Fascinating.

Because this is a "public forum" that somehow gives strangers license to engage in wild speculation, make wild accusations, jump to wild conclusions, and otherwise publicly act like total jerks on behalf of those who lost loved one in a terrible tragedy.

How sad.

KenV, are you describing Prune or the media in general?

Which wild accusations have particularly caught your attention Ken?

CG

USN has an old saying: One "Oh $hit" cancels out a thousand "Attaboys". Which is I believe as it should be.

Yes. (In other words, both. Although the media in general seems to act less like jerks than some on PPRUNE )

No it wasn't.

I would suggest that the reason the Red Arrows don't do aerobatic displays at Shoreham is because of the high ground at 700 Ft directly to the north of the airfield, less than 2 miles away, to fly aerobatics over Shoreham would mean having an 1000 Ft ceiling, and with Gatwick not far away, and the TMA base at FL55, that's effectively limiting them to a horizontal display, which at 1000 Ft is going to look very mundane indeed.

Shoreham has some very specific and difficult issues with terrain, I trained there 20 years ago, and the approach to runway 20 can be very tricky in some winds, due to that high ground and the Arun valley that is just to the north of the airfield. The descent from the loop on Saturday would have been in the area that can be most tricky, with Easterly winds, both downdraught and a tail wind could have been part of the scenario on Saturday, which would not have helped.

I wouldn't hold my breath.

True, Concorde was grounded a few days later, rather like this event. Personally I think it is a sensible decision until mechanical failure is discounted by AAIB/CAA.
Curious to know whether the Gnat has been grounded?

My heart still goes out to the victims of this tragedy, but I am quite annoyed over the knee-jerk reaction from the CAA.

As much as I and thousands of others will protest, air shows will never be the same again. I'm just pleased that I was able to attend shows "when they were good".

I would speculate that there has been absolutely no knee-jerking from the CAA; they are the DfT's whipping boy.

Indeed JSF and Cows. I suspect someone's been told to do something quick before more simple minded MPs jump on the ban the airshows bandwagon.
CAA becomes more like the alternative meaning of the TLA.....

Good job it was not them on the train to Paris.........

Grounding the Hunter is knee jerk, but it's easy to do, with limited consequences as there are so few of them flying.

Quite why the Gnat hasn't, by the same logic, been grounded as well tends to reinforce that the grounding is more to do with public feeling given the tragic consequences of the Hunter crash whereas in the Gnat accident 'only' the pilot died.

Air France grounds Concorde until cause of crash is known - Europe - World - The Independent

Apology accepted

The aircraft and why it crashed is not the problem. It's where the aircraft crashed which should be causing consternation.

I have no intention of apologising Old Fat One, I have nothing to apologise for. I didn't dispute that Concorde was grounded eventually, I disputed your assertion that it was grounded IMMEDIATELY, it wasn't. BA kept on flying their Concordes for a couple of weeks. It was only grounded after relevant facts came to light early in the investigation.

Amusingly, the report you linked to makes it perfectly clear that BA kept flying them after the crash, so they can't have been grounded.

So despite what you say, the grounding of an entire aircraft type the day after the crash is a highly unusual step.

A terrible tragedy and simply unacceptable that this has happened on a busy public highway. There are a great many people involved with the organisation of this airshow and the flying displays who will need to answer some tough questions. I saw the Gnat crash a few weeks ago and that made me shudder with thoughts of what could have happened, and then this happens.

I may be wrong, but I don't recall quite so many (if any) vintage jets being displayed like this a few years ago. There are many who have said on this on this thread, and the one following the Gnat crash, that these pilots do it to entertain. I don't really buy that. Being much more cynical about this, I feel that it's more about the personal enjoyment for the flyers. Doing it at displays just helps fund it.

Finally, some of you morons who were calling for the pilot not to be named on the early pages of this thread, whilst it was clear that many others had died, should hang your heads in shame.

This was an appalling accident, and clearly very much avoidable.

S-D

I for one think "over the sea aerobatics" is the only way too go from now on after such a tragic event, anyone who thinks otherwise should try and put themselves in the innocent victims family's shoes, in any case after the forthcoming multi million pound compensation pay outs future insurance premiums will settle the argument £100 per ticket anyone? RIP all affected. Sean.

I may be guilty of a degree of wishful thinking here, but I understand the rule simply prohibits inverted manoeuvres, so no rolling or looping. I would like to hope that tight/climbing turns and steep climbs would still be ok in which case the Vulcan should be ok. I recall back in the good old days that the RAF put together formation drill teams of Hunters, Lightnings, Phantoms etc all formation turns, changes and climbing turns then a spectacular formation break or run down the crowd line before disappearing up to the edge of the troposphere.

Leuchars squadrons used to work up such display teams each year for the home show, long after they fizzled out elsewhere.

FB