Damages for dead Yak pilot's family
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used to send my Cesspit drivers for a spin with Tony and i have to report his fastidiousness in frisking for loose objects - so i reckon he knew the risks associated with an open floor design.
He was quite the most superlative aerobatic pilot and a completely "Inclusive" person. I detected none of the arrogance you get with some.
Ironically Yak owners at the time were forced to bring their machines onto the UK reg when,really, they were happy to stay with Lithuanians or Checkos or whatever. I always thought it a bit arrogant of our authority to force this change as these Easterners did invent the aircraft and may have even learnt a bit about them over the last 30 years?
I feel sorry for the engineer who would seem to have made a mistake.
I feel a bit more perplexed and slightly cross about the **** trying to make assertions about a pair of brothers who had taken their flying to levels of excellence and experience few of us could really relate to.
I abhor this sanctimonious attitude of "If i ridicule others i must be agrandising myself" - do they know how they sound??? Couldn't those brain cells expended writing posts of that tone be best sacrificed elsewhere? I submit.
Spernkey Bowlock
He was quite the most superlative aerobatic pilot and a completely "Inclusive" person. I detected none of the arrogance you get with some.
Ironically Yak owners at the time were forced to bring their machines onto the UK reg when,really, they were happy to stay with Lithuanians or Checkos or whatever. I always thought it a bit arrogant of our authority to force this change as these Easterners did invent the aircraft and may have even learnt a bit about them over the last 30 years?
I feel sorry for the engineer who would seem to have made a mistake.
I feel a bit more perplexed and slightly cross about the **** trying to make assertions about a pair of brothers who had taken their flying to levels of excellence and experience few of us could really relate to.
I abhor this sanctimonious attitude of "If i ridicule others i must be agrandising myself" - do they know how they sound??? Couldn't those brain cells expended writing posts of that tone be best sacrificed elsewhere? I submit.
Spernkey Bowlock
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know the people at Little Gransden well (learned to fly there)and i would be surprised if it was THEIR screwdriver in the cables! The finding of a foreign object doesn't prove a thing! Maybe the chap had some bad freinds? Maybe some Hoodies didnt like his choice of clothes ? Maybe he was tinkering himself and forgot the thing was there? Also is his brother not as important to be accorded the same media coverage due to his NOT being a Falklands vet? One last point, when i was taught aero's we went up to 4000' so if anything whent wrong you had time to sort it or get out, so slicing a wing through some power cables would have been a bit unlikely. Sorry if i dont sound sympathetic to the bereaved, i do. But taking money from someone without conclusive evidence is just a sign of this litigious country we live in and it really ks nt rds off!
Now i feel a bit better.
The report said "the damages for the dead pilots family"
So how much is the dead brothers family going to try for?
Now i feel a bit better.
The report said "the damages for the dead pilots family"
So how much is the dead brothers family going to try for?
It was THEIR screwdriver.
Sure it could have had the pilot's DNA on it. I quite frequently (with previously agreed permission) borrow my engineer's screwdriver to open my cowls. However, if I did not replace it in its bespoke receptacle, he'd know immediately that it was AWOL and might alert me to the fact. He operates out of the same hangar and has a tool replacement regime to minimise just that sort of thing.
Piston/kidney gone had not at the time of his first posting actually read the AAIB report that came out QUITE some time ago.
P/K gone then threw up some totally spurious scenarios that really had no relevance. (Bad friends/hoodies)
Sorry that Tony is DEAD, yeah I was upset at the time. Sorry that his brother met his demise in the same accident, sure BUT although I met their parents once, I never met the brother.
Falklands vet - well some of us have put our lives on the line for HM/mankind and some of us never will. (Although not a betting chap, I know where I'd wager that you have never stood, PG!)
Aeros above 4000' - well P/K gone is truly a sky-God or has over-indulged in the risk assessment avoidance bit.
Flying for most of us is fun, it carries a risk - that's what makes it fun! To die by one's own hand is acceptable - you tend to die of aviation through EXUBERANCE or catastrophic mechanical failure. The latter if preventable is surely negligence.
Tony's wife and daughters deserved better than his untimely demise and a curmudgeonly £1/4 mill is pretty poor recompense.
As for me being a knob, well i will just put that down to your being agreeved, or maybe just being vocabularily challenged
PM me - I'll give you my real name and we can discuss it face to face if that would make you feel better. However, as you seem to know everything it probably won't help. Shame.
Stik
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Stik, you are way out of order here and Robert always said you were a reasonable guy. I have read the report and to be frank it smacks as much of crew negligence as that of the maintanance organisation. A trainee had a screwdriver removed without his permission and it not being noticed until the accident and the trainee voluntarily coming forward to suggest it may be his.
