The term 'grounded' is often used but frequently misunderstood. Hope this helps:
Grounded Aircraft | Aircraft | Operations and Safety

The BBC has posted a graphic of the flightpath:

http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cps..._crash_624.jpg

I've not seen anyone remark on this anywhere, but it strikes me that looping north of the runway wouldn't display the aircraft to its best advantage to the spectators' pen, and would also require overflying the A27 on the pullout. Would a properly-flown quarter clover in that position have looked good to the spectators? Has anyone seen the sequence card? Was a loop or quarter clover in this location actually intended?

I'm mystified.

Re the Vulcan, her CAA Permit to fly contains the following statement at
"6.1.1 Aerobatic manoeuvres, intentional spinning, and stalling, are prohibited."

That being the case why would her 'display' be affected in any way as, ( if she has been flown in compliance so far), there would be no problem continuing the same display in future as she isnt conducting 'Aerobatic Manoeuvres'.??

I am suprised to see that harrowing film taken seconds after the impact on the road has not been deleted from this site.The terrible tragedy at Shoreham is still unfolding, I for one cannot begin to imagine the sense of loss and shock to the bereaved families and those unfortunate to have seen this happen,let alone be injured. I just wonder where the media are going these days,being able to see such shocking film by accessing the Internet.Perhaps I am getting old but someone just walking about filming such scenes..............Just my thoughts.

That manoeuvre pulled at RIAT (much discussed on here) looked like what might be termed aerobatic. Certainly more than a fly by. So do you think that she has been flown strictly in compliance?



S-D

More bolleaux from the BBC. I wonder which expert drew that up. The a/c ran in along the crowdline before pulling and rolling......:ugh:

r75

I have always found it odd that people have filmed the aftermath of incidents instead of stopping and helping. I used to think that way when seeing footage taken by film crews or photographers, but eventually understood as it was their job. But nowadays everyone with a phone is doing it. It just doesn't feel right to see footage taken on a phone when most of us expect anyone that close to either be helping where they can or dialling 999 for help. They may simply have been too shocked to do anything else.

S-D

It would be interesting to see the vulcan trying a few aerobatics. I suppose that was a stock reply, but thought it could have been edited appropiately

This simply can't be correct, it doesn't tie up with the video(s) does it?

http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cps..._crash_624.jpg

Can somebody with knowledge of displaying at Shoreham please comment.

Anyone else starting to think (as i am) that this is looking less like an open and shut case of pilot mishandling and more like something out of Andy's control?

Whatever the cause a tragic accident that will have far reaching consequences. Condolences to all those affected.

What are you suggesting andrewn?

I wish the pilot all the best in his recovery, but as the one flying the aircraft......

S-D

It is simplistic to suggest that displays should be restricted to coastal sites. Even slightly restricted visibility in these locations can lead to disorientation and fatal accidents. I have certainly experienced some very nasty surprises in my many years of such fast-jet and piston displays around the coasts of two continents.

Let us also not forget the Red's mast strike, which could have been a huge lot worse!

r75.........agreed!

dear god......wtf were people filming and not helping? Yes, shock makes you do strange things, but trying to put my 28 years in the emergency services to one side, surely if you've the "presence of mind" to pull your phone out to film.......you're not that incapacitated that you can't do the decent thing and bloody well help!!!! :{

Condolences to all concerned.

MD

Is anyone else getting severe irritation from the media's constant reference to 'stunts' instead of aerobatics? Stunts are what Brendan O'Brien does when he tries to land his Piper Cub on a low loader trundling down the runway or tries to fly beneath a length of string between two poles across the runway!

Absolutely down right infuriating people!!:*

FB

with you 110%

Not particularly, no! This is the language and terminology that the public, their target audience btw, understand. And a good number of them were killed and injured by stunts, aerobatics call them what you will at the weekend.

Your petty annoyances following a tragedy are what grip my ****. Grow up fella.

S-D

FB, agree, annoys me too.

I think the Beeb graphic was either lifted from the other thread or created for them by the ppruner on that thread.

+1 such a trivial comment:mad:

"Mopardave" has summed up my thoughts too....100% agree, how could you just walk around and film like that.Perhaps I am old fashioned but surely after the initial shock you would be running around trying to help not film.Best stop there, not a judgement just first impressions.

FB - yes, but i know some very well meaning people who referred to the Gnat crash in a similar context, and were not meaning to be disrespectful. The difference between an aerial display or aeros and a "stunt" is not widely understood by joe public (never mind the news media).

SD - explicitly I'm saying that many people on here can probably make a relatively informed judgement call as to the primary cause of incidents such as this one based on evidence presented and background knowledge and often this indicates "pilot error". In this particular case i am thinking it may not be as straightforward. In due course we will hopefully find out.