Oh dear, so, so tragic.

My heart goes out to the bereaved partners and families of all caught up in this hideous maelstrom (RIP).

If this was XV 372, it was the first Hunter I ever flew - with Jim Rutter at Honington on 23 May 1983. Is this the 'start of the end' of fast jet participation on the 'regional airshow' circuit? :(:(

Hawker Hunter Loss at Shoreham Airshow
 

Isn't it also the anniversary of a very tragic event that took place at Manchester airport today ?

OK Courtney, I was aware of that but I don't know when the VV would move from below horizon to above so I wondered if it gave the pilot a cue that he was going to make it.

I hate to think what the outcome of this might be, but the UK does so dearly love to ban anything perceived as remotely dangerous.

Maybe a "g limit" on vintage aircraft could satisfy all and make things safer at the same time. Too much ?

Feathers

If you have waited for your VV to be above the horizon it is probably too late to leave the aircraft if it isn't!

LJ :ok:

That photo also seems to confirm (if my eyes aren't deceiving me) the reports of the flaps being deployed at the commencement of the pull up and all through the sequence.....as shown in the photo linked by Glad Rag earlier and others taken in the sequence...........

:\

Awful. And as others have already identified, very similar to GW in 99. A common factor is the difficulty of having a meaningful 'gate' in a rolling manoeuvre - a gate height is only valid if the subsequent roll and pitch rates match those for which the gate was established - roll (out) too slowly or pitch (down) too fast and disaster beckons, irrespective of any preceding gate. So in other words, a gate is no guarantee of safety in a barrel roll or similar manoeuvre - and can even create a false sense of security.

The shame is no-one needs to see extreme manoeuvres from classic aircraft - they can't compete with modern, agile ac - their appeal lies in their classic lines and their sound - IMHO a flat display with lots of plan form passes would keep the crowds perfectly happy.

Thoughts with all involved.

I agree entirely with Captain Kirk, seeing vintage aircraft is in my opinion enjoyable. But flinging them around the sky is unnecessary. A few turn to show off the lines, some good passes to be seen and heard at close quarters should be sufficient. While I agree with the condolences regarding the loss of another pilot (and most of us have been in danger of that at some time in our careers) I also mourn the loss of rare aircraft that need not have gone down.
Air shows? By all means! But aerobatics for vintage aircraft should cease I think.

Fair point, but a quarter-cloverleaf is a fairly standard way of getting your aircraft facing back towards the display line.

Old/Vintage Aircraft?
 

I have hesitated until now about responding having read some posts on here suggesting ( concluding?) this accident is attributable to the age of the aircraft. Seeing yet another recent post referring to "vintage aircraft", I must now question whether some of these folk ( or readers and poorly informed journos ) have an appreciation of the reality that, irrespective of an aircraft's age, there is a height above a display venue below which should an aircraft be placed in a vertical descent there is insufficient height left to effect a recovery. Do those holding these views about vintage aircraft believe that today's most modern aircraft could not be lost in the manner of today's tragic occurrence? Like other posters on here I too recall the F4 accident at Abingdon when a near neighbour of mine along with a mate who was on my Officer Cadet Entry lost their lives.

Before I am now jumped on about having determined the cause of this accident, I am properly mindful of other possiblities leading to an inability to recover from the vertical even if reached above the the minimum height to enable recovery.

I suspect this incident will lead to new legislation governing air-shows.

Firstly, if the public pay to go to an airshow (or motorsports event), they usually have to sign some sort of acknowledgement that spectating in the show is dangerous. In this instance, people who may have had no idea whatsoever that there was a nearby airshow have been killed.

Second, how on earth was authorisation given to a display that could risk (for whatever reason) a national road, used by public who were not attending the airshow? Outrageous really.

Captain Kirk and Royallist Flyer

I agree. On the BBMF they deliberately don't max perform the aircraft to give a margin for error and seek to 'display' the aircraft rather than provide astonishment. They leave that to the newer aircraft...

LJ

I think a lot of us here have been to air shows since we were children, and taken part in them when we were adults. Maybe I'm getting old and cautious, but I don't ever remember being particularly thrilled by aerobatics at air shows - I wanted to see the aircraft and I wanted to see them fly - old and new. But I think we shouldn't be be attempting to appeal to the lowest IQ crowd. I'm not singling out vintage aircraft. I think there have been enough accidents with non-vintage aircraft over the years when people got a little clever/misjudged and as a result lots of people got killed and injured. I just think that there should be a re-think in order to save the flying displays from being banned.

I've just watched the video again and the pull-out does appear to be a single-plane pitch (no rolling) so a gate height at the top would have been valid, providing that speed was under control. It is not, however, a quarter clover, as the pull to inverted happens before reaching the vertical, with a rolling pull that will reduce height achieved at the top.

Incidentally, this is not speculation - we have a video - it is observation. I could, of course, be mistaken. I will not, however, speculate on why the manoeuvre was chosen or flown in this manner.

LJ/Royalist - spot on.

ATC - blimey, that just looked like someone who had little idea of what they were doing...!

When I was taught Aerobatics, always dinned into me was adequate height, it is very easy to lose height in a manevor.
I know at an airshow you want to be close to the crowd, but it can still look impessive 500 feet higher

BBC are saying that the pilot is still alive.

Cows getting bigger,

There is a pic doing the rounds with what looks like a bang seat in the air, albeit on fire, with what appears to be a person in it. The angle it is at is consistent with the angle of the jet at the time and the canopy on the aircraft is up.

I'm saddened but not surprised at the Police Superintendent warning of further fatalities. Having been in the emergency services for some eighteen years, I would take that as a very high probability. They generally only hint like that when they know themselves, but it's too early to formally confirm. A terrible day.

Incredible he's still alive. Having been at Abingdon when the F4 went in, I agree the attitude of the aircraft just prior to impact is so similar

@Paracab
Witness reports seem to indicate pilot was pulled from burning wreckage, so that would suggest no ejection. This assumes they don't consider a parachute as "burning wreckage". If the aircraft had something to break it's fall and slow it's forward velocity that could help survivability. The cockpit etc would help protect against the fireball assuming the plane didn't clear it. Either way it's incredible to make it to hospital from an impact and fireball like that!