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

Shoreham Airshow Crash Trial

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.

Shoreham Airshow Crash Trial

Old 10th Mar 2019, 21:22
  #221 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,744
Worth watching the vid of Mark Hannah in his Duxford Hunter display at post #91. He describes the Duxford site as small for the Hunter, makes pull-ups with full power, flys no loops, does 1/2 Cubans with 200+ over the top and generally seems to fly with plenty of spare energy.

OAP
Onceapilot is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2019, 22:00
  #222 (permalink)  
Just a numbered other
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Earth
Age: 67
Posts: 1,153
Originally Posted by Treble one View Post
However, on the balance of probability, and given that the pilot hadnt suffered an eposide like this before during flying numerous aerobatic manoeuvres, over many years, makes it seem like a lot of holes in a lot of cheeses suddenly happened at a very precise and very unfortunate moment in time?
And the Jury may be in full agreement with you. However the standard of proof in criminal trials is ‘Beyond reasonable doubt’.

On the balance of probabilities is the criterion in civil cases. There just may be one in the offing.
Arkroyal is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2019, 22:48
  #223 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 475
Never met an RAF Pilot displaying a FJ who had flown such a paltry number of hours.
To argue the toss about Derry vs Canadian is pure "missing the whole point" pedantry.
dent. AH was not an RAF pilot displaying a Fast Jet. He knew perfectly well how to fly a safe repeatable loop in the Hunter.

Im not arguing anything about the manoeuvre at Southport. You incorrectly referred to it as a D Turn; it wasn't !
H Peacock is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2019, 23:53
  #224 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Baston
Posts: 1,583
Originally Posted by MPN11 View Post
I had a similar experience at Gatwick last year, having arrived from a long-haul flight ... which I do several times a year without even thinking about it. Left Arrivals for a kerbside cigarette in the Smoking Zone, and suddenly just folded up gracefully to the floor ... my descent being controlled by the OH. It came out of nowhere, and not encountered before or since. SCARY.
Yes, this may well be a MeToo thing for retired folk. Out of bed for the mandatory pump ship, but the carpet was not visible because I manoeuvre in the dark.

Terrifying. My doctor was very calm ........ momentary whatever mumble blood pressure mumble jargon take one of these if it happens again..
langleybaston is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 10:56
  #225 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: God's Country
Posts: 106
Originally Posted by Bob Viking View Post
I’m not sure I can wholeheartedly agree with your post. I agree it was an accident. AH never set out to hurt anyone. However, I don’t consider him blameless.
In what way was this incident an 'accident'? Are you saying that no one should be held responsible?
Of course he didn't set out to kill anyone. He set out to provide a stunning display to the best of his abilities.
The relatives will not accept that it was just 'one of things that happen'.
The Nip is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 11:31
  #226 (permalink)  

Gentleman Aviator
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Teetering Towers - somewhere in the Shires
Posts: 3,360
Terrifying. My doctor was very calm ........ momentary whatever mumble blood pressure mumble jargon take one of these if it happens again.
Not nice at all the old vertigo (pace Hitchcock NOT a fear of heights). Had the first instance just over a year ago - fell over in the street - fortunately quite close to the village Doctors' Surgery!

Despite throwing medical insurance at it, with brain scans etc - nothing found, so expensive (but not to me!) consultants said "probably a virus infection of the inner ear - it'll go away". (Which I understand to be docspeak for "haven't a f'ing clue mate"). Happened 3 or 4 times since, but I can now see it coming - it's the "seasickness" following it that's most annoying though.

But I've "hung up my Gosport tubes" for a while, perhaps for keeps..... :-(

How's THAT for thread drift!!
teeteringhead is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 11:35
  #227 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 75
Posts: 1,469
Bob Viking (The Nip take note)

I’m sure the jury reached the correct verdict on the strength of the evidence prevented but I still cannot excuse the actions of Andy Hill.

From my perspective, I am a current and pretty experienced Hawk pilot (2500+ hours on type). If someone asked me to perform a low level aerobatics routine tomorrow I would say no way. I fly aerobatic type manoeuvres (along with weapons, BFM, low level etc) on a daily basis in my job and I would not want, or expect, to go and fly the kind of manoeuvres he flew on that fateful day. Added to that, the fit of the aircraft was unfamiliar (I have flown Hawks in pretty much every conceivable fit including the heavier configurations) so, by comparison, if someone said “hey, BV, go take that Hawk with drop tanks and fly a low level display in front of thousands of people” I wouldn’t dream of it.

For the life of me I can’t work out why so many people want to excuse his actions.

I don’t know how I think he should be punished, since it hasn’t affected me directly, but I don’t think he should get off Scott free and I don’t think you can lay the entirety of the blame with the CAA
.

I have 2000 hours on type. I concur with your opinion. As for the CAA, their rules allowing AH to perform that display are unbelievably lax: in my view it should be taken to task, and should bear some of the responsibility.

That said, the verdict has been delivered. The poor chap will live with the consequences of his actions for the rest of his life. More tragically, so will the relatives of the
bereaved.
jindabyne is online now  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 11:41
  #228 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Dark Side of West Wales
Age: 80
Posts: 86
Originally Posted by Onceapilot View Post
Worth watching the vid of Mark Hannah in his Duxford Hunter display at post #91. He describes the Duxford site as small for the Hunter, makes pull-ups with full power, flys no loops, does 1/2 Cubans with 200+ over the top and generally seems to fly with plenty of spare energy.

OAP
Excellent display by Mark H (RIP) but do bare in mind that he was flying a fighter version of the Hunter ( F6 or later) which had more power than the T7.
DODGYOLDFART is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 12:30
  #229 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 582
Originally Posted by jindabyne View Post
Bob Viking (The Nip take note)

.

I have 2000 hours on type. I concur with your opinion. As for the CAA, their rules allowing AH to perform that display are unbelievably lax: in my view it should be taken to task, and should bear some of the responsibility.

That said, the verdict has been delivered. The poor chap will live with the consequences of his actions for the rest of his life. More tragically, so will the relatives of the
bereaved.
CAP 403 which governs Civilian Air Displays has been strengthened considerably post Shoreham (unsurprisingly). It is worth stating that AH was current in all requirements (as laid out then) to perform his display on the day.

Last edited by Treble one; 11th Mar 2019 at 12:46.
Treble one is online now  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 13:02
  #230 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: God's Country
Posts: 106
Originally Posted by jindabyne View Post
Bob Viking (The Nip take note)

.

I have 2000 hours on type. I concur with your opinion. As for the CAA, their rules allowing AH to perform that display are unbelievably lax: in my view it should be taken to task, and should bear some of the responsibility.

That said, the verdict has been delivered. The poor chap will live with the consequences of his actions for the rest of his life. More tragically, so will the relatives of the
bereaved.
Jindabyne,
I have not stated that AH is responsible. The verdict has been given and I have an opinion which I will keep to myself. (Because it is irrelevant).

My point was/is the word accident. This very word can lead to people not being held responsible for any given situation.
There has been many threads on here, Chinook, Hercules, Red Arrow, where the word accident is used. There is always someone responsible, generally further up the food chain getting paid for that responsibility.

The Nip is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 13:05
  #231 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 641
teeteringhead: your symptoms sound a lot like Benign Positional Vertigo caused by loose crystals in the semicircular canals of the inner ear. Google it - it can be treated with simple exercises.
Meikleour is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 13:11
  #232 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West London
Posts: 986
Originally Posted by DODGYOLDFART View Post
Excellent display by Mark H (RIP) but do bare in mind that he was flying a fighter version of the Hunter ( F6 or later) which had more power than the T7.
I might have misunderstood?, but I thought that was the comparison point, given Mark even said on the commentary as he pulled up, 'full power', and thus plenty of energy.........whereas I thought there was a question mark over AH not even using full power when he pulled up in the T.7 thus compromising the already reduced energy available...??
GeeRam is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 13:38
  #233 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: High Wycombe
Posts: 12
Originally Posted by The Nip View Post


Jindabyne,
I have not stated that AH is responsible. The verdict has been given and I have an opinion which I will keep to myself. (Because it is irrelevant).

My point was/is the word accident. This very word can lead to people not being held responsible for any given situation.
There has been many threads on here, Chinook, Hercules, Red Arrow, where the word accident is used. There is always someone responsible, generally further up the food chain getting paid for that responsibility.

The term "accident" has a special and precise written meaning in air law which defines exactly what is (and isn't) an accident that requires investigation.

In terms of accident investigation, which does not seek to apportion blame, it is probably important that it does have neutral connotations. In general, accident investigation is (and should always remain) outside any blame culture.
VerdunLuck is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 14:10
  #234 (permalink)  

Gentleman Aviator
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Teetering Towers - somewhere in the Shires
Posts: 3,360
teeteringhead: your symptoms sound a lot like Benign Positional Vertigo caused by loose crystals in the semicircular canals of the inner ear.
Thanks Meikleour.

That was suggested by the GP (random otoliths), but the consultant poo-poohed the idea (can't remember why). I've got the exercises from the GP - if it doesn't go away I'll give 'em a go. As we know from these pages, specialists aren't always right!
teeteringhead is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 14:14
  #235 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: front seat, facing forwards
Posts: 981
Originally Posted by VerdunLuck View Post
The term "accident" has a special and precise written meaning in air law which defines exactly what is (and isn't) an accident that requires investigation.

In terms of accident investigation, which does not seek to apportion blame, it is probably important that it does have neutral connotations. In general, accident investigation is (and should always remain) outside any blame culture.
Indeed, but since the police sensibly stopped using the term accident to describe something that may not be accidental (RTA - Road Traffic accident, now known as RTC - Road Traffic Collision), perhaps the aviation community should start using a more suitable term than accident.

If nothing else, it causes confusion on web forums, accidentally of course!
just another jocky is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 15:19
  #236 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Uk
Posts: 168
Had the pilot been killed in this accident there would have been no trial and he would no doubt have been responsible for what happened. AAIB Report.

Surely, you cant have it both ways?
3wheels is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 15:21
  #237 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 12,106
fortunately quite close to the village Doctors' Surgery!
How far from the pub?
ShyTorque is online now  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 15:59
  #238 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Age: 61
Posts: 45
Originally Posted by 3wheels View Post
Had the pilot been killed in this accident there would have been no trial and he would no doubt have been responsible for what happened. AAIB Report.

Surely, you cant have it both ways?
AAIB reports specifically do not attribute blame, for very good reasons.

I would go further and say Mr Hill should never have been put on trial based on the evidence that was presented.

For those that have not seen it, there is an interesting Tweet from Mr Hill's leading defence counsel....

Thank you to all who helped and supported #AndyHill with his defence in the #ShorehamAirCrash. A tragic case for everyone involved but it was my privilege to have represented such a remarkable man. Our thoughts are with the families who lost their loved ones.

Karim Khalil QC


Those keyboard warriors seeking to condemn Andy Hill would do well to take Mr Khalil's wise words on board.

Ultimately there is always a risk. Statistically the risk is very small given that this was the first fatal UK airshow accident involving someone other than the aircrew for over sixty years. Ultimately society has to decide if it is prepared to accept that small risk. What makes this particular incident worse is that many of those killed or injured were simply passing by with no interest in the show. To an extent, if you attend a show (or watch from outside) you are choosing to accept some risk but there is no realistic way of limiting the risk to just those attending.
Thoughtful_Flyer is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 16:16
  #239 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 160
Originally Posted by teeteringhead View Post
Thanks Meikleour.

That was suggested by the GP (random otoliths), but the consultant poo-poohed the idea (can't remember why). I've got the exercises from the GP - if it doesn't go away I'll give 'em a go. As we know from these pages, specialists aren't always right!

it is also worth getting the ticker checked out especially if you have seniority- hypotension on standing is not unusual and not always or even commonly related to the inner ear . Worth a read if you have time https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-...s/syc-20352548
dagenham is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 16:52
  #240 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,254
Originally Posted by Thoughtful_Flyer View Post
Those keyboard warriors seeking to condemn Andy Hill would do well to take Mr Khalil's wise words on board.
In the same way as AAIB reports are guaranteed not to attribute blame, defending QCs are guaranteed only to say good things about their client.

DaveReidUK is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

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