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 Feb 2016, 10:30
  #1281 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: SELondon
Posts: 40
I have just read the latest Pilot mag where there are details of what appears to be a radical overhaul of the current DA/DAE and FDD requirements.
My question is, would the CAA be privy to the latest AAIB findings before the publication of the final report?
The CAA have taken swift decisive action by the looks of things and one wonders if they feel as if this overhaul was long overdue.
The article makes very interesting and sobering reading.
Alvin Steele is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2016, 11:03
  #1282 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,085
From a previous thread:

After 9/11, someone said, 'Never let a crisis go to waste', and a whole raft of hitherto impossible to justify, draconian measures, including the inexplicable occupation of a foreign country, became a reality.

Many of these restrictions if they had been in force at the time.would have done little, if anything to prevent the events of that day,

There is something of that same concept here, in that the Hunter accident at Shoreham has enabled people to dust off and propose many already held ideas for even more heavy handed regulation/cost, that would, most likely, have made not a scrap of difference to this accident. (The specific cause of which is still unknown.)

Until Shoreham 2015 not a single person, other than those associated with the event, as either participants, or spectators, has ever been killed, in the entire history of airshows in the UK.

I believe we may well be attempting to eliminate the risk of a 'once in 100 years' event, by decimating the UK Airshow industry.


MJ

MJ
Mach Jump is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2016, 15:09
  #1283 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tarn et Garonne, Southwest France
Posts: 5,283
Alain,

In effect, no. The CAA will be sent copies of the report so they don't need to go online to download it. They may be given a bit of courtesy, but we're not talking weeks or months of delay for redaction or rebuttal. Only ex-Prime Ministers get that privilege.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2016, 15:25
  #1284 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,031
Alvin Steele wrote:

I have just read the latest Pilot mag where there are details of what appears to be a radical overhaul of the current DA/DAE and FDD requirements.
My question is, would the CAA be privy to the latest AAIB findings before the publication of the final report?
The CAA have taken swift decisive action by the looks of things and one wonders if they feel as if this overhaul was long overdue.
The article makes very interesting and sobering reading.

It is a very interesting article.
I am not sufficiently familiar with the current regulations to appreciate just how much of a change that this represents. However it would appear that there is a significant change of philosophy that may be an attempt to influence the culture attending display flying.

It would appear that the move is from having the "right to display" subject to meeting the criteria to one of having to "demonstrate suitability" and meet more stringent criteria. Those familiar with the UK Firearms Act will quickly see the analogy with Section 2 (shotgun) and Section 1 (rifled barrel firearms) procedures. Indeed, the use of the phrase "right attitudes and behaviours" in relation to display pilots, evaluators and directors is again reminiscent of the language used in relation to assessing suitability to possess firearms in the UK.

Interesting times indeed.

YS
Yellow Sun is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2016, 16:10
  #1285 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tarn et Garonne, Southwest France
Posts: 5,283
Assessment of attitude is not new to the display approval process. The emphasis may be changing, but it was already in the checklist.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2016, 16:46
  #1286 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,031
Assessment of attitude is not new to the display approval process. The emphasis may be changing, but it was already in the checklist.
As was the requirement for referees for Firearm Certificate applications to address specific questions in their submission. It was relatively easy to "tick the boxes" without actually revealing much about the applicant. The selection of referees has now moved from the "pillar of society" figure to having to provide names of those with a greater knowledge of the applicant and their circumstances. Written references are no longer required, but the referee may be contacted by an enquiry officer to discuss the applicant.

So, whilst the process is broadly the same in its purpose, the emphasis and depth of enquiry has definitely altered. I feel that a parallel process in in train with respect to DAs.

I apologise to those not familiar with UK Firearms Licencing procedures, but they do provide a useful analogy for comparing methods of assessment of suitability.

I also found it significant that the article mentions:

DAEs refusing, or even displaying reluctance to attend* their annual seminar will affect the CAA’s assessment of renewing their DAEs.
*my emphasis

This would seem to indicate a hardening of approach by the CAA and a method of ensuring that DAEs fully cooperate with the regulating authority.

YS
Yellow Sun is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2016, 18:33
  #1287 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 3,666
Alvin steele: Yes the CAA will be privvy to the AAIB findings before they go to print in March. In fact I believe the findings went there last week.

