Fairey Firefly at Duxford
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rallye Driver,
I wasn't present on Sat or Sun, but I'd agree that a minute silence would've been appropriate. On the same day that David Moore died at Woodford in '92, there was a minute silence before the show restarted, and the Red Arrows display was dedicated to David's memory. To this day, I still remember how moved I was by the total silence of the thousands in the crowd, and how much more appreciative I was of the Reds display given the risks they take when displaying for us.
On the other hand, the organisers at Duxford may be forgiven if they felt that it was not appropriate at the time.
Eyes.
I wasn't present on Sat or Sun, but I'd agree that a minute silence would've been appropriate. On the same day that David Moore died at Woodford in '92, there was a minute silence before the show restarted, and the Red Arrows display was dedicated to David's memory. To this day, I still remember how moved I was by the total silence of the thousands in the crowd, and how much more appreciative I was of the Reds display given the risks they take when displaying for us.
On the other hand, the organisers at Duxford may be forgiven if they felt that it was not appropriate at the time.
Eyes.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: England
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't believe some of the things I'm reading here...
For sure this was a tragedy for everyone concerned and obviously a disaster for the families of the two guys killed, - my heart goes out to them.
However, I can't believe that people think that the TV stations shouldn't be showing the accident until the families concerned have been informed.
Remember September 11? Around 3000 people were murdered that day - should it have been kept off the world's TV screens until all families had been informed?
I agree that selling the video tape for profit is a bad thing, but you can't blame the TV channels....
Before you ask, no I don't work for any of them.
For sure this was a tragedy for everyone concerned and obviously a disaster for the families of the two guys killed, - my heart goes out to them.
However, I can't believe that people think that the TV stations shouldn't be showing the accident until the families concerned have been informed.
Remember September 11? Around 3000 people were murdered that day - should it have been kept off the world's TV screens until all families had been informed?
I agree that selling the video tape for profit is a bad thing, but you can't blame the TV channels....
Before you ask, no I don't work for any of them.
This has become an impressive discussion thread and one I would hope the two men who died in the accident would approve of.
I’m sure anyone here would endorse Flying Lawyer’s comment about preferring to die of old age. The same applies to anything that would improve safety for for us or others in situations where risk is involved. Short, perhaps, of the total nanny state where we’re all confined to the sofa. Usually little things, the importance of which seems to increase as one advances in age. On a boat or an old aircraft it might be a doubler or an extra rivet – or one’s sensitivity to the importance of energy, as several have already mentioned. Or, for example, as in the case of the Shorts ditching at Edinburgh, a little thing like loosening the overhead escape hatch fastenings prior to hitting the water. There just can’t be enough of that and I am tempted to think that part of the measure of professionalism in anything is the sheer pleasure one takes in actually being able to remember all those little things.
Perhaps I have a problem defining respect for the deceased. But if you put a clamp on speculation now, while there are people around who actually saw what happened, aren’t you stifling the very essence of learning from accidents? I would hope that most of us, whatever we do, would not expect to be excused from judgement by our peers because we had died while doing something risky. If anything, most of us would probably expect a warmer than normal roasting; that in itself is part of the risk. Our actions might, or might not, be vindicated in the subsequent accident report. But most accident reports take months; should a community of peers just shut the issue out of its minds for the interim, as if the accident had never happened? I think that’s the absolute opposite of what should happen.
No matter what one does to minimise it, risk remains pretty much a constant. In boats, if I’m pitchpoled and look a fool, there will loads of laughs at my expense and a dozen different opinions as to how I could/should have avoided it. I will have deserved it and – if I’m not taking myself too seriously on the day – I’ll be laughing at myself just as heartily. If I happen to thump my head on the mast and drown in the process, the laughter will be muted but the opionions will still be around – probably even more vehemently.
If you pogo-stick a Stearman three quarters of the way down the runway on your third landing in type but still manage to get back to the apron intact, you’ll be the butt of all jokes for half an hour and will hear as many different opinions on landing techniques as there are people in the club bar. And If you flip it and bump your head? About the same proportion of mourning but the opinions and discussion are still there.
I really don’t think it’s disrespectful of the dead to speculate. On the contrary, it is trying to learn from their mishaps, but without the pleasure of having them around to share the experience. It’s certainly not a question of laying blame.
I’m sure anyone here would endorse Flying Lawyer’s comment about preferring to die of old age. The same applies to anything that would improve safety for for us or others in situations where risk is involved. Short, perhaps, of the total nanny state where we’re all confined to the sofa. Usually little things, the importance of which seems to increase as one advances in age. On a boat or an old aircraft it might be a doubler or an extra rivet – or one’s sensitivity to the importance of energy, as several have already mentioned. Or, for example, as in the case of the Shorts ditching at Edinburgh, a little thing like loosening the overhead escape hatch fastenings prior to hitting the water. There just can’t be enough of that and I am tempted to think that part of the measure of professionalism in anything is the sheer pleasure one takes in actually being able to remember all those little things.
Perhaps I have a problem defining respect for the deceased. But if you put a clamp on speculation now, while there are people around who actually saw what happened, aren’t you stifling the very essence of learning from accidents? I would hope that most of us, whatever we do, would not expect to be excused from judgement by our peers because we had died while doing something risky. If anything, most of us would probably expect a warmer than normal roasting; that in itself is part of the risk. Our actions might, or might not, be vindicated in the subsequent accident report. But most accident reports take months; should a community of peers just shut the issue out of its minds for the interim, as if the accident had never happened? I think that’s the absolute opposite of what should happen.
No matter what one does to minimise it, risk remains pretty much a constant. In boats, if I’m pitchpoled and look a fool, there will loads of laughs at my expense and a dozen different opinions as to how I could/should have avoided it. I will have deserved it and – if I’m not taking myself too seriously on the day – I’ll be laughing at myself just as heartily. If I happen to thump my head on the mast and drown in the process, the laughter will be muted but the opionions will still be around – probably even more vehemently.
If you pogo-stick a Stearman three quarters of the way down the runway on your third landing in type but still manage to get back to the apron intact, you’ll be the butt of all jokes for half an hour and will hear as many different opinions on landing techniques as there are people in the club bar. And If you flip it and bump your head? About the same proportion of mourning but the opinions and discussion are still there.
I really don’t think it’s disrespectful of the dead to speculate. On the contrary, it is trying to learn from their mishaps, but without the pleasure of having them around to share the experience. It’s certainly not a question of laying blame.
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really don’t think it’s disrespectful of the dead to speculate. On the contrary, it is trying to learn from their mishaps, but without the pleasure of having them around to share the experience. It’s certainly not a question of laying blame.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The posts by broadreach and Flying Lawyer are two of the best so far even though they have different opinions on the 'public forum' aspect.
If this was a discussion between warbird pilots in a Duxford crew-room, I'd see no problem with it for all the very good reasons Broadreach gave. However, if the same discussion took place in the Duxford public canteen with every Tom, Dick and Harry joining in, I'd take a very different view.
I don't think a public forum is a good place to discuss it, but my real objection is to people who don't come even close to the category John Farley described as "informed practitioners of low level displays" giving their uninformed opinions. Free speech and all that, but I think it would be more respectful of the dead if they just read and learned.
If this was a discussion between warbird pilots in a Duxford crew-room, I'd see no problem with it for all the very good reasons Broadreach gave. However, if the same discussion took place in the Duxford public canteen with every Tom, Dick and Harry joining in, I'd take a very different view.
I don't think a public forum is a good place to discuss it, but my real objection is to people who don't come even close to the category John Farley described as "informed practitioners of low level displays" giving their uninformed opinions. Free speech and all that, but I think it would be more respectful of the dead if they just read and learned.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: THE PEANUT BAR
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moggie says "leave the low level aeros to the Zlins and Pitses" correct me if I am wrong but arent some of those a/c forty years old and I think also they to occasionally crash!!!
I witnessed the accident and also flew over the field this a.m. both events very emotive. Condolences to all involved.
I witnessed the accident and also flew over the field this a.m. both events very emotive. Condolences to all involved.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alty Meter - take your points but if you display in public and crash in public every tom dick and harry is bound to discuss it - that is not being disrespectful it is merely their reaction to what they saw. You do not need to be an informed display pilot to comment on what you saw. I do, however, agree that opinions on the actions of those involved are quite likely to be considered offensive.
I am an ex-display pilot with relevant type experience and I have been informed by this thread - not just from those you consider entitled to an opinion but also from the general public who saw what happened and gave their opinions. It is not only display pilots who recognise speed or lack of it, nose attitude or roll direction and it is not only display pilots who witness accidents and provide evidence to the board. Let us not stifle the airing of information but do all we can to protect the interests of those who perished.
I am an ex-display pilot with relevant type experience and I have been informed by this thread - not just from those you consider entitled to an opinion but also from the general public who saw what happened and gave their opinions. It is not only display pilots who recognise speed or lack of it, nose attitude or roll direction and it is not only display pilots who witness accidents and provide evidence to the board. Let us not stifle the airing of information but do all we can to protect the interests of those who perished.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: South Oxon
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would just like to add my sincere condolences to the families of Bill Murton & Neil Rix.
Having seen the Firefly routine twice this year, i thought it was nice & gentle , one maybe other pilots may like to adopt when flying WW2 aircraft as these are not modern combat types some may fly day to day & fear that there will be more crashes i (god forbid) in the near future if the routines performed by some are not tamed abit.
I saw the whole thing happen from the road near the village on the hill, was busy filming the Firefly coming towards me when i suddenely realised as soon as the Firefly went inverted & saw the nose coming down & pointing more or less in the area where i was standing, I ran like hell.
I remember glancing up quickly whilst running to see if i was going to die or may have a chance of surviving, for it to pass very low & slightly to one side of me & crash approx 200ft / 250ft behind me into the cornfield!
Very very scary, definetly a close call & it took me a day to realise just how lucky i was.
My statement / Video film is now with the AAIB.
Having seen the Firefly routine twice this year, i thought it was nice & gentle , one maybe other pilots may like to adopt when flying WW2 aircraft as these are not modern combat types some may fly day to day & fear that there will be more crashes i (god forbid) in the near future if the routines performed by some are not tamed abit.
I saw the whole thing happen from the road near the village on the hill, was busy filming the Firefly coming towards me when i suddenely realised as soon as the Firefly went inverted & saw the nose coming down & pointing more or less in the area where i was standing, I ran like hell.
I remember glancing up quickly whilst running to see if i was going to die or may have a chance of surviving, for it to pass very low & slightly to one side of me & crash approx 200ft / 250ft behind me into the cornfield!
Very very scary, definetly a close call & it took me a day to realise just how lucky i was.
My statement / Video film is now with the AAIB.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly, a lot of folk attend air shows simply for the potential horrors and the pilots displaying know full well that if they crash or perish, the footage will be beamed around the globe rapidly. I bet all of the pilots in the displays last weekend would not have pulled out of flying their fantastic planes for fear of sensationalist journalism and folk attending selling footage to the TV?
You cannot censor news, but those sending out the stories to our TV's and PC's are to blame, not Mrs Buster selling footage of an incident, for if there was not a market for such footage........
Aerobatic like displays of vintage aircraft with elements of G-Force from a personal opinion, should be banned.
WW2 aircraft were designed with a shelf life of 60-90 days. I hope they last another 60-90 years at least. All folk want is to see them flown safely for many years to come and I am not saying that the Firefly was in any way unsafely flown on Saturday.
I am sickened at yet another major accident that Yeovilton has to endure.
Yet another irreplaceable airframe and certainly another two irreplaceable lives. Luckily (?) the stalwarts that truly adore the aircraft are very saddened and VERY shocked.
The fact is that whilst folk preserve and fly old airframes, there is a chance that Joe Public will witness a catastrophic event, Uncle Buster saw the wings fold back on the 'Spirit' at Coventry earlier this year, and has he stated, the show continued on 30 min later, just as it did at Duxford.
20 years ago the show's would have been cancelled following such an incident in respect, but that was 20 years ago!
After all, money rules now, Auntie Gertrude would want her money back if the organisers cancelled the show prior to its conclusion on the basis of an aviation tragedy?
You cannot censor news, but those sending out the stories to our TV's and PC's are to blame, not Mrs Buster selling footage of an incident, for if there was not a market for such footage........
Aerobatic like displays of vintage aircraft with elements of G-Force from a personal opinion, should be banned.
WW2 aircraft were designed with a shelf life of 60-90 days. I hope they last another 60-90 years at least. All folk want is to see them flown safely for many years to come and I am not saying that the Firefly was in any way unsafely flown on Saturday.
I am sickened at yet another major accident that Yeovilton has to endure.
Yet another irreplaceable airframe and certainly another two irreplaceable lives. Luckily (?) the stalwarts that truly adore the aircraft are very saddened and VERY shocked.
The fact is that whilst folk preserve and fly old airframes, there is a chance that Joe Public will witness a catastrophic event, Uncle Buster saw the wings fold back on the 'Spirit' at Coventry earlier this year, and has he stated, the show continued on 30 min later, just as it did at Duxford.
20 years ago the show's would have been cancelled following such an incident in respect, but that was 20 years ago!
After all, money rules now, Auntie Gertrude would want her money back if the organisers cancelled the show prior to its conclusion on the basis of an aviation tragedy?
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Wet Coast
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly, a lot of folk attend air shows simply for the potential horrors
Firstly my sincere condolences to the families of Bill Murton and Neil Rix.
I was there on Saturday and the Firefly display was, upto the accident, very sedate, yet people still keep talking as if the display was full of 'extreme g-pulling' maneuvers. The only extreme maneuver was when they tried to recover from the situation, which was the only bit of flying by the Firefly, that appeared to be screened by the media.
In fact the display appeared to be exactly as many would seem to wish to see for a/c of that vintage, nice gentle flypast down the display line, etc.
As for 'a lot of folk' going to airshows to 'see the potential horrors' what complete and utter nonsense. I've lost count of the airshows/displays I've attended over the past 20+ years and this was the first time I've had the unfortunate experience of witnessing an accident/incident of any kind. If someone is that unhinged, they could have a damn long time to wait and end up spending a fortune to see, what is, a very RARE event!
I was there on Saturday and the Firefly display was, upto the accident, very sedate, yet people still keep talking as if the display was full of 'extreme g-pulling' maneuvers. The only extreme maneuver was when they tried to recover from the situation, which was the only bit of flying by the Firefly, that appeared to be screened by the media.
In fact the display appeared to be exactly as many would seem to wish to see for a/c of that vintage, nice gentle flypast down the display line, etc.
As for 'a lot of folk' going to airshows to 'see the potential horrors' what complete and utter nonsense. I've lost count of the airshows/displays I've attended over the past 20+ years and this was the first time I've had the unfortunate experience of witnessing an accident/incident of any kind. If someone is that unhinged, they could have a damn long time to wait and end up spending a fortune to see, what is, a very RARE event!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having read the various posts on here, and especially the contribution from Flying Lawyer, I have retracted the comments I made. On reflection, they were insensitive to the family and friends of the deceased, and really those of us who so inexperienced in such matters, should refrain from passing judgement.
Apologies to all concerned.
Apologies to all concerned.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Edge of the fens
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've wrestled with this one for a while. When the Firefly went in, I was doing solo touch and goes in the Cambridge circuit, with a beautiful - if distant - view of warbirds cavorting around in their natural element.
Still haven't quite come to terms with the fact that they died a few short miles from where I was happily doing my thing. Two far more experienced aviators than I will ever be. It's not right.
But every time I saw the footage - and god knows it was shown incessantly that night - I thought it was an avoidable accident. The extent of the coverage was disgusting, the timing of the footage ill-judged, but I still got the same feeling every time it was shown. Too low, too slow, too indicisive.
A crying shame, and for anyone who feels my words are harsh, believe me, I HAVE shed tears over this.
The only thing I wanted to add to the discussion was a comment to Neil Porter.
Quote.
"I saw the whole thing happen from the road near the village on the hill, was busy filming the Firefly coming towards me when i suddenely realised as soon as the Firefly went inverted & saw the nose coming down & pointing more or less in the area where i was standing, I ran like hell.
I remember glancing up quickly whilst running to see if i was going to die or may have a chance of surviving, for it to pass very low & slightly to one side of me & crash approx 200ft / 250ft behind me into the cornfield!
Very very scary, definetly a close call & it took me a day to realise just how lucky i was."
If you'd have been taken out by the Firefly, you would have been the first public airshow casualty in the UK since 1952. Purely through your own bloody stupid actions in standing under the display area. Thereby resulting in media calls for airshows to be banned, and the very aircraft you purport to adore being grounded. Think about it, muppet.
Still haven't quite come to terms with the fact that they died a few short miles from where I was happily doing my thing. Two far more experienced aviators than I will ever be. It's not right.
But every time I saw the footage - and god knows it was shown incessantly that night - I thought it was an avoidable accident. The extent of the coverage was disgusting, the timing of the footage ill-judged, but I still got the same feeling every time it was shown. Too low, too slow, too indicisive.
A crying shame, and for anyone who feels my words are harsh, believe me, I HAVE shed tears over this.
The only thing I wanted to add to the discussion was a comment to Neil Porter.
Quote.
"I saw the whole thing happen from the road near the village on the hill, was busy filming the Firefly coming towards me when i suddenely realised as soon as the Firefly went inverted & saw the nose coming down & pointing more or less in the area where i was standing, I ran like hell.
I remember glancing up quickly whilst running to see if i was going to die or may have a chance of surviving, for it to pass very low & slightly to one side of me & crash approx 200ft / 250ft behind me into the cornfield!
Very very scary, definetly a close call & it took me a day to realise just how lucky i was."
If you'd have been taken out by the Firefly, you would have been the first public airshow casualty in the UK since 1952. Purely through your own bloody stupid actions in standing under the display area. Thereby resulting in media calls for airshows to be banned, and the very aircraft you purport to adore being grounded. Think about it, muppet.
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BeauMan
Let's be fair .... how can any display organiser, first of all ban anyone from being under the display area ??
Secondly, do they actually publish this 'display area' to everyone who may be affected or anyone who might be in the vicinity so that they know to not carry out bloody stupid actions, by driving along the M11 for example ??
If you'd have been taken out by the Firefly, you would have been the first public airshow casualty in the UK since 1952. Purely through your own bloody stupid actions in standing under the display area.
Secondly, do they actually publish this 'display area' to everyone who may be affected or anyone who might be in the vicinity so that they know to not carry out bloody stupid actions, by driving along the M11 for example ??
The Firefly was a military aircraft flown by a military crew. I would have thought that the accident would be the subject of a Board of Inquiry rather than an AAIB investigation?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Gone.........for good this time.
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pprune Moderator,
It's impossible to sterilise the area under a Flying Display off-airfield. CAA Permissions given to displaying pilots state that the aircraft "shall not fly over buildings or vessels which the commander belieives to contain persons", or words to that effect. So at Little Migginton village fete, the displaying aircraft shouldn't be flying over the local WI hall..
On an airfield, things are different.. The Live side of the Flying Display can be cleared of all unnecessary persons. Take Duxford as an example. ALL visiting aircraft are parked under the display, but all the occupants MUST retire to behind the crowd barrier during the display. If there is an accident, then the live side is designed to contain the impact to an area that is as far as possible, free of people, and will not involve the publis who have paid to watch.
Those cheapskate freeloaders who gather on the southern boundary at Duxford, are normally warned by the Police that they are in a risky position, and the landowner has a duty of care to those people in the event that one of them gets an aeroplane parked on his/her head, especially if he charges them. But they have a right to be there and cannot be moved.
DOC400,
The results of Military Boards of Inquiry are not released to us civilian types..
Let's be fair .... how can any display organiser, first of all ban anyone from being under the display area ??
On an airfield, things are different.. The Live side of the Flying Display can be cleared of all unnecessary persons. Take Duxford as an example. ALL visiting aircraft are parked under the display, but all the occupants MUST retire to behind the crowd barrier during the display. If there is an accident, then the live side is designed to contain the impact to an area that is as far as possible, free of people, and will not involve the publis who have paid to watch.
Those cheapskate freeloaders who gather on the southern boundary at Duxford, are normally warned by the Police that they are in a risky position, and the landowner has a duty of care to those people in the event that one of them gets an aeroplane parked on his/her head, especially if he charges them. But they have a right to be there and cannot be moved.
DOC400,
The results of Military Boards of Inquiry are not released to us civilian types..
BeauMan
But every time I saw the footage - and god knows it was shown incessantly that night - I thought it was an avoidable accident. The extent of the coverage was disgusting, the timing of the footage ill-judged, but I still got the same feeling every time it was shown. Too low, too slow, too indicisive.
It's all too easy to jump to this type of conclusion. It's a bit too bloody insensitive in my book.