Crash at Shoreham Air show

[dr_gn]

RoverP6B said:

This isn't a hobby. This is the second biggest spectator activity in the country, just behind football. It's a major part of our heritage. It's a huge contributory factor to our economy and the income of charities. It is a major source of engineering skills. It also plays a part in our national security - there are still Hunters on the military register today, flying for the MoD. That would not be possible without the civilian scene which is mainly directed towards and funded by airshows. All now in jeopardy because of the CAA's bureaucratic myopia and the disgraceful, unwarranted vilification of a pilot who is very lucky to be alive at all. Pull your heads out of your arses and your Daily Mails and get a clue about the reality of the heritage aviation industry.

You've got "issues".

[RoverP6B]

AAIB couldn't note it because of the ensuing damage to the airframe in the impact. The report, in case you have not read it, does not in any way imply pilot error as the cause of the crash. They just couldn't find conclusively what went wrong.

How many of you have actually got any experience of piloting anything - let alone aerobatics?

I have - albeit not in anything as big and heavy as a P-38 or Hunter.

[dr_gn]

RoverP6B said:

I have - albeit not in anything as big and heavy as a P-38 or Hunter.

That's a blessing.

[dr_gn]

HoHoHo said:

RoverP6B said:

HoHoHo said:

Please respond to my question Rover.

Already did.

Sorry, so you're suggesting there was something wrong with the trailing edge of the wing.

I'm lost here, are you talking about Shoreham or another accident

For some reason he's talking about the P-38 crash at Duxford years ago.

[HoHoHo]

dr_gn said:

HoHoHo said:

RoverP6B said:

HoHoHo said:

Please respond to my question Rover.

Already did.

Sorry, so you're suggesting there was something wrong with the trailing edge of the wing.

I'm lost here, are you talking about Shoreham or another accident

For some reason he's talking about the P-38 crash at Duxford years ago.

Thanks Garth, it's difficult keeping up with all the conspiracy theories

[RoverP6B]

99% of the population are generally morons, so the herd's verdict on something they know sod all about is worthless. Andy Hill has most certainly been vilified in the press - hence that photo of him looking haunted being splashed all over the scummy tabloids.

The CAA's changes do nothing for safety. Meanwhile, an average show will now have its CAA fees increased by about 600%. It's unsustainable and unjustifiable. As is grounding the Hunter as a type: there is no suggestion that there's anything wrong with the surviving CAA-registered Hunters, and MAA-registered Hunters continue to fly safely from Scampton. The Yanks are still flying theirs, as are the Swiss. Embraer are still using their two Hunters as photographic chase planes.

My verdict on this utterly unreasonable imposition is mildly-worded compared to what's being said by the greats of the aviation community (e.g. Bob Grimstead). People are losing their livelihoods over this. Some are keeping their own counsel for now, but the big BADA symposium is next week, and the pilots and MAA are going to eviscerate the CAA over this nonsense.

I've said it before and I'll doubtless say it again: if this was anything else, some form of sport, no way would such restrictions have been imposed. Can you imagine suspending all football matches on an indefinite basis, or charging the clubs vast fees to put on their matches, while you figure out what, if anything, to do? There'd be riots! Airshows are an easy target for politicians and quangos desperate to justify their grossly inflated salaries and budgets.

Meanwhile, according to some airshow organisers I've been talking to, the verdict of the insurance assessors is that the British airshow scene remains very safe and that there is no need to raise premiums. Thank goodness the insurance business is showing some sense.

[dr_gn]

HoHoHo said:

dr_gn said:

HoHoHo said:

RoverP6B said:

HoHoHo said:

Please respond to my question Rover.

Already did.

Sorry, so you're suggesting there was something wrong with the trailing edge of the wing.

I'm lost here, are you talking about Shoreham or another accident

For some reason he's talking about the P-38 crash at Duxford years ago.

Thanks Garth, it's difficult keeping up with all the conspiracy theories

Course it could all be a piss-take?

[RoverP6B]

dr_gn said:

That's a blessing.

I was taught to fly powered aircraft (having come from gliders), and taught aerobatics, by no less a figure than the late, great Ted Girdler, ex-Red Arrows QFI in the Ray Hanna era. I can still remember everything he taught me about rolling, turning and spinning the Beagle Pup 150. He, alas, expired at the controls of an L-29 Delfin off the coast at Eastbourne back in 2000, despite having recently been given a squeaky-clean bill of health by the CAA's doctors. They never found out what killed him - not impact injuries and not any of the usual natural causes. I haven't flown for some years now, and my physical health prevents any resumption, but, were that to change, after some refreshers in the Pup and Bulldog, I could work my way up through the JP to the Hunter and fly the thing competently and safely. One never forgets the tenets one has been taught. Although it's over 30 years since I last flew the Pup, I still have the entire start-up procedure committed to memory. I still have the muscular memory of the feel through the stick and rudder pedals.

As for the Hunter - as Flapjack Whaley said - it's a very easy, benign aeroplane to fly, devoid of handling vices, and endlessly reliable.

dr_gn said:

Course it could all be a piss-take?

I rather think it's a more qualified commentary than that of most other contributors to this thread. Aside from me, and "aeropilot", who here has any real-world flying experience of anything aerobatic?

[HoHoHo]

dr_gn said:

HoHoHo said:

dr_gn said:

HoHoHo said:

RoverP6B said:

HoHoHo said:

Please respond to my question Rover.

Already did.

Sorry, so you're suggesting there was something wrong with the trailing edge of the wing.

I'm lost here, are you talking about Shoreham or another accident

For some reason he's talking about the P-38 crash at Duxford years ago.

Thanks Garth, it's difficult keeping up with all the conspiracy theories

Course it could all be a piss-take?

Actually what I'm more interested in is simply are you and I 'in' or 'out' of the 99% of morons

[dr_gn]

RoverP6B said:

99% of the population are generally morons,

You see, if you actually believe that...then that worries me.

[RoverP6B]

Explain the success of Justin Bieber and One Direction. Or the sales figures of the Sun, Mail, Express etc. Or the online support for Britain First and other such scum.

However, with particular regard to the world of aviation, it is SUCH a specialist subject that there is no hope of the public or mainstream media getting it even 10% right. They don't have a bloody clue. They wouldn't know their ailerons from their elevators. They cannot begin to comprehend what is involved in owning, maintaining, operating and flying aerobatics in a complex 60-year-old fighter aircraft. They just swallow the vile, baseless vituperation those hellspawn rags spew, taking it all at face value. All they know is that the paper told them the accident happened because a negligent devil-may-care rich boy exceeded the capabilities of a clapped-out, superannuated jet that shouldn't have been flying over land, if at all - which is, of course, patently bks, for the reasons I've already outlined.

[pc.iow]

RoverP6B said:

dr_gn said:

That's a blessing.

I was taught to fly powered aircraft (having come from gliders), and taught aerobatics, by no less a figure than the late, great Ted Girdler, ex-Red Arrows QFI in the Ray Hanna era. I can still remember everything he taught me about rolling, turning and spinning the Beagle Pup 150. He, alas, expired at the controls of an L-29 Delfin off the coast at Eastbourne back in 2000, despite having recently been given a squeaky-clean bill of health by the CAA's doctors. They never found out what killed him - not impact injuries and not any of the usual natural causes. I haven't flown for some years now, and my physical health prevents any resumption, but, were that to change, after some refreshers in the Pup and Bulldog, I could work my way up through the JP to the Hunter and fly the thing competently and safely. One never forgets the tenets one has been taught. Although it's over 30 years since I last flew the Pup, I still have the entire start-up procedure committed to memory. I still have the muscular memory of the feel through the stick and rudder pedals.

As for the Hunter - as Flapjack Whaley said - it's a very easy, benign aeroplane to fly, devoid of handling vices, and endlessly reliable.

dr_gn said:

Course it could all be a piss-take?

I rather think it's a more qualified commentary than that of most other contributors to this thread. Aside from me, and "aeropilot", who here has any real-world flying experience of anything aerobatic?

This thread has got fk all to do with the ability to fly being a condition to be able to make a comment.
You just dont get it do you?
Your heads so far up your arse only st is coming from it.
If a bunch of innocents and freeloaders hadn't been murdered, this would be funny as you're either trolling or delusional.

[RoverP6B]

If you haven't flown, and specifically haven't flown aerobatics, you do not have the requisite level of knowledge to make any informed comment on this matter.

Incidentally, I'd be very careful about using the word "murder". It carries the weight of premeditation. It would suggest that Andy Hill intended to commit suicide by ramming the Hunter into the A27 and thereby to kill anyone in his way. Nobody is making that suggestion.

[dr_gn]

RoverP6B said:

Explain the success of Justin Bieber and One Direction. Or the sales figures of the Sun, Mail, Express etc. Or the online support for Britain First and other such scum.

and I take it you're in that elite 1% of the non-moron population?

[Richie Slow]

Normally, if I thought somebody's opinion was a little narrow I'd try to point out that other perspectives and opinions exist.

But to be honest, I'm not going to waste my time . I'm lost for words anyway.

[Nik da Greek]

RoverP6B said:

If you haven't flown, and specifically haven't flown aerobatics, you do not have the requisite level of knowledge to make any informed comment on this matter.

This is, of course, utter bks. In much the same way as you don't have to be able to write a Shakepearean-quality sonnet to be entitled to say you don't like the lyrics of Goldie Lookin Chain

[RoverP6B]

dr_gn said:

and I take it you're in that elite 1% of the non-moron population?

It seems I have a better idea than many when it comes to aviation and some cultural matters. I don't pretend to be any kind of great expert at any of it, though.

Nik da Greek said:

RoverP6B said:

If you haven't flown, and specifically haven't flown aerobatics, you do not have the requisite level of knowledge to make any informed comment on this matter.

This is, of course, utter bks. In much the same way as you don't have to be able to write a Shakepearean-quality sonnet to be entitled to say you don't like the lyrics of Goldie Lookin Chain

It's such a technical subject, one of which the public and media regularly demonstrate crass levels of ignorance. If you haven't flown, you can't make an informed comment, end of.

[HoHoHo]

RoverP6B said:

I don't pretend to be any kind of great expert at any of it, though.

Ah, but you do.

Quite a lot actually

[RYH64E]

I get the impression that even diehard airshow fanatics are embarrassed by Rover's support of their cause, it's hard to think of a worse advocate.

[RoverP6B]

I demonstrate a greater knowledge of the subject at hand than most contributors here. However, if someone here has experience of the Hunter or any remotely comparable type, I would love to hear from them.