Crash at Shoreham Air show
Discussion
RoverP6B said:
As for my qualification - though I never got round to doing PPL, I've been involved in aviation at various levels for many years - gliding, flying clubs, an historic aircraft museum, airline ops management, latterly working on the Harrier at BAe Kingston. I've rubbed shoulders with and often befriended many truly great airmen, including Handley Page test pilots Hedley Hazelden and Spud Murphy, Hawker test pilot Bill Bedford and my old flying instructor Ted Girdler (who sadly expired suddenly while displaying an L29 at Eastbourne in 2000). Eric Garland, MBE, MC, one of our greatest war heroes, was another of my pilots at Air Anglia - I still regret having to call him into work on a significant wedding anniversary of his when all my other pilots were either out of hours or off sick... Hazel summarised his approach to airmanship in the following words: "There are three ways of flying this aeroplane! The company way, the CAA's opinion of the way it should be done, and my f*****g way!". He was an excellent pilot, who proved his mettle as a test pilot with several forced crash-landings from which fatalities could easily have been sustained in lesser hands. I'd have flown to the gates of Hell with him.
You sound very passionate. Perhaps a bit too passionate to be impartial. Scuffers said:
EskimoArapaho said:
NEEP said:
The AAIB don't have a record of fully cooperating with Police investigations into fatal aircraft accidents
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-o...
Interesting and surprising to me. Pretty scummy behaviour from the AAIB/BALPA. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-o...
there is a very solid case for NOT letting the CPS go mad with this stuff, if you do, then people will not report/provide witness statements to AAB etc for fear of prosecution further down the line.
in this case, the judge forced them to hand it over:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-o...
then delayed:
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/islands/...
then upheld:
http://www.scottishlegal.com/2015/06/22/judge-gran...
not sure what's happened since then?
BrabusMog said:
You sound very passionate. Perhaps a bit too passionate to be impartial.
I am capable of being impartial. I have no involvement whatever with any part of the warbird scene now, and never knew anyone who flew Hunters on the civvy register (although one of my Air Anglia pilots, the marvellously-named Julian Soddy, had flown Hunters in the RAF). I had no personal knowledge of any of the people involved with WV372, nor I believe had I ever seen that particular aircraft. However, I have enough knowledge and experience of both police and AAIB to ally myself with the latter and not the former.BrabusMog said:
RYH64E said:
The view of most posters in this thread seems to be 'but we really like airplanes, and s
t happens'.
This is the same impression I get and it is very unpleasant. Although I wouldn't say it's most posters, but certainly more than a few.t happens'.t happens camp. I don't think I particularly like airplanes and certainly don't attend lots of airshows, although have been to Eastbourne a couple of times as its just down the road.However whether an accident particularly a fatal one is related to cars, buses, buildings, planes etc I am unsure of whether there is any particular advantage of prosecuting those involved unless it is proved that their actions were deliberate and would have obviously have the outcome they did.
What benefit is there of prosecuting the parties responsible, they know that their mistake has had the consequences it did, they have to live with that for the rest of their lives. We all make mistakes, but most of us get away with them most of the time, and when we do we usually learn from them.
I'd much prefer that we learn from our mistakes and educate others so they also learn from them.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
But one can also make a mistake that causes death without being deliberately reckless. Something which is critical to understanding the cause of an accident. But of course the police don't recognise the concept of accident, 'accidents don't happen, someone must be to blame'.Chrisgr31 said:
Well I am firmly in the st happens camp. I don't think I particularly like airplanes and certainly don't attend lots of airshows, although have been to Eastbourne a couple of times as its just down the road.
My view is that people who take part in events (racing, rallying, horse racing, skiing, etc) accept a degree of risk that can be quite high, that's their choice. Similarly, people attending such events accept a (albeit much lower) degree of risk, but again, that's their choice. However people going about theur daily lives completely oblivious to the event in question haven't accepted any risk from the event and shouldn't be exposed to any. It's not as if the event had any importance or significance, it was just entertainment.t happens camp. I don't think I particularly like airplanes and certainly don't attend lots of airshows, although have been to Eastbourne a couple of times as its just down the road.Chrisgr31 said:
However whether an accident particularly a fatal one is related to cars, buses, buildings, planes etc I am unsure of whether there is any particular advantage of prosecuting those involved unless it is proved that their actions were deliberate and would have obviously have the outcome they did.
What benefit is there of prosecuting the parties responsible, they know that their mistake has had the consequences it did, they have to live with that for the rest of their lives. We all make mistakes, but most of us get away with them most of the time, and when we do we usually learn from them.
I'd much prefer that we learn from our mistakes and educate others so they also learn from them.
As for blame, I very much doubt that there was any deliberate intention to harm, but negligence or lack of due care can't be ruled out. If a similar thing happened on the roads, with a (even highly skilled) driver performing some kind of 'watch this' manoeuvre to entertain his friends that resulted in 11 deaths, then I'm damn sure he would be prosecuted. I'd be amazed if 'sorry, I've learnt my lesson' would suffice.What benefit is there of prosecuting the parties responsible, they know that their mistake has had the consequences it did, they have to live with that for the rest of their lives. We all make mistakes, but most of us get away with them most of the time, and when we do we usually learn from them.
I'd much prefer that we learn from our mistakes and educate others so they also learn from them.
Scuffers said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Fine in theory, my issue us the police are simply not equipped to do this, and will end up as a box ticking exercise Looking for the donkey to pin the tail on.1) Question a man responsible for several deaths in an attempt to determine if there was any intent?
or
2) Conduct an investigation into an aircraft accident?
In general, The findings of 2) may be totally unrelated to 1) irrespective of the findings of the AAIB investigation. That's why the Police should be - and have been - involved from the start.
dr_gn said:
Not equipped to do what?
1) Question a man responsible for several deaths in an attempt to determine if there was any intent?
or
2) Conduct an investigation into an aircraft accident?
In general, The findings of 2) may be totally unrelated to 1) irrespective of the findings of the AAIB investigation. That's why the Police should be - and have been - involved from the start.
1) don't be so ridiculous - if there was any intent he would have had to be suicidal, if not, he would have aimed for the crowd and ejected himself.1) Question a man responsible for several deaths in an attempt to determine if there was any intent?
or
2) Conduct an investigation into an aircraft accident?
In general, The findings of 2) may be totally unrelated to 1) irrespective of the findings of the AAIB investigation. That's why the Police should be - and have been - involved from the start.
that has to be the most pathetic excuse yet.
2) Yes, the police can hardly manage to investigate a burglary, you think they have the first idea how to look at an air-crash?
My view is the AAIB should be the ONLY investigating agency, but have the power to pull in whoever else THEY feel are appropriate.
Mave said:
Have a google for "Captain Glen Stewart", lots of stuff on interweb
That wasnt too difficulthttp://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_a...
Agree that crash investigations should try to find out what happened in a non-blame way so that everyone can speak their mind without undue fear of retribution.
It would be useful to apply to other walks of life too
saaby93 said:
Mave said:
Have a google for "Captain Glen Stewart", lots of stuff on interweb
That wasnt too difficulthttp://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_a...
Agree that crash investigations should try to find out what happened in a non-blame way so that everyone can speak their mind without undue fear of retribution.
It would be useful to apply to other walks of life too
I had not known about this case before, all very sad and really does illustrate the point.
Scuffers said:
dr_gn said:
Not equipped to do what?
1) Question a man responsible for several deaths in an attempt to determine if there was any intent?
or
2) Conduct an investigation into an aircraft accident?
In general, The findings of 2) may be totally unrelated to 1) irrespective of the findings of the AAIB investigation. That's why the Police should be - and have been - involved from the start.
1) don't be so ridiculous - if there was any intent he would have had to be suicidal, if not, he would have aimed for the crowd and ejected himself.1) Question a man responsible for several deaths in an attempt to determine if there was any intent?
or
2) Conduct an investigation into an aircraft accident?
In general, The findings of 2) may be totally unrelated to 1) irrespective of the findings of the AAIB investigation. That's why the Police should be - and have been - involved from the start.
that has to be the most pathetic excuse yet.
Are you (or indeed anyone) qualified in any field whatsoever which would allow you base a judgement on the intent of a pilot from a few newspaper articles?
Scuffers said:
2) Yes, the police can hardly manage to investigate a burglary, you think they have the first idea how to look at an air-crash?
Which was exactly my point. You need to separate the crash investigation from the Police investigation. As I said, they are potentially two completely different investigations.dr_gn said:
Which was exactly my point. You need to separate the crash investigation from the Police investigation. As I said, they are potentially two completely different investigations.
I'll ignore your first point as it's plainly ignorant and stupid.as for the police investigating, investigate exactly what?
if they don't have the first clue as to an air-crash, what exactly are they going to do?
If it was an airliner where a passenger went all rambo, then they would have a role, or something like a Lockerbie bombing, then yes, they could add to an investigation.
This was nothing like either of them, leave it for the AAIB to decide who should be involved.
charlie7777 said:
Yes eleven innocent people have died. To suggest that the police would not be involved in any investigation from the very beginning seems to show a fundamental lack of understanding as to the way this country is governed. ... They have a lot of power and their remit is very wide.
Isnt there a separation between the way the country is governed and policed?However yes there may have been some unlawful activity for which the police could be involved or there could be civil matters, but lets try not to let those get in the way of hoping to prevent a similar future occurrence, which is often what families and friends look first for - how to make sure it doesnt happen to anyone else, it's too late for their loved ones
Is this the order
What happened
what can prevent it happening again
Is anyone culpable
Edited by saaby93 on Wednesday 28th October 11:22
saaby93 said:
charlie7777 said:
Yes eleven innocent people have died. To suggest that the police would not be involved in any investigation from the very beginning seems to show a fundamental lack of understanding as to the way this country is governed. ... They have a lot of power and their remit is very wide.
Isnt there a separation between the way the country is governed and policed?However yes there may have been some unlawful activity for which the police could be involved or there could be civil matters, but lets try not to let those get in the way of hoping to prevent a similar future occurrence, which is often what families and friends look first for - how to make sure it doesnt happen to anyone else, it's too late for their loved ones
charlie7777 said:
Yes eleven innocent people have died. To suggest that the police would not be involved in any investigation from the very beginning seems to show a fundamental lack of understanding as to the way this country is governed. ... They have a lot of power and their remit is very wide.
Yes, innocent people have died, that does not however, mean a crime has taken place.if somebody falls off a building site, HSE investigate, and if criminality is suspected, then they call the Police in.
Are the Police in a position to investigate non-crimes of a highly technical nature?
The victims here dies when an aircraft landed on them, for that to be a crime would need to be:
1) homicidal/suicidal pilot
2) criminal negligence of the aircraft's maintenance/parts supplier.
I do not see how the Police are in any position to be able to establish either of these.
Scuffers said:
dr_gn said:
Which was exactly my point. You need to separate the crash investigation from the Police investigation. As I said, they are potentially two completely different investigations.
I'll ignore your first point as it's plainly ignorant and stupid.as for the police investigating, investigate exactly what?
if they don't have the first clue as to an air-crash, what exactly are they going to do?
If it was an airliner where a passenger went all rambo, then they would have a role, or something like a Lockerbie bombing, then yes, they could add to an investigation.
This was nothing like either of them, leave it for the AAIB to decide who should be involved.
Yes, it seems highly unlikely, but not impossible.
If you didn't know better, would you have put money on a pilot surviving that crash?
Therefore why is my point "ignorant and stupid"?
You ask what the Police would be left to investigate? See every other post in the latter part of this thread to get some ideas.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff