Aircraft down at Blackbushe?
Discussion
converted lurker said:
This defence of a Banker who jacked in his RAF 'career' at the early part of the Hawk course to make millions in the City so he could afford to play around at weekends in a Gnat is puzzling.
This is a new low even for you.Take some advice. If the only thing standing between the insults you post about dead fathers on the internet and you getting a smack in the mouth from a berieved father, brother or friend is your precious anonymity, then I would most strongly suggest that you seriously reconsider what you post.
You cery clearly have a well balanced chip on each shoulder. The fact that this man chose a different career path but found a means of enjoying displaying the Gnat has your nose seriously out of place. You very obviously consider yourself his superior as a pilot in general and feel no shame casting aspersions about his life choices and flying abilities. The fact that he has so recently died and the cause not yet determined by actual experts (as opposed to you - who appear to share no qualities with any FJ, ME or RW military pilots nor civil ATPLs nor indeed engineering nor investigators I know of (and I know a lot) is lost on you and worsens how already offensive posts land.
To be honest it's somewhat difficult to believe that someone with such a comprehensively poor ability to relate to others could survive professionally in the work you claim to do. If nothing else, all the other pilots and engineers I know at least know when to shut their mouths.
Maybe one or two of them are aware of their own mortality and would hope that no-one like you is all over the internet condemning not only their conduct and decisions but their very existence in the cockpit - all whilst completely unburdened by fact.
Is all this s
te you've written about the Gnat pilot really what you'd say to his young daughter in person? If not, reconsider what you're saying.But you're anonymous, so it's ok.
CL says in the other thread that he's flown Hawks and "has displayed aircraft". As he didn't mention any other fast jets by name (i.e. if he flew Hawks he should really have moved onto Harrier/Tornado/Jag/Typhoon depending on year), it is safe to assume that he trained with the RAF, got to Hawk stage, then got chopped either completely or restreamed to multis/rotary wing.
Therefore I'm not sure where his high and mighty stance comes from about the deceased Gnat pilot, given that their RAF careers appear to be reasonably similar.
Therefore I'm not sure where his high and mighty stance comes from about the deceased Gnat pilot, given that their RAF careers appear to be reasonably similar.
I can see that we are going to need a bigger outrage bus if we are going to start hallucinating about saying all this to the family at the funeral and dragging Operation Yewtree into the discussion.
My opinions are ones that have been aired on several other online forums by several other people, not least on airliners.net and pprune. One weekend, two fireballs and much informed criticism of their unnecessarily high likelihood.
My opinions are ones that have been aired on several other online forums by several other people, not least on airliners.net and pprune. One weekend, two fireballs and much informed criticism of their unnecessarily high likelihood.
Edited by converted lurker on Wednesday 5th August 10:49
b14 said:
CL says in the other thread that he's flown Hawks and "has displayed aircraft". As he didn't mention any other fast jets by name (i.e. if he flew Hawks he should really have moved onto Harrier/Tornado/Jag/Typhoon depending on year), it is safe to assume that he trained with the RAF, got to Hawk stage, then got chopped either completely or restreamed to multis/rotary wing.
Therefore I'm not sure where his high and mighty stance comes from about the deceased Gnat pilot, given that their RAF careers appear to be reasonably similar.
You really don't have enough data for this. It's not high and mighty but I don't put anyone on a pedestal flying wise just because they got to Valley and got their temporary wings. Prince Edward pulled out of his training and I don't see anyone describing him as an ex-Royal Marine...Therefore I'm not sure where his high and mighty stance comes from about the deceased Gnat pilot, given that their RAF careers appear to be reasonably similar.
Anyway, let's get back to hot high single pilot approaches to marginal length runways before I get another thread ban!
Lots of supposition and assumption on this thread and the Gnat thread from one poster in particular.
Given the qualifications and experience this poster says he has I find that bizarre.
Until ALL of the facts are known I'm calling WALT on this one.
True professionals would not get into a slanging match on the internet.
I also find it strange that this poster is questioning the ability of the pilots without actually knowing them or knowing what happened.
It's a strange stance. I suspect this poster is an aviation enthusiast - but an experienced pilot with many hours on fast jets ?
Highly doubtful imo.
Given the qualifications and experience this poster says he has I find that bizarre.
Until ALL of the facts are known I'm calling WALT on this one.
True professionals would not get into a slanging match on the internet.
I also find it strange that this poster is questioning the ability of the pilots without actually knowing them or knowing what happened.
It's a strange stance. I suspect this poster is an aviation enthusiast - but an experienced pilot with many hours on fast jets ?
Highly doubtful imo.
converted lurker said:
My opinions are ones that have been aired on several other online forums by several other people, not least on airliners.net and pprune.
Yes, your mastery of the copy and paste function is impressive. Can you write up opinions into facts by yourself though, or are you just pasting up bits of other threads on other forums due to boredom?Red 4 said:
Lots of supposition and assumption on this thread and the Gnat thread from one poster in particular.
Given the qualifications and experience this poster says he has I find that bizarre.
Until ALL of the facts are known I'm calling WALT on this one.
True professionals would not get into a slanging match on the internet.
I also find it strange that this poster is questioning the ability of the pilots without actually knowing them or knowing what happened.
It's a strange stance. I suspect this poster is an aviation enthusiast - but an experienced pilot with many hours on fast jets ?
Highly doubtful imo.
A wise man speaks!Given the qualifications and experience this poster says he has I find that bizarre.
Until ALL of the facts are known I'm calling WALT on this one.
True professionals would not get into a slanging match on the internet.
I also find it strange that this poster is questioning the ability of the pilots without actually knowing them or knowing what happened.
It's a strange stance. I suspect this poster is an aviation enthusiast - but an experienced pilot with many hours on fast jets ?
Highly doubtful imo.
This, and GG's style of addressing these threads are a sign of professionalism. Perhaps CL bunked off those classes at Cranwell/Dartmouth?
The gnat departed from controlled flight during high g low level manoeuvres. The history of ex-military aircraft being flown in this manner by civilians is littered with pilot error in the form of stalling the wing. It's top of every pilots list of likely causes with this tragic accident. Experience and training levels come then naturally into the topic.
Yes yes we will all have to wait for AAIB to write it up but speculation happens on the unit, in the pub, in your head and on the web these days. I used to do a bit of motorbike road racing but I quit when I had my first child because you now have a responsibility that outweighs your desire for fun. I would have done the same if I had been a Gnat display pilot frankly. It looked just as risky to me.
Back on topic, I note that the vast majority of Phenom accidents are runway overruns. There may be a technical reason for this. Plus I note he pilot had done two long flights that day and at his age must have been reasonably tired.
Yes yes we will all have to wait for AAIB to write it up but speculation happens on the unit, in the pub, in your head and on the web these days. I used to do a bit of motorbike road racing but I quit when I had my first child because you now have a responsibility that outweighs your desire for fun. I would have done the same if I had been a Gnat display pilot frankly. It looked just as risky to me.
Back on topic, I note that the vast majority of Phenom accidents are runway overruns. There may be a technical reason for this. Plus I note he pilot had done two long flights that day and at his age must have been reasonably tired.
Edited by converted lurker on Wednesday 5th August 13:04
el stovey said:
converted lurker said:
This defence of a Banker who jacked in his RAF 'career' at the early part of the Hawk course to make millions in the City so he could afford to play around at weekends in a Gnat is puzzling.
I doubt you find it puzzling in the slightest. RIP.
onyx39 said:
I personally am glad that he chose to give up his career which allowed him to fly Gnats. Without this, I would not have seen them fly at Eastbourne last year.
RIP.
Really?!RIP.
I am sad the CAA didn't decline to allow the Gnat on the civil register. 'Kev' would still be a brilliant husband and father and able to enjoy his highly successful life to old age if they had.
PS he never had a career in the RAF as he left in training. He had a career in the City.
Show me where it says you can't register any specific aircraft by type? Or where the CAA maintain a list of aircraft banned from being registered?
http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=56
You'll be telling me you can't register or fly a Lightning in the UK next.
