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 31st Jan 2020, 08:51
  #541 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne
Age: 54
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Ddraig Goch
Can anyone tell me why?
I can't tell you why but my guess would be a combination of the fact that the case has received so much publicity that an untainted jury would be impossible to find and that the volume of specialist and technical information would prove difficult for many to understand.
Tashengurt is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2020, 10:16
  #542 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 3,225
Received 172 Likes on 65 Posts
Originally Posted by Ddraig Goch
Can anyone tell me why?
Juries can ask awkward questions. There'll be a few sighs of relief in the CAA, AAIB, HSE and MoD!
tucumseh is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2020, 14:38
  #543 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London
Age: 67
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 35 Likes on 12 Posts
When the police were asking the High Court for access to AAIB Shoreham witness statements (which the Court refused), the judges were also looking at a spat with the Norfolk Coroner, who wanted access to the CVFDR for the Lord Ballyedmond AW139 accident. The Lord Chief Justice added to the judgement in that case by stating:

“In the absence of credible evidence that the investigation into an accident is incomplete, flawed or deficient, (my bold) a Coroner conducting an inquest into a death which occurred in an aircraft accident, should not consider it necessary to investigate again the matters covered or to be covered by the independent investigation of the AAIB. […] [T]he findings and conclusions should not be reopened.”

It will be interesting to see how Ms Schofield interprets that direction.
Fortissimo is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2020, 15:03
  #544 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: France
Posts: 170
Received 18 Likes on 2 Posts
Thank you both for your swift and judicious replies.
Ddraig Goch is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2020, 18:39
  #545 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,156
Received 1,461 Likes on 660 Posts
https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/1854...ack-year-2021/

Shoreham Airshow disaster inquest put back a year to 2021
ORAC is online now  
Old 25th Jun 2020, 22:22
  #546 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Dark Side of West Wales
Age: 85
Posts: 161
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ORAC
https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/1854...ack-year-2021/

Shoreham Airshow disaster inquest put back a year to 2021
I for one am very glad that at last the CAA is getting round to investigating the issues surround the term cognitive impairment. However delaying the inquest for another year I fear will be much regretted by all concerned.
DODGYOLDFART is online now  
Old 26th Jun 2020, 16:14
  #547 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 607
Received 10 Likes on 7 Posts
Originally Posted by DODGYOLDFART
I for one am very glad that at last the CAA is getting round to investigating the issues surround the term cognitive impairment.
Absolutely agree; the sooner they ‘file’ CI where it belongs the better!
H Peacock is offline  
Old 28th Jun 2020, 10:21
  #548 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 85
Received 7 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by DODGYOLDFART
I for one am very glad that at last the CAA is getting round to investigating the issues surround the term cognitive impairment
I note the article mentioned CAA review of CI. I fear that might not take long... Some proper research into the area is needed.
Ridger is offline  
Old 28th Jun 2020, 17:44
  #549 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Dark Side of West Wales
Age: 85
Posts: 161
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ridger AFAIUI ever since the trial several recognised "authorities" have been turning summersaults in an attempt to come up with an agreed definition of what CI is and how it should be applied to aeronautical situations. Whilst everyone I have discussed this with seems to agree that finding an agreement on the specific terms involved is bad enough but then when you turn to the issue of how such terms may be applied the famous "can of worms" starts to be mentioned. One thing that clearly stands out with hindsight, is that the defence team really played a flanker when they got the Court to buy into the CI concept.

What ever happens now I do not envy the people who will be involved with the Inquest. However in my advanced years I hope I will be able to get my brain around whatever they come up with.
DODGYOLDFART is online now  
Old 28th Jun 2020, 18:41
  #550 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 3,225
Received 172 Likes on 65 Posts
One must bear in mind that the AAIB report left the CAA without a name, and the judge was less than impressed with some prosecution witnesses. In fact, it is by no means certain the pilot would have been found guilty even if CI had not been raised. Yes, it must be looked at by regulators, but I suspect the CAA (and MoD) will be hoping it serves as a diversion.
tucumseh is offline  
Old 28th Jun 2020, 19:28
  #551 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bourton-on-the-Water
Posts: 1,017
Received 16 Likes on 7 Posts
As ever, Tucumseh makes some good points.

I’ve spent quite a lot of the last few decades watching and commenting on aerobatic displays at air shows, and I also sat through most of the Old Bailey trial. I have to say that one of the more extraordinary moments of the trial for me was when I first saw the film of the start of the fatal manoeuvre. My immediate reaction was ‘what on earth is he doing?’ It didn’t make sense. And my professional knowledge of Andy Hill was as a very competent display pilot.

So the question raised for me then - a question which remains unanswered to this day - was, why did he do that? I suggest, nobody knows. And we probably never will.

airsound
airsound is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 10:12
  #552 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 85
Received 7 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by DODGYOLDFART
Ridger AFAIUI ever since the trial several recognised "authorities" have been turning summersaults in an attempt to come up with an agreed definition of what CI is and how it should be applied to aeronautical situations
I completely agree - CI is far too broad to agree on in a specific acute context. De-coupling from the accident, I would say that is a major reason to motivate research, perhaps of assessing cognition at sub A-LOC levels in a centrifuge. If meaningful data were produced it would add another solid reason to not erode safety margin...
Ridger is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 12:42
  #553 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,779
Received 75 Likes on 34 Posts
Originally Posted by Ridger
I completely agree - CI is far too broad to agree on in a specific acute context. De-coupling from the accident, I would say that is a major reason to motivate research, perhaps of assessing cognition at sub A-LOC levels in a centrifuge. If meaningful data were produced it would add another solid reason to not erode safety margin...
I don’t think it takes much of a leap to imagine what that research might find. As Gz increases, more and more cognitive capacity will be devoted to resisting its effects (mainly the anti-g straining manoeuvre, but also things like planning how to position head and neck). Physical discomfort will also have an effect on spare mental capacity. Taken to an extreme well beyond Shoreham, at +9g in old-style kit there isn’t much of it left!

In the context of culpability, the effects I mention are all ‘known knowns’ and trained for. Pilots, and especially display pilots, should not be able to *choose* to expose themselves to the high ‘g’ environment and then claim that its entirely predictable effects excuse them from responsibility.

At issue, I think, is whether unpredictable ‘medical’ CI is distinguishable from the predictable effects of Gz. The research will need to be very carefully designed to separate those things, if indeed it is possible to do.

Last edited by Easy Street; 29th Jun 2020 at 17:21.
Easy Street is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 16:59
  #554 (permalink)  
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,874
Received 60 Likes on 18 Posts
This whole CI argument is very circular. Military operators have understood for many years the stresses, strains and limitations of human physiology when exposed to extreme G forces. That's why FJ pilot selection is as rigorous as it is, that's why age is known to be a key factor in maintaining the physiological performance required and that's why fundamentally, it's a young person's domain. I genuinely don't understand the apparent surprise and confusion that putting an individual into this environment who is almost certainly not performing to the same physiological standards as they were 20 years ago, may lead to issues with Cognitive Impairment.

Yes, I am proposing that age should be a discriminator in high performance flying. A lengthy study on the instances and effects of Cognitive Impairment could be avoided altogether by a quick check of display pilot's birth date and flying recency.
Two's in is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 17:28
  #555 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,779
Received 75 Likes on 34 Posts
Originally Posted by Two's in
Yes, I am proposing that age should be a discriminator in high performance flying. A lengthy study on the instances and effects of Cognitive Impairment could be avoided altogether by a quick check of display pilot's birth date and flying recency.
I hope you mean ‘high performance display flying’ (in which case I could be persuaded to agree) and not other areas of high performance flying where the consequences of momentary lapses are better mitigated. Andy Hill was 51 at the time of crash: capping high performance aviation at an age below that would have a huge impact on air forces’ training throughput requirements and, to compound that, availability of instructors. And unless MFTS sorts its act out it’d reduce RAF fast jet pilot careers to less than a decade!

Last edited by Easy Street; 29th Jun 2020 at 19:15.
Easy Street is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 18:44
  #556 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Leicester
Posts: 73
Received 7 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Two's in
A lengthy study on the instances and effects of Cognitive Impairment could be avoided altogether by a quick check of display pilot's birth date and flying recency.
Ah, I see - so you only crash after a certain age? This is great news for young pilots everywhere!
DaveJ75 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 19:06
  #557 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 256
Received 32 Likes on 7 Posts
i dont want to state the obvious or be accused of being a modern day witch finder general - but there is a simple solution.

If Andy is capable, willing and able why not strap him into a centrifuge and see what happens.......the trial is done and it could really help with the science and the benefit could be significant?

am i too optimistic ?

Last edited by dagenham; 29th Jun 2020 at 19:16.
dagenham is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 19:35
  #558 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 831
Received 98 Likes on 51 Posts
I can’t believe we are still going round and round this debate. Surely everybody who has ever strapped into an ejector seat ( which excludes all of the lawyers and most of the doctors) and has read the AAIB report knows exactly what happened. He was no where near current or experienced enough in the Hunter to be displaying it in a confined area. He was signed off for displays by a few old mates and on the day screwed it up. Just like most of us have screwed up at some time but, by the grace of God, without these consequences.
Timelord is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 19:57
  #559 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 2,164
Received 46 Likes on 22 Posts
Nailed it.
Just This Once... is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 20:16
  #560 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Oxford
Age: 85
Posts: 455
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Timelord,

How right you are - unfortunately!!

Bill
Bill Macgillivray is offline  

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.