The CAA report is long overdue. This is an (airshow) industry that is in need of an overhaul.
Thomas coupling is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2016, 15:41
  #1288 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 59
Posts: 221
Anybody else seen Proposed Mandatory Permit Directive 16-01? It's an intriguing document, but the big question (for me at least) is that can any of you think of anything currently flying in the UK on the G-reg that's powered by a RR Nene?
DaveUnwin is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2016, 15:51
  #1289 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Hampshire
Age: 74
Posts: 208
There may be a Canadair T33 T Bird out there with a G Reg,and now RNHF is run by civilians the Seahawk might be off charge and to be a G reg!The Sea Vixen seems to be a bit of both now!!I believe the poor Seahawk is still suffering from its Fuel Recuperator system,that sits above the bifurcated exhaust,so is prone to setting off Red lights.Easiest way to stop it is to simply remove it,as it only does aileron rolls so no Neg G and it has a relight button,but I gather the CAA will not accept the MOD as it was never done in service,and Hawkers no longer exist!!??Maybe Eric Heywood is still alive to make it work,otherwise it may not be seen again!!Therefore a RR Nene could be a possibility on the Display scene again!!?????????????????
FAStoat is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2016, 16:06
  #1290 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Brum
Posts: 657
now RNHF is run by civilians the Seahawk might be off charge and to be a G reg!
Not anytime soon. It was dismantled and taken to Shawbury last week for storage...
Nige321 is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2016, 16:10
  #1291 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 59
Posts: 221
Ahhh, the Sea Hawk might explain it. I think all the T-Birds are gone.
DaveUnwin is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2016, 21:37
  #1292 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,085
Joint Statement by the Honourable Company of Air Pilots and the British Air Display Association - Air Pilots
Pittsextra is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2016, 21:49
  #1293 (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: 76
Posts: 16,622
"pilot organisations reject caa ceo’s claims that the air display community has declined to co-operate with its post-shoreham crash changes to airshows"

And nothing directly relevant to Shoreham.

Last edited by Pontius Navigator; 4th Mar 2016 at 22:24.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2016, 21:53
  #1294 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,085
The whole thing is related to Shoreham and therefore relevant.
Pittsextra is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2016, 09:10
  #1295 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Anglia
Posts: 1,904
I find it interesting that GAPAN spin doctors seem to have redefined the CAA CEO's "resistance" as "declined to co-operate". That seems to be a large bit of escalation and politicking too.
I would rudely assume that when the CAA and GAPAN met to discuss the issues, the CAA had already made its rule changes and that GAPAN didn't agree with them...

Something akin to "When an immovable object meets a self-righteous society..."
Rigga is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2016, 09:39
  #1296 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,519
....the CAA is populated in the main by officials, many of whom having little or no understanding of aviation...
Whether that is true or not, it seems the language of confrontation, as does much else in the letter. As an aside I had a quick look at the CAA executive and there are aviators amongst them, but perhaps in too small a number?
The Old Fat One is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2016, 09:43
  #1297 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 21
Looping the venerable Hawker Hunter

Please see the great formation aeros picture at post #596 on this thread.

If 4 regular RAF Squadron pilots can consistently loop 4 Hawker Hunters safely in close formation why can a solo Hunter pilot not complete a safe loop without hitting the ground and causing havoc at an airshow?
http://www.pprune.org/forums/images/.../eusa_wall.gif
bigglesbrother is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2016, 10:08
  #1298 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 2,867
That letter would not be out of place in the Nimrod Review. It accuses the CAA of savings at the expense of safety.
tucumseh is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2016, 10:14
  #1299 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Northants
Posts: 692
bigglesbrother,

Have you read any of this thread or indead anything about the accident at all?

He couldn't complete a loop because he was not attempting to fly a loop! It was a completely different manoeuvre.
Flap62 is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2016, 11:51
  #1300 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 21
Looping a Hawker Hunter

Hallo Flaps 62 ....

If a Hawker Hunter starts a pull up from a normal upright flight position - keeps pulling and climbing until it is inverted - (becoming desperately slow at the top as it happens) and then pulls through toward the original upright normal flight attitude as it nears the original start altitude - that is essentially a 'loop'.

A change of direction from entry heading to descent/impact heading does not negate the general aerodynamic description 'loop'.

The Shoreham Hunter went up, was inverted at the top, and then descended with the intent to arrive once more in a normal upright flying attitude at around manoeuvre start height. This it failed to do with tragic consequences.

The axis of the loop was likely skewed by the pilot in an attempt to stay within the airshow airspace, but it was still up we go and down we come - planning to arrive at the start height ready for the next display manoeuvre.
bigglesbrother is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

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