Crash at Shoreham Air show
Discussion
aeropilot said:
In other words, we (the CAA) have decided we don't won't any civilian operated ex-mil jet aircraft flying in the UK,
Surely it doesnt read like that at all.You have to remember that the AAIB have found a set of circumstances that have come together to produce what happened at Shoreham, and there was a feeling about incidents at other shows too about things creeping away from where they should be
The last section about human factors, not shrugging shoulders - ho hum that's the way it is, but trying to find out more about the pressure on pilots at displays seems welcome
saaby93 said:
aeropilot said:
In other words, we (the CAA) have decided we don't won't any civilian operated ex-mil jet aircraft flying in the UK,
Surely it doesnt read like that at all.saaby93 said:
You have to remember that the AAIB have found a set of circumstances that have come together to produce what happened at Shoreham
We don't know what the AAIB have found yet, as the AAIB haven't produced their final report yet, it's not due for another good few months yet. Only their preliminary report has been published.Richie Slow said:
Should such aircraft even be flying under a p2f on an informal currency and display basis? I think the answer to that is obvious!
Unfortunately, despite lobbying from some owners, the CAA refuses to consider types like the Hunter and JP for a CofA. They will only allow them to fly on a Permit.Cobnapint said:
As they haven't confirmed mechanical failure as the cause of the accident - following their logic - why not all jets..?
One does wonder. There are far fewer instances of failures with the Hunter or the Avon engine (even the earlier 122-series in the T.7s and F.4s on which they were based) than there are of Merlins going phut. Both Lancasters have had in-flight engine fires in the UK within the last two years, and at least two Spitfires got quite seriously bent last summer when their Merlins quit - yet those are approved to fly, even with a passenger in the 2-seat T.9s like Carolyn Grace's ML407... the grounding of the Hunter as a type is utterly unjustifiable! There are also directives out now on all ex-military jet engines, demanding proof that the engine has never been left uninhibited and without running for longer than 30 days. Given that some of them are 65 years old and/or have been through multiple countries' air forces and multiple civilian owners, this is impossible to prove.As for the manoeuvre which ended in the Hunter crashing, it was NOT a loop. You enter and exit a loop in the same direction. That looked like a half-Cuban to me.
oakdale said:
s3fella said:
Any more news on this as we enter airshow season?
Is Andy flying this year...?
If he is, will someone please ask him to be a bit more careful.Is Andy flying this year...?
According to the DM Mr Hill is being investigated for possible manslaughter....
Daily Mail said:
today it has emerged that officers are investigating him on suspicion of manslaughter, alleging that he may have endangered lives by breaching strict air navigation laws
AndDaily Mail said:
He has not been arrested or charged and could still face no further action. Police will complete their report on the crash and submit it to prosecutors, who will decide whether or not to press on with a trial.
I don't think we're at the end of this terrible story yet.Eric Mc said:
The police want to prosecute it seems to me. However, they cannot move until the AAIB releases all the data they have - which they haven't done yet as the accident investigation is not complete.
I suspect you are correct Eric.Aside from the police I get the feeling some in authority feel the need to make an example made of this entire episode, some thoughts good, some not so good possibly.
Eric Mc said:
The police want to prosecute it seems to me. However, they cannot move until the AAIB releases all the data they have - which they haven't done yet as the accident investigation is not complete.
The police appear to be investigating for a charge of manslaughter due to gross negligence, and they are taking the AAIB to court to seek the release of data.Problem I can see is the data is not releases on purpose to ensure it is freely given to the AAIB to help them investigate. If the Police are to force the AAIB to hand over that data people might not supply it in future.
Its a difficult case.
Chrisgr31 said:
Eric Mc said:
The police want to prosecute it seems to me. However, they cannot move until the AAIB releases all the data they have - which they haven't done yet as the accident investigation is not complete.
The police appear to be investigating for a charge of manslaughter due to gross negligence, and they are taking the AAIB to court to seek the release of data.Problem I can see is the data is not releases on purpose to ensure it is freely given to the AAIB to help them investigate. If the Police are to force the AAIB to hand over that data people might not supply it in future.
Its a difficult case.
I would have thought the AAIB will provide the authorities with any data they ask for, once they have gathered everything themselves.
HoHoHo said:
Where does it suggest the police are taking the AAIB to court?
I would have thought the AAIB will provide the authorities with any data they ask for, once they have gathered everything themselves.
The AAIB are usually very reluctant to do that. It would simply limit the amount of information they would be able to gather in the future.I would have thought the AAIB will provide the authorities with any data they ask for, once they have gathered everything themselves.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff