Crash at Shoreham Air show

[Eric Mc]

RYH64E said:

He's unlikely to be proven guilty if none of the evidence is made available to the Police/CPS.

You seem to be assuming that the police are incapable of building their own case and finding their own evidence.

[Bonefish Blues]

Eric Mc said:

And that episode had a very unfortunate end a number of years later.

What was that?

[HoHoHo]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

No I understand you didn't however without wishing to split hairs steve-5snwi suggested not looking at altitude dials for example which could possibly be seen to be negligent surely?

[danllama]

Bonefish Blues said:

Eric Mc said:

And that episode had a very unfortunate end a number of years later.

What was that?

Yes, please go on...

[Dr Jekyll]

Bonefish Blues said:

Eric Mc said:

And that episode had a very unfortunate end a number of years later.

What was that?

The pilot ended up committing suicide.

The story is on this link.

http://theairlinewebsite.com/topic/384754-courtesy...

[Eric Mc]

Yes, it was a very sad outcome. It just shows that pilots are human too - not gung ho "Biggles" types with no thought for themselves or others.

[saaby93]

Dr Jekyll said:

The pilot ended up committing suicide.

The story is on this link.

http://theairlinewebsite.com/topic/384754-courtesy...

Wouldnt be surprised if thats the goal of some people hunting down shoreham too
The best line in that article is the one where it says we should be trying to find out why it happened rather than what happened
The day the police are in there first looking at what happened will be a sad day.

The shoreham pilot wouldn't have gone out that day looking to crash or to crash into bystanders
A video seems to show him trying to lift the plane off the deck
We know what happened - it crashed.
If we're to prevent it happening again we need to know why it happened

The change is already happening on the railways where its no longer enough to know what but find out why
Let's not make aircraft safety go backwards

[RYH64E]

Eric Mc said:

Yes, it was a very sad outcome. It just shows that pilots are human too - not gung ho "Biggles" types with no thought for themselves or others.

Not really, it shows that one particular pilot was badly affected by events, not sure how you extrapolate that to include pilots in general.

I would imagine that pilots reactions would be as variable as those of motorists faced with the aftermath of a difficult situation, some would shrug it off, some would be badly affected, and most would be somewhere in between.

[BrabusMog]

aeropilot said:

BrabusMog said:

but it's a bit upsetting to see how indifferent you can be to the loss of human life, that some are strongly defending the pilot before your precious AAIB report is out in public.

Stop being a drama queen ffs.

And people are only defending the right of the pilot's 'innocent until proven guilty' which until the AAIB report is finished and published, no one is in any position (including the Police, or rather the CPS, because it won't be the Police making the decision) to make a decision on that as the 'facts', not heresay, will be in the AAIB report.

What is so difficult for you to understand that rather simple fact?

I'm far from a drama queen.

[dr_gn]

saaby93 said:

Dr Jekyll said:

The pilot ended up committing suicide.

The story is on this link.

http://theairlinewebsite.com/topic/384754-courtesy...

The best line in that article is the one where it says we should be trying to find out why it happened rather than what happened

I don't get that assertion. The AAIB reports I've read in the past deal with both, although as already established they don't directly assign blame. Take the Oulton Park Gnat report: The causes of departure from controlled flight (ie the "why"s) are clearly outlined as well as the results (ie the "what"s) of these. Surely the two are inextricably linked for any investigation to be of real value in terms of avoiding a repeat accident?

[jamieduff1981]

RYH64E said:

Eric Mc said:

Yes, it was a very sad outcome. It just shows that pilots are human too - not gung ho "Biggles" types with no thought for themselves or others.

Not really, it shows that one particular pilot was badly affected by events, not sure how you extrapolate that to include pilots in general.

I would imagine that pilots reactions would be as variable as those of motorists faced with the aftermath of a difficult situation, some would shrug it off, some would be badly affected, and most would be somewhere in between.

