Gnat Crash At Carfest
Discussion
J
Thank you.
Quite an impressive list. I think what winds people up is the manner of your replies.
You might very well end up being proved correct however the tone of your replies suggest an air of superiority which is not necessary.
converted lurker said:
fatboy69 said:
I don't think that is the case. You don't have to be exact - just a general answer would be good.
Nobody really cares who you are - I think people would be interested to know what your experience is given your 'I have an answer for everything' replies.
>20,000hrs, flown Hawks, displayed aircraft, instructor, airline captain, trainer, AAIB approved unit flight safety officer, gliding champion, aircraft owner, Duke of Edinburgh Gold holder. Nobody really cares who you are - I think people would be interested to know what your experience is given your 'I have an answer for everything' replies.
Edited by fatboy69 on Tuesday 4th August 10:18
Thank you.
Quite an impressive list. I think what winds people up is the manner of your replies.
You might very well end up being proved correct however the tone of your replies suggest an air of superiority which is not necessary.
s off so many people? 
converted lurker said:
If you crash your bicycle you kill yourself. If you hurl a fast jet into the ground you also kill yourself AND anybody who was innocently going about their business. Hence there is a higher degree of safety regulation incumbent on fSt jet display flying than cycling. The two are not remotely comparable.
Just as I anticipated you might say. So...yellowjack originally said:
Suffice to say that two cyclists died at the weekend, one from a medical incident, the other in a 'single vehicle accident'. Also very recently, a former soldier crashed his mountain bike into a tree in Swinley Forest. Totally out of scale with the damage an aircraft can inflict, yes, but a cluster of deaths in a short period all the same.
Annually, driving on the roads of the UK kills thousands of people. 1,713 in 2013, and a peak figure of 3,508 in 2003.Of the 1,713 road accident deaths (Government figures, BTW) in 2013, 785 were occupants of cars and 331 were riders or passengers on motorcycles - so 1,116 motor vehicle occupants, leaving some 507 pedestrians and cyclists needlessly slaughtered by maniacal motor vehicle drivers. An average of nearly 1.4 deaths per DAY of people who were not the drivers or passengers of the vehicles causing the carnage. The figure for 'innocent victims' is going to be significantly higher, too, as passengers rarely cause crashes.
How many people who were killed in 2013 in aviation accidents were neither flying, nor riding in aeroplanes? What is the rough annual figure for the number of "persons innocently going about their business" who are killed by aeroplanes falling from the skies above the UK? Or is that not "remotely comparable" either?
The trend for road deaths is a downward one, generally speaking, and the authorities want to see it reduced further. Since 2000, there are only three years in which the number of deaths increased over the previous year. But 1,713 is still a high figure. The figure for deaths to non-participants in aviation accidents is very small indeed. I take a bigger risk riding my bicycle or walking to the newsagent on a Sunday morning than I do living very near to TWO busy GA/private traffic runways, by several orders of magnitude. I'd sooner live under the flightpath of North Weald than share the roads with some of the numpties who've inexplicably been gifted driving licences. Some of the display pilots aren't "professional" pilots? So frickin' what? Even amongst so-called "professional drivers" there is very little evidence of anything that could be said to resemble a truly professional attitude. I'd hazard a guess, and say that "amateur" pilots take their safety, and that of the rest of us, far more seriously than the majority of "professional" drivers, yet I'm directly overflown by an aeroplane maybe two or three times a day, whilst I'm exposed to the chance of the risky behaviour of A.N. Other driver hundreds, often thousands of times an HOUR.
Risk. It's quantifiable, and manageable. Do try getting it into perspective, deary...
Eric Mc said:
converted lurker said:
It's not arrogance if you're right.
Need I say more?Some of you need your sensitivity meters calibrated and your banter circuits BITE tested.
The history of civilian flying of ex military aircraft is littered with death and smoking holes in the ground. The CAA today very much regrets ever allowing the Gnat onto the civilian register. The public enquiry if the car fest crash had wiped out people on the ground would have been a very uncomfortable experience for them.
Edited by converted lurker on Tuesday 4th August 15:12
voicemail said:
When someone says I "KNOW" implication of factual, I am interested in the source.
Good luck.It's usually their arse. When they are actually in the know, you won't often get the answer because they're usually in the tricky situation of wanting to tell everyone they're in the know but don't want to/can't reveal how they know.
voicemail said:
SkySailing,
Might I ask how you are so sure that there was an ejection?
On the video, I think there's a puff of smoke or bit of debris visible around the aircraft just before it disappears behind the trees, I thought at the time it might have been the canopy, or some evidence of an engine issue. It's all too blurred to tell exactly what it is.Might I ask how you are so sure that there was an ejection?
Re CL's posts - A shame about the tone - as someone who has no experience of aircraft other than the bi-annual holidays I thought that his points were interesting and added to the discussion, even to the point that I began to feel like some on here were picking on him a little.
He now seems intent on insulting/flaming those that have differing views.
He now seems intent on insulting/flaming those that have differing views.
Mastiff said:
Re CL's posts - A shame about the tone - as someone who has no experience of aircraft other than the bi-annual holidays I thought that his points were interesting and added to the discussion, even to the point that I began to feel like some on here were picking on him a little.
He now seems intent on insulting/flaming those that have differing views.
Thing is...does it really matter? He now seems intent on insulting/flaming those that have differing views.
Everyone's got an opinion, and the poster in question seems to have an informed opinion. You can argue about their tone, and possibly their conclusions, but not the reasoning behind their conclusions.
It's an anonymous internet forum, not necessarily a charm school.
dr_gn said:
On the video, I think there's a puff of smoke or bit of debris visible around the aircraft just before it disappears behind the trees, I thought at the time it might have been the canopy, or some evidence of an engine issue. It's all too blurred to tell exactly what it is.
I thought exactly the same!Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff