people that is) getting away with it, every Summer for years.
Do some of you seriously think this sort of risk is still acceptable in the modern age?
You've got to weigh up the money generated and the joy derived against the risk to the general public overhead a small highly populated little island.
The planes are getting older, the money to maintain them harder to find, the skill base of the experts who flew and maintained them disappearing.
I've seen this close hand, seen the pressures they worked under to keep them flying.
Well, I've said it for years on Prune, this is an industry that needs closer and harder scrutiny from people outside of the club.
Or even call time on it?
It presently doesn't add up in favour of the safety of the public.
The lad above who said I make outrageous posts...I like being a contrarian and thinking against the herd. I spout probably as much but no more bollocks that many others on here. Who was right here? Me.
There will be millions sitting over their cornflakes this morning only asking the same basic question - why has this been allowed to happen?
Again.. the thing is I watched Air shows and was involved with them for 30 years....military ones as a grunt.. It made me progressively more and more uneasy...no going to go into that on here.
My feeling is this sort of thing will simply happen again and again until the public or print media get fed up. Its a big money generating industry and anyone who ever puts their head over the parapet generally gets sneered at (like me). Not an easy task to bring it down -money acts for its defence.
Anyway, I will go on avoiding air shows (as far as I am allowed to) like the plague.
And my true condolences to the families of the people on that road.
HS.
And I'm sorry but I for one will be glad.
There are so many crashes I can think of involving these old planes and their crews, that my former colleagues attended some of them/witnessed them.
The country has been very fortunate that people on the ground were generally usually missed - that ended yesterday.
I mean going back, I can think of both Sea Fury's in the 80's or 90's. The Firefly. The Mosquito. The Jetstream. The Blenheim. The Beaver..several Hurricanes and Spitfires. The Gnat and now the Hunter. Its a long list...The recent Lancaster fire - incredibly fortunate no one was killed. The Victor near take off thing..it just goes on and on.
You've been (or we have been-the non flying ground living people that is) getting away with it, every Summer for years.
Do some of you seriously think this sort of risk is still acceptable in the modern age?
You've got to weigh up the money generated and the joy derived against the risk to the general public overhead a small highly populated little island.
The planes are getting older, the money to maintain them harder to find, the skill base of the experts who flew and maintained them disappearing.
I've seen this close hand, seen the pressures they worked under to keep them flying.
Well, I've said it for years on Prune, this is an industry that needs closer and harder scrutiny from people outside of the club.
Or even call time on it?
It presently doesn't add up in favour of the safety of the public.
The lad above who said I make outrageous posts...I like being a contrarian and thinking against the herd. I spout probably as much but no more bollocks that many others on here. Who was right here? Me.
There will be millions sitting over their cornflakes this morning only asking the same basic question - why has this been allowed to happen?
Again.. the thing is I watched Air shows and was involved with them for 30 years....military ones as a grunt.. It made me progressively more and more uneasy...no going to go into that on here.
My feeling is this sort of thing will simply happen again and again until the public or print media get fed up. Its a big money generating industry and anyone who ever puts their head over the parapet generally gets sneered at (like me). Not an easy task to bring it down -money acts for its defence.
Anyway, I will go on avoiding air shows (as far as I am allowed to) like the plague.
And my true condolences to the families of the people on that road.
HS.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fleet
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another beautiful historic aeroplane lost during a flying display. In an adrenalin fuelled environment the human can be tempted to go a 'little further' perhaps? We have lost various warbirds due to commencement of a loop from inexplicably low altitude, and on a day when the air is particularly thin due to nearly 30C OAT this kind of accident is more likely to occur. The RR Spit being an example. The Shoreham Hunter appeared to be fully airworthy, correctly configured, and free of problems throughout the entire sequence.
Air displays involving 'older' aeroplanes should be no more dangerous than ones with modern types if the engineering work is sound and followed the book. I do worry when high energy aircraft - of a scarce nature - are pushed for the sake of display flying. Not because of engineering/structural limitations, but the consequences of a misjudged moment. While many warbirds have aerobatic capability they are often not the best vehicles for aerobatic displays. Surely, most people who have 'feeling' for veteran aeroplanes love to see and hear them in the air, but do not necessarily wish to see them entering the domain of the 'stunt plane'? I am very happy to see our heritage on the wing but do not wish to see it put at unnecessary risk.
The concern following the Shoreham event is for the clunking fist of Heath & Safety and the inevitable appearance of they who see this as an avenue toward exercising their voices and inventing draconian restrictions on display flying.
The tragedy of yesterday is immeasurable in human terms. Let us hope for the continuation of display flying, but perhaps employing a more tempered approach to what we do with precious vintage aeroplanes at the time?
Air displays involving 'older' aeroplanes should be no more dangerous than ones with modern types if the engineering work is sound and followed the book. I do worry when high energy aircraft - of a scarce nature - are pushed for the sake of display flying. Not because of engineering/structural limitations, but the consequences of a misjudged moment. While many warbirds have aerobatic capability they are often not the best vehicles for aerobatic displays. Surely, most people who have 'feeling' for veteran aeroplanes love to see and hear them in the air, but do not necessarily wish to see them entering the domain of the 'stunt plane'? I am very happy to see our heritage on the wing but do not wish to see it put at unnecessary risk.
The concern following the Shoreham event is for the clunking fist of Heath & Safety and the inevitable appearance of they who see this as an avenue toward exercising their voices and inventing draconian restrictions on display flying.
The tragedy of yesterday is immeasurable in human terms. Let us hope for the continuation of display flying, but perhaps employing a more tempered approach to what we do with precious vintage aeroplanes at the time?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Age: 58
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can I ask why the manoeuvre was performed within distance of such a public road?
I presume the pilot would not do it over the crowd line so why was it deemed acceptable to do it over/near a very busy road?
I presume the pilot would not do it over the crowd line so why was it deemed acceptable to do it over/near a very busy road?
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The Alderaan System
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Being a contrarian
hangarshuffle, you will be aware that Haddon Cave recommended adopting a 'Questioning Culture'. Being a contrarian is part of that, and I applaud you for it.
The people inside the gate at the Shoreham Airshow paid their entry fee and in doing so accepted the risk of being in close proximity to fast jets flying at the edge of their flying envelopes, where the margins for error are small. BUT the people on the A27 didn't accept that risk. I'm with you; I would end the displays of this type.
The people inside the gate at the Shoreham Airshow paid their entry fee and in doing so accepted the risk of being in close proximity to fast jets flying at the edge of their flying envelopes, where the margins for error are small. BUT the people on the A27 didn't accept that risk. I'm with you; I would end the displays of this type.
I don't think knee jerk reactions are needed, although at the risk of stating the obvious it would be right for this to be followed by some expert consideration of lessons learnable. Comments around the lack of need to push vintage airframes though aerobatics (it's enough for people to see them displayed) and eg "start high and fly down" sound measured and sensible to me. But hopefully better minds than mine will draw some sound conclusions, based on a good and dispassionate view of the facts.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
I have sympathy with HS view. We get as much pleasure watching the various Spitfires, Hurricane, Dakota and Lancaster doing level passes over our garden or across. Loops and rolls aren't necessary for the sheer joy of seeing them.
Once saw a Canberra, low, say 1200 feet at the top, lower its undercarriage while inverted before descending. An accomplished piece of flying whose subtlety failed to distract the great unwashed from the beer tent.
Once saw a Canberra, low, say 1200 feet at the top, lower its undercarriage while inverted before descending. An accomplished piece of flying whose subtlety failed to distract the great unwashed from the beer tent.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I disagree.
I think these beautiful aircraft should all be flown even if that means they eventually are lost.
In a museum they are a machine. In the air they are art.
I think we all need to fight back against this modern idea that dangerous is always bad and that the worst thing that can happen is death.
Life is about living, not about avoiding death.
I think these beautiful aircraft should all be flown even if that means they eventually are lost.
In a museum they are a machine. In the air they are art.
I think we all need to fight back against this modern idea that dangerous is always bad and that the worst thing that can happen is death.
Life is about living, not about avoiding death.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: North Yorkshire
Age: 82
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please keep this tragedy in proportion. Air displays give enormous pleasure to millions but sometimes **** happens. Avoidance of unnecessary risk is a praiseworthy goal, but how far do you take it? You can't fly anywhere in the UK without crossing busy roads. Any aircraft flying over populated land is liable to cause damage or casualties if something goes wrong, but should that result in their grounding?
At this rate we'll have men with red flags walking in front of road vehicles. Hangarshuffle doesn't like air displays so wants to ban them, and here's an excuse. Personally I wish they would ban football!
At this rate we'll have men with red flags walking in front of road vehicles. Hangarshuffle doesn't like air displays so wants to ban them, and here's an excuse. Personally I wish they would ban football!
Unlike flying incidents that result in a coroner's inquest and an AAIB report, the nature of yesterday's tragedy means it's also likely to generate a public inquiry.
That's where the real debate will occur, and there are bound to be recommendations to the government in its conclusions.
I imagine there's also going to be a full police investigation.
That's where the real debate will occur, and there are bound to be recommendations to the government in its conclusions.
I imagine there's also going to be a full police investigation.
Last edited by XV490; 23rd Aug 2015 at 10:34. Reason: addendum