What was the pilot doing borrowing without permission? DNA traces prove he handled the screwdriver. I see nothing to blame the maintanance organisation any more than the pilot.
It is a shame that they both died but death is inevitable. Lets not get into a totallyt irrelevant discussion on war veterans. I am a war veteran and have some little medals for it. Will that have made me a better person when I am dead? I doubt it.
So lets all calm down a little eh?
What was the pilot doing borrowing without permission? DNA traces prove he handled the screwdriver. I see nothing to blame the maintanance organisation any more than the pilot.
It is a shame that they both died but death is inevitable. Lets not get into a totallyt irrelevant discussion on war veterans. I am a war veteran and have some little medals for it. Will that have made me a better person when I am dead? I doubt it.
So lets all calm down a little eh?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: エリア88
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With due respect Bose-x, negligence of the crew would indicate an act which falls below the standards set by CAA regulation.
The following two safety recommendations are made as a result of this investigation:
Safety Recommendation 2003-71
The CAA should require the Yak-52, and aircraft of a similar design operating on the UK register, to have fitted a method of preventing loose articles migrating to a position where they could interfere with the operation or jam the flight controls.
(The maintenance organisation has already implemented the installation of a ceconite bulkhead, with a clear view panel, in the rear of all relevant aircraft. This bulkhead is being installed, on an opportunity basis, when aircraft are subject to routine maintenance by the organisation.)
Safety Recommendation 2003-72
The CAA should publicise the circumstances of this accident in order to bring to the attention of Licenced Engineers (LAE) and maintenance organisations the need for them to have in place an effective tool system that reduces the likelihood of tools being left in aircraft after maintenance.
The following two safety recommendations are made as a result of this investigation:
Safety Recommendation 2003-71
The CAA should require the Yak-52, and aircraft of a similar design operating on the UK register, to have fitted a method of preventing loose articles migrating to a position where they could interfere with the operation or jam the flight controls.
(The maintenance organisation has already implemented the installation of a ceconite bulkhead, with a clear view panel, in the rear of all relevant aircraft. This bulkhead is being installed, on an opportunity basis, when aircraft are subject to routine maintenance by the organisation.)
Safety Recommendation 2003-72
The CAA should publicise the circumstances of this accident in order to bring to the attention of Licenced Engineers (LAE) and maintenance organisations the need for them to have in place an effective tool system that reduces the likelihood of tools being left in aircraft after maintenance.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MP, no need to point anything out to me, I read the report and the RECOMENDATIONS. Neither of which indicate blame.
At the end of the day someone missed the screwdriver. So who is to blame the crew who borrowed it without permission or the trainee without tool control? You could perhaps describe this as "falling below the standards set by CAA regulation"?
I would say there is an element of shared blame and being an ace pilot does not prevent a mistake having been made.
I have no axe to grind, just taking a disspassionate view about the situation.
At the end of the day someone missed the screwdriver. So who is to blame the crew who borrowed it without permission or the trainee without tool control? You could perhaps describe this as "falling below the standards set by CAA regulation"?
I would say there is an element of shared blame and being an ace pilot does not prevent a mistake having been made.
I have no axe to grind, just taking a disspassionate view about the situation.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: england
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is not necessarily any conflict between the AAIB report and the court's judgement.
The family might have been suing the engineering firm for £2.7 million and on the basis of the facts the judge might have decided that the pilot was 90% responsible and the engineer 10% - hence £270,000.
Perhaps a poster from the legal profession who has access to the court record could give us his interpretation.
The family might have been suing the engineering firm for £2.7 million and on the basis of the facts the judge might have decided that the pilot was 90% responsible and the engineer 10% - hence £270,000.
Perhaps a poster from the legal profession who has access to the court record could give us his interpretation.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Totally agree with you stik.
Incredible how a lot of people here tell everyone to wait for the AAIB reports to come out and now there's a load not wishing to believe them! Anyone with any knowledge of a Yak will know how difficult it is to see down the back of a fuselage amongst the elevator controls on a pre-flight check.
As has been said, Tony was a very experienced aerobatic competition pilot (and a really nice bloke) hence why he was practising aeros at a lower altitude than what most of us do - that's where aero competitions are held.
Bose-x you really are incredible. We all know just how accomplished you are in every walk of life but enough is enough. Now you a DNA crime scene investigator and war veteran! Whether your lamp swinging tales can quite equal to that of Tony who was one of the pilots using the downwash of their SeaKing rotor blades to blow the burning ships lifeboats to safety. No doubt you can beat that......
Incredible how a lot of people here tell everyone to wait for the AAIB reports to come out and now there's a load not wishing to believe them! Anyone with any knowledge of a Yak will know how difficult it is to see down the back of a fuselage amongst the elevator controls on a pre-flight check.
As has been said, Tony was a very experienced aerobatic competition pilot (and a really nice bloke) hence why he was practising aeros at a lower altitude than what most of us do - that's where aero competitions are held.
Bose-x you really are incredible. We all know just how accomplished you are in every walk of life but enough is enough. Now you a DNA crime scene investigator and war veteran! Whether your lamp swinging tales can quite equal to that of Tony who was one of the pilots using the downwash of their SeaKing rotor blades to blow the burning ships lifeboats to safety. No doubt you can beat that......
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd just like to make a point.
It's also the case that anybody who is in this business should have substantial public liability insurance, and anybody who has lost a member of their family has lost a great deal. Whilst one may have a dim view of some members of the legal profession, it is the mechanism to ultimately decide whether the person/family who have lost much, should be compensated by the insurance of the organisation. There isn't really another way.
It's also the case that anybody who is in this business should have substantial public liability insurance, and anybody who has lost a member of their family has lost a great deal. Whilst one may have a dim view of some members of the legal profession, it is the mechanism to ultimately decide whether the person/family who have lost much, should be compensated by the insurance of the organisation. There isn't really another way.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Totally agree with you stik.
Incredible how a lot of people here tell everyone to wait for the AAIB reports to come out and now there's a load not wishing to believe them! Anyone with any knowledge of a Yak will know how difficult it is to see down the back of a fuselage amongst the elevator controls on a pre-flight check.
As has been said, Tony was a very experienced aerobatic competition pilot (and a really nice bloke) hence why he was practising aeros at a lower altitude than what most of us do - that's where aero competitions are held.
Bose-x you really are incredible. We all know just how accomplished you are in every walk of life but enough is enough. Now you a DNA crime scene investigator and war veteran! Whether your lamp swinging tales can quite equal to that of Tony who was one of the pilots using the downwash of their SeaKing rotor blades to blow the burning ships lifeboats to safety. No doubt you can beat that......
Incredible how a lot of people here tell everyone to wait for the AAIB reports to come out and now there's a load not wishing to believe them! Anyone with any knowledge of a Yak will know how difficult it is to see down the back of a fuselage amongst the elevator controls on a pre-flight check.
As has been said, Tony was a very experienced aerobatic competition pilot (and a really nice bloke) hence why he was practising aeros at a lower altitude than what most of us do - that's where aero competitions are held.
Bose-x you really are incredible. We all know just how accomplished you are in every walk of life but enough is enough. Now you a DNA crime scene investigator and war veteran! Whether your lamp swinging tales can quite equal to that of Tony who was one of the pilots using the downwash of their SeaKing rotor blades to blow the burning ships lifeboats to safety. No doubt you can beat that......
Whatever you may have thought of the pilot and I am sure he was a really nice bloke, it is obvious from the AIB report that the pilot had some involvement with the screwdriver, the DNA results are quoted by the AIB not by me claiming to be a DNA expert. You have drawn your own conclusions (about a lot of things) and I have drawn mine. A little less on the personal attacks now I think.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been following this thread and feel it is becoming rather a bit overheated.
Calling people names will not help. The AAIB report seems to outline what is known (and what is not known) quite clearly. It was a terrible accident which should not have happened, there is uncertainty on what happened to the screwdriver. We can speculate whether a tool board would have caught the missing screwdriver or whether it would have just shown that it was missing but no-one knew where/which aircraft. This is just speculation. You may have your opinion and others may have a different one.
We don't know whether this is two insurance companies meeting each other in court or the family trying to gain compensation from Little Gransden. Accusations of 'ambulance chasing' cannot be made without understanding this.
We also don't know why/how the award was made and whether there was some shared blame. So again, until we have some facts it is speculation and opinion.
Unlike Stik, I did not know the pilot but the facts are clearly outlined by the AAIB. He was performing aerobatics in a way that many of us do regularly and with an excellent safety record at BAeA competitions up and down the country during the summer. There was nothing reckless here.
Perhaps we could keep to the known facts rather than making comments based on assumptions which may be wrong.
Calling people names will not help. The AAIB report seems to outline what is known (and what is not known) quite clearly. It was a terrible accident which should not have happened, there is uncertainty on what happened to the screwdriver. We can speculate whether a tool board would have caught the missing screwdriver or whether it would have just shown that it was missing but no-one knew where/which aircraft. This is just speculation. You may have your opinion and others may have a different one.
We don't know whether this is two insurance companies meeting each other in court or the family trying to gain compensation from Little Gransden. Accusations of 'ambulance chasing' cannot be made without understanding this.
We also don't know why/how the award was made and whether there was some shared blame. So again, until we have some facts it is speculation and opinion.
Unlike Stik, I did not know the pilot but the facts are clearly outlined by the AAIB. He was performing aerobatics in a way that many of us do regularly and with an excellent safety record at BAeA competitions up and down the country during the summer. There was nothing reckless here.
Perhaps we could keep to the known facts rather than making comments based on assumptions which may be wrong.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: london uk
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RTFP
Well it seems there are a lot of people here who didnt' read my post correctly.
Will one of you please explain where i said anything derogatory of the pilot???
The main point of my post was the fact that litigation seems inevitable in this health and safety, politically correct world we find ourselves in, and THAT is what cheeses me off. Also i hate the way the media report these things in a skewed way. IE: (and possibly, this is where you thought i was getting at the pilot) they allways look for the sensational, as normality doesnt sell. Hence the referal to the pilots millitary history. Not a mention of the brother in the head line! THAT IS WHAT MY BEEF WAS!! NOT THE PILOTS SKILLS OR ANYTHING ELSE OF THE PILOT!!
Now a couple of points that came to me on the drive in to work this morning.
1. The screw driver couldnt have been in place at time of take off as a full and free would have shown that up. So it was at a place other than where it was found. So in the vertical ascent it moved from its position and became lodged in the elevator mechanism. So how come when the plane was diving vertically it didnt become dislodged, especially as you would presume all methods were tried. Then on impact, it still stayed in place, appx 190 kn impact didnt dislodge it!
2. If that wasn't the tool used by the crew for pre-flight, then where is the second tool?
3. I am not a DNA expert, but i assume the test was looking for ANY DNA and they only reported the pilots? I may be wrong, but i think that would be a logical conclusion to draw. That may indicate that it was a period of time since the TRAINEE engineer had last touched it.
Lastly, as has been pointed out before, as soon as the mechanic heard of the tool being found, he said it was probably his, which shows great integrity in my book.
I still dont understand why with an altitude of 3000', with loss of control authority the decision wasnt made to abandon the aircraft, as the aaib report said they were wearing parachutes but stil had the belts on.
Will one of you please explain where i said anything derogatory of the pilot???
The main point of my post was the fact that litigation seems inevitable in this health and safety, politically correct world we find ourselves in, and THAT is what cheeses me off. Also i hate the way the media report these things in a skewed way. IE: (and possibly, this is where you thought i was getting at the pilot) they allways look for the sensational, as normality doesnt sell. Hence the referal to the pilots millitary history. Not a mention of the brother in the head line! THAT IS WHAT MY BEEF WAS!! NOT THE PILOTS SKILLS OR ANYTHING ELSE OF THE PILOT!!
Now a couple of points that came to me on the drive in to work this morning.
1. The screw driver couldnt have been in place at time of take off as a full and free would have shown that up. So it was at a place other than where it was found. So in the vertical ascent it moved from its position and became lodged in the elevator mechanism. So how come when the plane was diving vertically it didnt become dislodged, especially as you would presume all methods were tried. Then on impact, it still stayed in place, appx 190 kn impact didnt dislodge it!
2. If that wasn't the tool used by the crew for pre-flight, then where is the second tool?
3. I am not a DNA expert, but i assume the test was looking for ANY DNA and they only reported the pilots? I may be wrong, but i think that would be a logical conclusion to draw. That may indicate that it was a period of time since the TRAINEE engineer had last touched it.
Lastly, as has been pointed out before, as soon as the mechanic heard of the tool being found, he said it was probably his, which shows great integrity in my book.
I still dont understand why with an altitude of 3000', with loss of control authority the decision wasnt made to abandon the aircraft, as the aaib report said they were wearing parachutes but stil had the belts on.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: london uk
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice one stcik,
lets meet up on Saturday and get the carb ice debate going again!
Speaking of whiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii- - - - - - - - - - -
lets meet up on Saturday and get the carb ice debate going again!
Speaking of whiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii- - - - - - - - - - -
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: エリア88
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Manchester UK
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also, no one would jump in a 1950's car and thrash it about like a new one but we tend to think that because its been regularly serviced and its 'military' somehow its different. Clearly these a/c are well serviced and strong but you cant get around the fact that no design is perfect, look at all the threads about current military technology!!
I, for one, am delighted that we get to access these aircraft, long may it continue with Jet Provosts, Gnats, Hunters and who knows what else in the future (Sea Harriers are gathering dust!
) but each type has been superseded by so called 'better' aircraft, and we need to remember this when we strap ourselves to an ageing a/c.Condolences to those involved and safe flying to all.
Regards
XRAF
