Crash at Shoreham Air show

[CAPP0]

Alongside the actual guilt, there is almost certainly also survivor guilt. On top of that, if the plane had flown for another second, not only might he have cleared the road but there might not have been anyone near enough to pull him out before he burnt. That's a lot to cope with, let alone what else of the incident may be running through his head.

[mybrainhurts]

HoHoHo said:

As I understand it he was dragged out of the cockpit.

Your understanding is incorrect. See the preliminary accident report.

[HoHoHo]

mybrainhurts said:

HoHoHo said:

As I understand it he was dragged out of the cockpit.

Your understanding is incorrect. See the preliminary accident report.

I stand corrected, I missed that.

Edited by HoHoHo on Friday 2nd October 21:01

[Cfnteabag]

I really feel for the poor pilot goodness only knows what he is going through.

Why on earth are all the news reports focusing oj the fact he is carrying a bottle of water?

[marksx]

Cfnteabag said:

I really feel for the poor pilot goodness only knows what he is going through.

Why on earth are all the news reports focusing oj the fact he is carrying a bottle of water?

Because they have nothing worthwhile to say about the poor bloke.

[zarjaz1991]

I wonder how he feels?

I think if it were me, I'd be wishing I'd died too. I would not be able to see any point in carrying on, even if it's shown that he was blameless...you would feel responsible nonetheless, I know I would.

[dr_gn]

marksx said:

Cfnteabag said:

I really feel for the poor pilot goodness only knows what he is going through.

Why on earth are all the news reports focusing oj the fact he is carrying a bottle of water?

Because they have nothing worthwhile to say about the poor bloke.

I fail to see why a photo like that is necessary at all. I wouldn't be surprised if they'd followed him around for days hoping to catch him smiling or doing something that they could contort as him exhibiting a 'lack of regret'...or something else that happens to corroborate whatever their agenda happens to be.

[mrloudly]

zarjaz1991 said:

I wonder how he feels?

I think if it were me, I'd be wishing I'd died too. I would not be able to see any point in carrying on, even if it's shown that he was blameless...you would feel responsible nonetheless, I know I would.

I would imagine pretty sh.t... Knowing somebody that went through a fatal RTA put down to them, it's not good for all involved...

[yellowjack]

marksx said:

Cfnteabag said:

I really feel for the poor pilot goodness only knows what he is going through.

Why on earth are all the news reports focusing oj the fact he is carrying a bottle of water?

Because they have nothing worthwhile to say about the poor bloke.

It's just the way of the 'news'papers generally, theses days. Publish a photograph in which it is as clear as day what is going on, then proceed to ignore the maxim that "a picture paints a thousand words", and go on to inanely fill half a column explaining in great detail exactly what's going on in the picture. Or maybe they think that they are interpreting the photo for all their blind readers. You know, the ones who can read the words, but not see the pictures...


...I think it's commonly known as 'dumbing down' and is omnipresent within the output of almost every 'news' outlet across the whole spectrum of news and current affairs reporting.

I can't see why the photo needed publishing anyway. It's one of those "man released from hospital walks around outside" non-stories. There's nothing new to report on this story, and won't be until the police and the AAIB reports are finished and the findings published. But Heaven forbid the press waste an opportunity to fill column inches with a 'story' that requires no expertise, knowledge, or effort to publish.

[MartG]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Why would they - they aren't the ones investigating the crash, the AAIB are

[Simpo Two]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

If I was a relative of a victim I hope I would have the vision and calmness of thought to file it under 'accident' and not expect the bloke to be sued or imprisoned.

[HoHoHo]

Simpo Two said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

If I was a relative of a victim I hope I would have the vision and calmness of thought to file it under 'accident' and not expect the bloke to be sued or imprisoned.

Playing devils advocate...........

What if he broke guidelines and rules etc. and that ended up in the death of your husband/wife et al, would you still think it was only an accident?

If it is proved he entered the manoeuvre at 100ft rather than 500ft in which case I'm sorry to say that it could be in many respects that it's no different to driving straight through a red light and killing someone.

I fear there will be civil proceedings if not criminal at some stage in the future - that is unless the airshow pilots are only working to 'guidelines' and not hard and fast rules in which case he has made a bad misjudgment.

[Mr Will]

HoHoHo said:

Simpo Two said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

If I was a relative of a victim I hope I would have the vision and calmness of thought to file it under 'accident' and not expect the bloke to be sued or imprisoned.

Playing devils advocate...........

