Yes, I was there that day and saw it happen, my thoughts are exactly the same as yours. Shoreham was more than just a failure by a single individual, the rules and regs regarding "vintage" jet displays were far too lax for far too long. All the warning signs for a catastrophic event like Shoreham were there in plain sight, but the window of opportunity to prevent it was missed.

And, for the record, the Gnat came down in woodland frequented by walkers, horse riders and dog walkers. And right on the edge of the public road cutting through the woods. A few hundred meters from a pub and similar distance from the event car parks and campsite if I recall. It too could have been so much worse, but for the grace of God and all that.

Not read the tin kickers’ official report for a while but I seem to remember Shoreham was more an issue of the different parties assuming it was the responsibility of one or other of the other parties to check compliance with the regs rather than the regs themselves being lax. In other words, a lack of ownership.

The report certainly burned a lot of pages on those issues. For me the bigger picture is that the despite previous accidents and close calls, the regulator still enabled an environment in which inappropriately complex aerobatic displays in vintage jet aircraft could be flown to inappropriately low heights by pilots who were insufficiently skilled or current to be doing so.

Exactly ^^^^^^^

So a fractional difference in the Gnat's trajectory and the result could have been even more tragic than Shoreham?

If I remember correctly (and it is a few years since I read the report) the pilot of the Gnat had the bare minimum number of hours in the preceding 12 months to retain a PPL? Yet it was lawful for him to fly that type of swept wing jet at a large public display!

Compare that with when the RAF still provided a solo Hawk display each season. How many hours practice would a much younger and very current fast jet pilot have in preparation for a display season? Even then, wasn't one of them grounded mid season for repeatedly "pushing the flight boundaries". However, at least in that case the supervision picked up the problem and took some decisive action.

Well, it’s exactly NOT just that particular hole in this bit of Swiss cheese.

Anyway, Hill should be in prison for the primary part he played and others should have been held to account for the lesser roles they played.

Wasn't there a Hawk 100 flown by a current pilot that flew into the ground at a display abroad one year?

DTR2
 

I suspect you already know the details but try here anyway:

https://www.pprune.org/military-avia...200-crash.html

Post 10 especially should help to answer your questions. Rather than helping to prove your point, it rather proves the opposite. There is a difference between a current and qualified display pilot and a current pilot doing low level aerobatics.

If you re-read this thread you’ll find my thoughts on AH’s currency and qualifications to perform low level aerobatics in a Hunter. I don’t need to rehash them.

BV

Has anyone else watched the documentary on Discovery +?
It mentions at the end, that AH went to the High Court to appeal the Coroner's verdict, but was refused.

Sadly it also showed and confirmed that the video I saw years ago on youtube, of the scene on the A27 just after the impact, that the small silver car featured did indeed belong to the two Worthing United footballers. Not something I wished to re-watch.

Cowboy indeed. I was at North Weald before the pandemic and was talking to one of the vintage jet aircraft owners there. AH name was dirt. His attitude before the accident was the same afterwards as far as the man I was talking to was concerned, CAA should tell him to sod off.

"Haven't loaded rolls / barrel rolls claimed lots of aircraft low down"?

The maneuvers chosen for level 1 display all should have one constant, that being the element of predictability of outcome.
Barrel rolls contain control pressure inputs for pitch and roll coupled with a requirement for control in yaw. These variables are EXTREMELY difficult to control with any EXACT element of predictability of outcome to the degree required for level 1 display. ANY deviation in application of ANY of the 3 control inputs applied during the first 90 degrees of the roll will affect the size of the arc flown during the backside recovery. This places the display pilot in the position of having to control the aircraft through 3 dimensions requiring predictable recovery altitude where any one or combination of control pressure can and WILL change the exact recovery parameters as the maneuver is being performed.
VERY BAD JU JU !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It can be done, and indeed has been done, but the general "word" among professional display pilots is to pass on barrel rolls at low altitude and that would be my personal recommendation EXACTLY!
Dudley Henriques

When teaching students to do `barrel-rolls`,I used a simple `tool`to demonstrate the key positions to reach during the manoeuvre....the spiral bound `toilet-roll/kitchen /paper roll`insert,,,,each may have a different `degree of spiral`,and can therefore show all combinations of large or tight `loaded rolls.`
Then draw little aircraft `symbols` along the `spiral`,whether left,or right spiral,at each 90* point around the spiral.
It should be noted that the `barrel` has `width`,and the centre of the roll axis is displaced out from the`nearest` display`foul-line`,and that the aircraft will be commencing the roll at an `offset` angle of maybe 30-60 *..
Having drawn our roll,,you now look though the`tube and align the centre with the horizon,and note the positions/attitudes of the `symbols`at the 5 critical points,bottom,mid-climb,top,mid-descent,bottom ,at end.
The most `critical point is at the `top` of the arc`,nose above the horizon,wings level(late,and you maybe in trouble..).Now tilt the roll down,and see the difference it makes to the 2nd half of the roll; you will be lower,maybe faster,need to roll faster,and reduce the `pull to escape`....
So,my mantra was`Always above..seldom level..never below`(the horizon),,for the roll axis...and never multiple rolls,,unless you are pointing `up`...

Just to be clear; what you have described works perfectly well in the teaching of normal acro. In fact, my own pedagogy teaching barrel rolls isn't all that different.
Teaching barrel rolls in the classic sense and style is a world apart from the low altitude air show environment where show lines, min and max altitudes and most importantly energy state entering into and at egress are all pertinent factors present in the maneuver sequence requiring predetermined spacing and energy state as required for the next maneuver in the routine.
There is a TREMENDOUS difference between the air show aerobatic display environment and the environment used in the teaching of normal aerobatics.
One of the most difficult factors we find in transitioning aerobatic pilots into the airshow environment isn't found in the technical aspects involved with aerobatics per se' but rather in the required transition from the normal aerobatic environment into the highly specialized world of the display pilot.
It's a night and day comparison where what is normal as related to everyday acro can kill you in short order in the world of low altitude aerobatics.
These are just a few considerations in any and all ACE flight tests required here in the United States for any pilot wishing to obtain a card of competency as required to enter the air show industry as a display pilot.
Dudley Henriques

And frankly barrel rolls don't look good enough from the ground to warrant the temptation to expose yourself to the risk!

I just realized several of us may be discussing barrel rolls in opposing context.
When I speak on Barrel Rolls in the air show sense I'm talking specifically in the low altitude arena; in other words initiated and completed at low altitude.
We use Barrel Rolls in WW2 fighters all the time in display. These are recovered well above the low altitude area where the danger lies.
I'm sorry if my previous comment has been confusing.
I can possibly clear up any confusion by simply saying that ANY Barrel Roll initiated AND COMPLETED at low altitude (this would include any display pilot working a show on level one waivers) would be a VERY poor maneuver selection and extremely dangerous in the airshow display context.
Hope this is a bit more clear an explanation.
Dudley Henriques

BR ‘Gates’
 

I am not sure if I am duplicating previous comments: teaching and supervising low level displays by military jet pilots I wasn’t keen on Barrel Rolls primarily because there are so many variables in pitch and roll rates that there were never any clear gate heights and speeds that could be used to judge whether the manoeuvre was going as planned. Entry speed, Minimum height and Max speed over the top of a loop are easily remembered and observed. If required gates are not achieved the manoeuvre can be abandoned safely. Barrel Rolls have no such easily recognised heights and speeds thereby making it very difficult to recognise quickly and easily when things are going wrong. I have one further controversial observation shared with another very experienced and very senior retired officer;, I have flown displays and supervised numerous jet pilots both in the medium level teaching environment and display arena. At the top of the ‘crooked loop’ which I think he believed he was flying rather than a BR; AH made the precise gate height and speed in the Hunter that he would expect to see in a loop in his JP display - a display he was far more familiar with……….
.I believe he had reverted to the type he was most familiar with in a stressful moment. (Trying to position the aircraft using a slightly non standard manoeuvre ( for him) was stressful. )
I also agree with the many comments re insufficient currency on the Hunter and that there are inherent dangers in trying to achieve or maintain currency on two vastly different types.
The RAF requirements were 5 runs at 5000’ 5 at 1500, 5 at 1000 and then cleared ( by Station Commander observing) to practice at 500’. All within a set (recent) period details of which I have forgotten. Being an ex test pilot does not make you immune to lack of currency; skill fade; or temporary lapses in awareness.

Plus one...

(Going to Shoreham-by-Sea today for the first time since the sad event - can't believe nearly nine years have slipped by...)

Shoreham verdict
 

Let’s be honest here. Despite any evidence given in court and suggestions of temporary medical events there are those of us, mainly those that have flown aerobatics in fast jets, that are never going to accept the verdict. He and his friends can argue until they’re blue in the face but we will always believe what we believe.

AH doesn’t belong in prison but I for one would be happier if he, and anyone like him who thinks his display was a good idea, never again got the opportunity to display a vintage jet infront of a crowd.

As I have said before I grew up going to air shows and my love of jets as a kid gave rise to a 23 year RAF fast jet career. Since the Shoreham accident though I have never been tempted to take my family to an air show where vintage jet aircraft are displaying.

BV

Well.......since Shoreham, and then the grounding of '558, and the Sea Vixen's wheels up at Yeovilton, its not a worry to have, as there has pretty been no airshow in mainland UK where you could have since any vintage jet displaying anyway now....well not any swept wing vintage jet.

Geeram
 

Good point. To be honest though apart from a couple of exceptions, air shows are just not something I really consider for family entertainment any more. Which I think is a crying shame.

BV