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 3rd Mar 2017, 18:41
  #1741 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 4,334
Received 80 Likes on 32 Posts
Pilot porked it, whilst others that could have stopped it, also porked it...

That is all...
Lima Juliet is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2017, 18:45
  #1742 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,720
Received 2,711 Likes on 1,150 Posts
That's how I read it too, padded out with a lot of recommendations re seats and engines etc that didn't actually contribute to the accident.
NutLoose is online now  
Old 3rd Mar 2017, 18:48
  #1743 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: all over
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well I dare say the pilot is in for a pretty long term in the clink based on other sentences today...
3engnever is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2017, 18:57
  #1744 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes on 45 Posts
Aircraft Accident Report 1/2017, G-BXFI
https://assets.publishing.service.go...017_G-BXFI.pdf (28Mb)

Air Accidents Investigation Branch Published on Mar 3, 2017
"Air Accidents Investigation Branch video to accompany the final report of the investigation. This video is intended to help visualise the aircraft’s final manoeuvre.

The images shown are not a precise depiction of the aircraft’s behaviour at all stages of the flight. The video is not a summary of the final report, which includes other information about the circumstances of the accident and the reasons for the severity of the outcome."
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2017, 19:10
  #1745 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes Spaz, we've all seen the video, read the report.
glad rag is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2017, 19:30
  #1746 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,803
Received 134 Likes on 63 Posts
I get a faint feeling that the pilot reverted to a recent JP experience/mind-set and associated numbers. Am I wrong?
MPN11 is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2017, 19:32
  #1747 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Away from home Rat
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Seats and other things make lots of money for the lawyers. Out of date carts may be fine for "it will do a trip" mentality, however for your insurance loss adjusters, it is a get out clause that "Your PtF wasn't really valid and we are not coughing out". Lawyers will have a field day on the aspects of airworthiness too.
Alber Ratman is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2017, 21:00
  #1748 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: here and there
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not sure which thread this should be in..and apologies if its already been done..
Was any mention made of that spotter video doing the rounds which shows his extremely long takeoff run on the day in question?
gpzz is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2017, 21:08
  #1749 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,548
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Well like the rest of us you could have a wade through the report....it is online and the answer is in there..

But just this once, since it is late Friday evening and I'm felling mellow...yes the initial takeoff is mentioned in the report, from a slightly dulled memory caused by having waded through 400 plus pages of the report this PM as I recall it there was no adverse comment other than it was down wind, warm, and AH lifted the nose off at a slightly lower speed than normal etc.
wiggy is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2017, 22:59
  #1750 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Under the clag EGKA
Posts: 1,026
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The mention of JP experience is spurious. He had his entry height dictated to him. He was. well below his entry gate.
effortless is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2017, 02:40
  #1751 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 260
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Think the JP reference is Southport.
phil9560 is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2017, 07:25
  #1752 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
gpzz

Not sure which thread this should be in..and apologies if its already been done..
Was any mention made of that spotter video doing the rounds which shows his extremely long takeoff run on the day in question?
Yes , the departure is covered and it notes a few points: the t/o was downhill with some tailwind component, the engine parameters are not specified but, described as "normal"(or words to that effect), the rotation was non-standard.
You have to read all the report to get the detail. Overall, I am not impressed with the analysis of engine performance in the whole report. There seems little attempt to accurately assess the performance of the engine in that t/o where known details exist. The whole report notes deviations in engine performance and instrumentation that include multiple gross overspeeds on test flight, gross undereading JPT indications and fuel system degredation. I don't really understand why the performance on that t/o is not fully tested, after all, it must have been a full throttle event.
Maybe there was a problem with using this engine at full throttle-how can we know?

OAP
Onceapilot is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2017, 07:31
  #1753 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,548
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Overall, I am not impressed with the analysis of engine performance in the whole report.
Likewise, though I do appreciate that with the lack of a FDR the analysis will be bleedin difficult.
wiggy is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2017, 08:06
  #1754 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 3,225
Received 172 Likes on 65 Posts
In a number of places, the AAIB report mentions "visual limitations, such as contrast and glare".

Interestingly, in the aftermath of a fatal accident in 2003, MoD stated that only the effect of direct light, not glare or reflections, need be considered in an aircraft's design. If this were still a military aircraft, those references would not be permitted in the report; although I'd like to think the AAIB would insist.
tucumseh is online now  
Old 4th Mar 2017, 08:35
  #1755 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Lechlade, Glos.UK
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
MPN11. Who knows. But he still entered the manoeuvre far too low.
sharpend is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2017, 08:49
  #1756 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Away from it all
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Entry too low/slow, power insufficient, not realizing situation at the loop top and then '1/2 cubaning' out - rest is padding, but all excellent background.
Philoctetes is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2017, 08:50
  #1757 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: orlando
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The problem with display flying as with any other types of "demanding" flying close to the limits, you need to be doing it almost full time and be very current. Both with the maneuvers and a/c type.

The CAA plan to implement "higher qualifications" is certainly a step in the right direction.

Takes a lots b***s to be a display pilot, as if you screw up, the world is watching. Everyone's worst nightmare is to involve the innocent, when you screw up.
John_Reid is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2017, 15:52
  #1758 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,803
Received 134 Likes on 63 Posts
I refer to my #1746 ...

Crash pilot ?forgot which jet he was in? | News | The Times & The Sunday Times

I obviously defer to experts here, especially those who fly several different types on a regular basis.

I would however note that I have been driving for over 50 years. In the last decade, I have driven may more miles in the USA than in UK/Jersey, and in a wide variety of rental cars. I quite frequently have to press the "THINK" button to remember where I am, where the necessary switch is, and what the local rules are. My best 'fail' was a couple of days after returning from the US, where I blithely left a multi-storey using the 'UP' ramp. Now if that can happen doing perfectly ordinary car-driving, can we evaluate the challenges of aero displays in different aircraft types?

No, it's NOT old age, I suggest it's just the most recent mental imprint that causes the problem.
MPN11 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


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.