What if he broke guidelines and rules etc. and that ended up in the death of your husband/wife et al, would you still think it was only an accident?

If it is proved he entered the manoeuvre at 100ft rather than 500ft in which case I'm sorry to say that it could be in many respects that it's no different to driving straight through a red light and killing someone.

I fear there will be civil proceedings if not criminal at some stage in the future - that is unless the airshow pilots are only working to 'guidelines' and not hard and fast rules in which case he has made a bad misjudgment.

He's not been interviewed by the coastguard either. What make you think the police need to get involved any more than they do? Do you think the police have any knowledge of the rules and regulations he might have broken, the performance of the aircraft or any of the other factors that might have caused this tragedy?

The crash is being investigated by the proper authorities. If criminal charges need to be brought against the pilot then they will be. The absence of police involvement at this point will not change that.

[HoHoHo]

Mr Will said:

HoHoHo said:

Simpo Two said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

If I was a relative of a victim I hope I would have the vision and calmness of thought to file it under 'accident' and not expect the bloke to be sued or imprisoned.

Playing devils advocate...........

What if he broke guidelines and rules etc. and that ended up in the death of your husband/wife et al, would you still think it was only an accident?

If it is proved he entered the manoeuvre at 100ft rather than 500ft in which case I'm sorry to say that it could be in many respects that it's no different to driving straight through a red light and killing someone.

I fear there will be civil proceedings if not criminal at some stage in the future - that is unless the airshow pilots are only working to 'guidelines' and not hard and fast rules in which case he has made a bad misjudgment.

He's not been interviewed by the coastguard either. What make you think the police need to get involved any more than they do? Do you think the police have any knowledge of the rules and regulations he might have broken, the performance of the aircraft or any of the other factors that might have caused this tragedy?

The crash is being investigated by the proper authorities. If criminal charges need to be brought against the pilot then they will be. The absence of police involvement at this point will not change that.

As I said - playing DA nothing more and my thought was pointing at the comment "If I was a relative of a victim I hope I would have the vision and calmness of thought to file it under 'accident' and not expect the bloke to be sued or imprisoned"

I'm in agreement with you that we should let the authorities come to a conclusion and then go from there. I wasn't suggesting and didn't state or write the police should be involved now.

[Simpo Two]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

You found it 'interesting' that the police had not interviewed him. If that is not for possible arrest then what for? Why do you think it is 'interesting'?

You then implied that a relative of a victim would take a different view from someone else. That is no doubt true, but it should not alter whatever happens next.

My post was not a conclusion, and all it 'reveals' (wow gasp horror) is that what you thnk is not what everyone else thinks.

[TooMany2cvs]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

[dr_gn]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Hypothetically, what if an apparent "accident" is actually a deliberate act? (e.g. the recent German Wings crash)?

Hypothetically, what if a pilot has some kind of psychosis (e.g. the recent German Wings crash)?

Who establishes if there was any intent whether through a medical issue or something else irrelevant to the aircraft or circumstances of the crash? Presumably the Police, not the AAIB.

[mybrainhurts]

Simpo Two said:

If I was a relative of a victim I hope I would have the vision and calmness of thought to file it under 'accident' and not expect the bloke to be sued or imprisoned.

This stands out like a breath of fresh air from the general frothing of the mouth going on here at the moment.

Our string-'em-up culture of punishment for mistakes, not involving recklessness, is all wrong.

[mybrainhurts]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

My comment was aimed at the principle, not particularly this incident.

[HoHoHo]

mybrainhurts said:

Simpo Two said:

If I was a relative of a victim I hope I would have the vision and calmness of thought to file it under 'accident' and not expect the bloke to be sued or imprisoned.

This stands out like a breath of fresh air from the general frothing of the mouth going on here at the moment.

Our string-'em-up culture of punishment for mistakes, not involving recklessness, is all wrong.

You probably include my comments as "general frothing of the mouth" however I fail to see how any of the comments (including mine) are along the lines of "'string-'em-up culture"

11 people have been killed and many more have been affected by this accident - it's perfectly acceptable that the accident be investigated to not only learn lessons but take any action necessary if a member of the public broke the law. I've just been done for 70 in a 60 on a dual carriageway and been punished - and guess what, it was at 4:50am when 95% of the population were in bed asleep and certainly not on the roads. I broke the law and I accept the points and fine.

I am not however suggesting he is guilty as I have no more data than anyone else on here. I would however like to see a satisfactory conclusion for all concerned in this terrible event.