The CAA's concerns with the Gnat were based on the fact there were no design records available, BAE Systems inherited the design and didn't maintain any of the records or data. The type was and still is "accepted based on its previous satisfactory service history." (That is the exact wording by the CAA.
) and thats been the case for each and every one right since the first went on the register in 1982.
That doesn't sound much like a mistake to me.
http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=56
You'll be telling me you can't register or fly a Lightning in the UK next.
The CAA's concerns with the Gnat were based on the fact there were no design records available, BAE Systems inherited the design and didn't maintain any of the records or data. The type was and still is "accepted based on its previous satisfactory service history." (That is the exact wording by the CAA.
) and thats been the case for each and every one right since the first went on the register in 1982.That doesn't sound much like a mistake to me.
Edited by richw_82 on Wednesday 5th August 15:13
converted lurker said:
onyx39 said:
I personally am glad that he chose to give up his career which allowed him to fly Gnats. Without this, I would not have seen them fly at Eastbourne last year.
RIP.
Really?!RIP.
I am sad the CAA didn't decline to allow the Gnat on the civil register. 'Kev' would still be a brilliant husband and father and able to enjoy his highly successful life to old age if they had.
PS he never had a career in the RAF as he left in training. He had a career in the City.
Perhaps the CAA should ground everything, just in case there is ever another aircraft accident??
No, just 50 year hard to maintain fast jets with demanding failure modes and high end agility. The Lancasters fine.
People said this would happen. It happened.
If you wanted to be pejorative about it you would list posh boy city millionaire RAF dropouts as being a risk factor as well but THAT would be too harsh so all I did was point out that experience levels did not match those of a serving pilot. Knickers were then spectacularly twisted...
Having gen'd up on the subject of modern bizjet handling characteristics it's evident how sensitive they are to VApp speeds. Slippery little buggers do not like carrying an extra 5 or 10 knots over the fence. Compared to lager aircraft they are a lot less forgiving of extra energy on landing. Every day's a school day as they say.
People said this would happen. It happened.
If you wanted to be pejorative about it you would list posh boy city millionaire RAF dropouts as being a risk factor as well but THAT would be too harsh so all I did was point out that experience levels did not match those of a serving pilot. Knickers were then spectacularly twisted...
Having gen'd up on the subject of modern bizjet handling characteristics it's evident how sensitive they are to VApp speeds. Slippery little buggers do not like carrying an extra 5 or 10 knots over the fence. Compared to lager aircraft they are a lot less forgiving of extra energy on landing. Every day's a school day as they say.
Good luck registering a Lightning in the UK. As CAA personnel have already admitted - they wouldn't have allowed the Gnat now. The Lightning really would be a widow maker. A wealthy friend was seriously considering a run in the Thunder City one in S Africa a few years back. I pleaded with him to go and do the Russian MiG29 instead which he did.
1960's jets are like 1960's cars. Rare, beautiful, delicate, evocative, fragile, weak, repaired and designed for a different time with different standards.
1960's jets are like 1960's cars. Rare, beautiful, delicate, evocative, fragile, weak, repaired and designed for a different time with different standards.
converted lurker said:
Good luck registering a Lightning in the UK.
Its been done, not by me, but others. Registering? Easy. Safety case and support? Not a chance now. The one and only UK flight was with the full backing of BAE at the time, and unlikely to ever be repeated.converted lurker said:
As CAA personnel have already admitted - they wouldn't have allowed the Gnat now.
If that were the case, they wouldn't have allowed the Lightning flight, or considered Bucanneer, and we certainly wouldn't have the Vulcan. Or if you want to start looking at really grim accident statistics for aircrew, the Meteor. Show us where they admitted Gnat wouldn't be allowed - if indeed you can. Present evidence - as thats what the CAA work with - not just more forum posts with suspect claims presented as facts.Looking at Gnat accidents in civilian hands you can count them on one hand, since they started operating in 1982. By contrast how many simple category aircraft (Spitfire, Hurricane, Mustang, etc) have been lost in the same period? Hardly what you would expect from a jet that the CAA were so worried about.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff