StopStart - thanks for the info.

Re standards - I like to think of this as rational thinking rather than knee-jerking.

If the issue was one of 'showing off' then a red card is justified. But if the guy fronted up and said 'Yep, cocked up, scared me sh*tless, here's what happened, here's why it won't happen again' then why not let him continue?

The RAF are still learning about the jet, but they aren't gifted amateurs at flying. Learn - move on.

sw

If, IF the control override feature was a contribution to this save, then the engineers, Tarnished, and other tps should take this event as the recognition and validation of their judgment and fortitude; it is an example for all who work in design / flight test, and the bean counters who think that they make the decisions (but never appear at the BOI). Well done the design and test team.
--------------------
Airspeed and Upwardness

Navaleye, nothing to do with RIAT but the 25 fps claim.

A handy remembrance aid is that 360k is the same at 202 yards or 606 feet (approx per second).

60mph is 88 fps.

25 feet in any direction is going to be a pretty short period.

Safetypee

The one post I found informative (hardly surprising given his call sign) and measured was by Tarnished. There again, I read it properly. He pointed out that the override facility comes into play at g limited conditions. I suspect at these speeds the aircraft would be alpha limited.

Won't post any more to this thread. It's run its course and I, like many others, have nothing worthwhile to contribute. Would love to hear the story from the horse's mouth though.
Maybe in years to come we'll read "I learned about display flying from that"

Stoppers,

Were commercial pressures brought to bear to avoid a cancellation of the Typhoon display?

I don't know.

If there were such pressures, where did they come from?

I'd guess from RIAT itself (Typhoon is a draw) rather than from the manufacturer.

Just a thought. And here's another:

Even if the normal reaction would have been an automatic red card, shouldn't we be applauding an outbreak of common sense and flexibility, if we agree that the bloke had learned from his mistake and wasn't going to repeat it? Red carding someone simply because "that's what always happens" is no better for flight safety, surely?

J

I started this thread after coming home with a lump in my throat. There has been some useful comment on the forum, but now that it is ‘off and running’ and with quotes like that above perhaps it has run its course.

Although I have never done a display, I am interested as the next man as to what went wrong – we all want to learn. However, I am prepared to wait; I suggest others consider doing the same.

To whoever said "I don't know if it's possible to eject at that rate of descent", I refer you to the rather embarassing accident at Mountain Home AFB in September 2003. This involved an F-16 from the Thunderbirds doing a similar manoeuvre but not getting away with it and creating $21 million worth of wreckage. The pilot committed his egress micro-seconds before impact and got away with it. I know he wasn't using Martin Baker furniture removal equipment, but I imagine the EFA has a similarly performing seat. Good show to the chappy involved :) .

Ginge :cool:

For heaven's sake - stop any talk of QFE/QNH. Never in a million years will a display pilot NOT check that his altimeter reads ZERO at the end of the runway.

Now can we just drop the subject - the incident is finished. There is nothing to be gained by any more speculation.

I think maybe JR is right. It is time to end this particular thread simply because there is really no more to be said that hasn't already been said.

However, feel free to start another perhaps using the post by Tarnished and keep speculation from it.

All I can think to say is that the design team seem to have thought of everything - and I mean everything. Thanks also be to the tp's who must have had some hairy rides proving the theory.