To be a pilot requires a great deal more effort and commitment than it takes to sit a piss-easy driving test before driving an Audi through a bus-stop whilst texting. The demographic of attitudes will be far tighter in aviation than the wide spread of attitudes to driving.

[saaby93]

dr_gn said:

I don't get that assertion. The AAIB reports I've read in the past deal with both, although as already established they don't directly assign blame. Take the Oulton Park Gnat report: The causes of departure from controlled flight (ie the "why"s) are clearly outlined as well as the results (ie the "what"s) of these. Surely the two are inextricably linked for any investigation to be of real value in terms of avoiding a repeat accident?

Ok yes you usually need to know the whats to look for the whys but see the Malaysia crash

If its a police investigation you just stop at the the whats - see what happened , prosecute for what happened
If its AAIB ( or RAIB) step back - find out why it happened once you know the whys, would a typical person doing that job given those circumstance also end up with the same what happened = no prosecution but change the whys

[Magog]

It's not just the Shoreham Crash where the AAIB is finding itself at odds with parts of the judiciary.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/voice_recordings...

In contrast to Shoreham, it seems there is little chance of any criminal prosecution in this instance, and the evidence could not have been witheld from the AAIB as it potentially could have been at Shoreham. Yet the AAIB is still unwilling to share it with other investigating authorities.

[RoverP6B]

As I gave up long ago trying to make sense of this thread, I have just two questions.

1) When will the final AAIB report be out?
2) When, as both WV372 and the Hunter as a type have been exonerated, will the currently ongoing CAA ban on Hunters flying (not adopted by the MAA, interestingly - HHA have flown on) end?

[RWD cossie wil]

BrabusMog said:

aeropilot said:

BrabusMog said:

but it's a bit upsetting to see how indifferent you can be to the loss of human life, that some are strongly defending the pilot before your precious AAIB report is out in public.

Stop being a drama queen ffs.

And people are only defending the right of the pilot's 'innocent until proven guilty' which until the AAIB report is finished and published, no one is in any position (including the Police, or rather the CPS, because it won't be the Police making the decision) to make a decision on that as the 'facts', not heresay, will be in the AAIB report.

What is so difficult for you to understand that rather simple fact?

I'm far from a drama queen.

It's quite difficult for the non aviators to understand why so much emphasis is placed on AAIB reports, and the hugely important point that they establish fact, & not blame.

No one feels anything but total sadness for all involved, but a lynch mob with burning torches & pitch forks won't bring anyone back, the incident needs investigating thoroughly & professionally to ensure that incidents like this are mitigated against as far as possible in the future.

Simply blaming the pilot is a fruitless & pointless exercise.

[Simpo Two]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I gained the impression, about a million pages of bickering ago, that there were some on this thread who thought it was the pilot's fault - well it obviously was because otherwise the plane wouldn't have crashed - and that he should be prosecuted by the police for being a reckless maniac and sent to jail for killing lots of innocent people (who were more innocent than the ones who paid to see the show).

[saaby93]

Not sure this is what you mean by fault

Very often the conclusion of accident investigations is pilot error. The pilot is there to keep the thing safe, no matter what set of circumstances are presented.
However following the accident the immediate job is not to lock up the pilot but to find out what led them to making that error, so as to prevent another pilot in the same situation coming to the same conclusion
The obvious one was the air crash at Kegworth where the plane had a faulty engine, the pilot examines whats in front of him and comes to the conclusion (guess) to shut down what turns out to be the remaining good engine.
Quietly systems and displays are changed so that given a similar engine failure a pilot should be able to shut down the faulty engine.
If when the thing crashes all you do is lock up the pilot, dont be surprised if you have a repeat.

Edited by saaby93 on Sunday 23 October 18:17

[zarjaz1991]

No airshow this year either.

[Trevatanus]

saaby93 said:

the pilot examines whats in front of him and comes to the conclusion (guess) to shut down what turns out to be the remaining good engine.

It was hardly a "guess". He was basing his information on the previous 737's he'd flown.

[SydneyBridge]

I don't think there will ever be an air show at Shoreham again