Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Hawker Hunter Crash at Shoreham Airshow

Wikiposts
Search
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

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 2nd Feb 2017, 21:48
  #1661 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: UK
Posts: 7,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
She was set straight on all counts, told to wind her neck in and had to produce the data protection paperwork. As I made clear it was entirely up to you if you choose to respond and it was done by PM to keep it all in-house if you decide not to.

Last time was Operation Yewtree where one soul being pursued was released from enquires via the content on the Mil forum proving him right. Open knowledge here.

Rob
PPRuNe Towers is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2017, 22:00
  #1662 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,836
Received 2,804 Likes on 1,194 Posts
It would make sense / might be an idea for people to announce in the threads such as this that the plods have contacted them, thus allowing / warning other members it is happening.

But then again it is up to them. It just came as a surprise so far along from the incident.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2017, 06:58
  #1663 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Brexitland
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
My comments related to the amount of practice historic jet display pilots (don't) get. It was an observation which I still believe in but will not be contacting the Sussex Police because I don't wish to be instrumental in prosecuting a fellow aviator.
I thought Rob's advice to me about it being my decision, to respond or not, was helpful - thanks for that.
Be careful what you write..........
Arfur Dent is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2017, 07:08
  #1664 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,803
Received 270 Likes on 109 Posts
Having thought long and hard about the matter, I have decided not to respond - for the very reasons Arfur makes.

My comments concerned the totally normal use of 23° flap when manoeuvring the Hunter and were confirmed by others with far more experience on the type.

Hydrobooster jackstall only occurs above M0.9 with flap extended; that would equate to around 590KIAS at low level and Andy's aircraft was flying at nowhere near such a speed.

And that's all I have to say about that.
BEagle is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2017, 07:53
  #1665 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Hampshire physically; Perthshire and Pembrokeshire mentally.
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have come to the same conclusion.

My comments, from a distance of 33 years from a Hunter cockpit, were based on what appeared to happen in the video, the use of flap and the possibility of it reducing elevator authority at higher speeds. My memory was slightly defective as others pointed out. I also wrote about G-LOC and medical fitness.

There are others out there with much more recent experience on Hunters, including former Hunter display pilots. I'll leave it to the AAIB.
Wingswinger is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2017, 18:11
  #1666 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 4,334
Received 80 Likes on 32 Posts
Would any pilot really wish to offer information which might support such a case against a fellow aviator?
Yes, in the right circumstances. I have a very good mate who lost one of his family in the accident. If I knew something that was incriminating then not only would I have a legal duty to report it, but also a moral one as well. Sorry, but no-one is above the law and that is that.

Finally, I suspect they may also be looking at the companies and trusts that operate these aircraft plus also those that look after airshows - it certainly looks like there have been failings within the organisation. Might they be looking at corporate manslaughter with respect to those that do the training, supervision, engineering and direct operation for these aircraft (I'm thinking the Hunter and Gnat operators plus the airshow organisers)? I understand there is no custodial sentence for corporate manslaughter but a hefty fine and compensation. Thoughts?

LJ
Lima Juliet is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2017, 20:01
  #1667 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: where-ever nav's chooses....
Posts: 834
Received 46 Likes on 26 Posts
Originally Posted by BEagle
Would any pilot really wish to offer information which might support such a case against a fellow aviator? Somehow I doubt it...

Re:your fellow aviator - why not? If he did wrong, he needs to be brought to court and his actions assessed, and if found wrong, punished.

Just because he's an aviator doesn't mean he gets to be involved in a fatal accident and not have every action scrutinised.
alfred_the_great is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2017, 20:29
  #1668 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Squalor
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 23 Likes on 13 Posts
Thoughts?

...this is an internet thread of armchair experts speculating without access to all available facts, without experience of the requisite skills or the characteristics of the specific aircraft.

The thread is full of crap. (sorry, I stared at the screen for ages to get the precise wording). Nobody posting here actually 'knows' any pertinent fact -it is just guesswork, mostly bad.


The thought that Sussex Police ( did they shoot an unarmed naked man in Brighton?) are trawling here for expert testimony fills me with alarm for the future of justice in this case.

I think the Jjury seems to have reached a verdict...and the report is not yet issued.

I am sorry someone known to you had a relative who died in this event. i hope the final report allows closure.
Wetstart Dryrun is online now  
Old 3rd Feb 2017, 21:07
  #1669 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,549
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Thoughts?

...this is an internet thread of armchair experts speculating without access to all available facts, without experience of the requisite skills or the characteristics of the specific aircraft.

The thread is full of crap. (sorry, I stared at the screen for ages to get the precise wording). Nobody posting here actually 'knows' any pertinent fact -it is just guesswork, mostly bad.

The thought that Sussex Police ........are trawling here for expert testimony fills me with alarm for the future of justice in this case.
And not just this case. I know we are in the "post expert" era but this is rediculous.

Hypothetically let's say someone has a accident driving an old car such a Ford Capri......would one expect the police to trawl a hypothetical "former Ford Capri owners forum," asking "what do you think caused the accident" and then using those regarded as giving the most suitable answer as some form of expert witness.

(Nothing against Capri's BTW, used to have one.)
wiggy is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2017, 21:30
  #1670 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK.
Posts: 4,390
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by WD
...this is an internet thread of armchair experts speculating without access to all available facts, without experience of the requisite skills or the characteristics of the specific aircraft.
Not entirely. It would appear that some have flown the type, albeit a long time ago and have made some useful comment, usually with the caveat of failing memory.
I recollect flying a Bucker Jungmann about once a month and thinking 'This ain't really enough.' Now, say, an Avions Robin, not a problem.
We don't have very current Hunter people any more. (Been told I could be wrong there)
It's over ten years since I've touched the controls and I'd be very reluctant to pass serious comment (Not to be confused with pub talk in which I'm 200% better than I ever really was )

Last edited by Basil; 4th Feb 2017 at 12:02.
Basil is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2017, 00:18
  #1671 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne
Age: 54
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
I'd be surprised if the Police were trawling Internet forums looking for snippets of info.
More likely someone connected to the incident has mentioned comments made on this thread as being potentially relevant at which point those investigating would be duty bound to at least assess that relevance.
Tashengurt is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2017, 07:40
  #1672 (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
Form? The police are well on to investigating crimes decades back when, by definition, they are trawling fading memories. Then we have the barrister with his question, answer Yes or No.

I am 100% certain that I have full, complete and accurate memory of events during training 50 years ago.

I am also 100% certain that I am wrong. There you go Basil, my 200% too.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2017, 08:42
  #1673 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: London UK
Posts: 531
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Hypothetically let's say someone has a accident driving an old car such a Ford Capri......would one expect the police to trawl a hypothetical "former Ford Capri owners forum," asking "what do you think caused the accident" and then using those regarded as giving the most suitable answer as some form of expert witness.
Not as such. But there was a case when a driver on some kind of club run was involved in a serious accident and the police trawled the drivers previous contributions to the club's internet forum for statements that could be read out in court to portray him as a hooligan.
Dr Jekyll is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2017, 10:01
  #1674 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK.
Posts: 4,390
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Dr J
the police trawled the drivers previous contributions to the club's internet forum for statements that could be read out in court to portray him as a hooligan.
Which is a good reason for being careful what you post online.
(Note to self: Heed foregoing advice!)
Basil is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2017, 19:23
  #1675 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Brexitland
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
The Sussex Police don't really need to ask me whether an Airline pilot who used to be a Fighter pilot should be displaying a Hunter with virtually no sensible currency on that type. It's like the Base Commander of a Typhoon station suddenly deciding that he will be the Display Pilot as well as running the base. It simply would never happen.
Who authorises these people and gives them a Permission to Display Authority?
They are culpable too.
Arfur Dent is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2017, 20:57
  #1676 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,378
Received 1,579 Likes on 717 Posts
Shoreham families 'to receive £10m compensation' for loved ones who died in jet crash fireball - Mirror Online
ORAC is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2017, 21:33
  #1677 (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
An extract states:

Essex tycoon Graham Peacock owns Canfield. A spokesman said: “An admission of liability was made. We cannot comment further given investigations are ongoing . . .
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2017, 08:44
  #1678 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 4,334
Received 80 Likes on 32 Posts
I womder if the Regulator (ie. CAA) will be sued? After all their apparent lacklustre procedures for civilian display requirements have already been found wanting and have undergone significant review.
Lima Juliet is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2017, 09:51
  #1679 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Squalor
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 23 Likes on 13 Posts
Mr Dent, While I don't necessarily not disagree with your sentiments about currency, I could not comment about a specific display without either watching it or reading the list of intended manouevres.

A show of fast/slow, clean dirty fly-bys linked with practised wingovers would give the punters a chance to see, hear, photograph and generally marvel at a pretty aeroplane in flightwith minimal need for rehearsal. Even a station master could do it.

Clearly the perils of a birdstrike, engine failure, or even an FCU or linkage failure would give a high probability of a column of greasy smoke, especially if the runway is a bit short.
Wetstart Dryrun is online now  
Old 5th Feb 2017, 11:21
  #1680 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 2,164
Received 46 Likes on 22 Posts
Originally Posted by Leon Jabachjabicz
I womder if the Regulator (ie. CAA) will be sued? After all their apparent lacklustre procedures for civilian display requirements have already been found wanting and have undergone significant review.
I have wondered the same. The CAA had set incredibly low standards that were way below comparable military requirements and yet appear to have no demonstrable audit chain to underpin such low recency/currency requirements for high-performance swept-wing jets. This would struggle to meet the Clapham Omnibus test, let alone a reasoned expert witness.

That they allowed someone to achieve a display qualification on a straight-wing basic trainer such as the JP as a means to display a Hunter is professional madness - yet this is what the CAA did, whilst billing people for the privilege.

There has been a lot of focus on Mr Hill and the company (rightly so of course) but it does not take long to tug on the threads of this incident to find a supine, target-driven and business-focused CAA at the other end. Somehow the CAA has lost 'aviation' as one of its core competencies.
Just This Once... is offline  


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.