|
22 Aug 15 - 01:42 PM (#3732407) Subject: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Will Fly I sometimes go to the annual RAF Air Show at Shoreham Airport, near where I live. Not this year, luckily, for me, as a Hunter jet didn't pull out a loop-the-loop manoeuvre and crashed on to the main A27 dual carriageway - killing 7 people. What a terrible disaster. People forget that air shows have a comparatively high incidence of accidents - not surprising considering the variety of planes and pilots involved. I've seen two fatal crashes myself over the last few years. Air crash |
|
22 Aug 15 - 02:31 PM (#3732419) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Dave the Gnome Blimey. Sorry to hear this, Will. Condolences to all affected. |
|
22 Aug 15 - 02:33 PM (#3732421) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: gnu Oh dear! Sad news indeed. |
|
22 Aug 15 - 02:34 PM (#3732422) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Big Al Whittle I used to have a model one when I was a kid, it must have been an old plane. |
|
22 Aug 15 - 03:44 PM (#3732432) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: GUEST The air show organisers f*cked up and people going about their daily lives are dead. |
|
22 Aug 15 - 06:03 PM (#3732441) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Will Fly Al, it's quite possible that the plane had some sort of mechanical fault - as you say, it must have been quite old - and the pilot is supposed to have been an experienced formation and acrobatic flyer. Still, it's too early to jump to conclusions. I wouldn't say it was the fault of the organisers though. Pilot error and/or machine failure are the usual causes of air show accidents. |
|
22 Aug 15 - 07:03 PM (#3732448) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: akenaton Yes Al, I had one myself...think it was an Airfix kit. Hawker Hunter, mine had naval livery. They were brought into service in the nineteen fifties I think. |
|
22 Aug 15 - 07:55 PM (#3732459) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Joe Offer I really love air shows, but there was an accident at the EAA AirVenture show in Oshkosh Wisconsin when I attended a few years ago. I understood one low-wing P51 landed atop another, since the wing prevented the upper pilot from seeing the plane below him. We saw the commotion, but I'm glad we didn't see the actual crash. The video looks a bit different from what I understood had happened. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLnKYJLzjjI -Joe- |
|
23 Aug 15 - 03:55 AM (#3732501) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Musket Truly awful. Some friends and old colleagues were there. The company I used to run has a factory just down the road near Shoreham Harbour at Fishersgate, Portslade. I had a series of flying lessons at Shoreham back in the day. Ironically, I was looking at a Hawker Hunter at Yeovilton Air Arm Museum only last month and the info board mentions The RAF still flying one (maybe more than one, I forget) for air shows etc. |
|
23 Aug 15 - 04:07 AM (#3732503) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Big Al Whittle bloody typical! are they in showbusiness or defending us - its obviously a 70 year old piece of shit that needs selling to a collector? |
|
23 Aug 15 - 04:26 AM (#3732506) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: GUEST,Shimrod On Aug 31st this year I have been asked to lead a wild flower walk in a local nature reserve. In order to do this I have had to produce a public liability insurance certificate and a risk assessment. I wonder what documentation the air show organisers had to produce? Whatever it was, it didn't avert this terrible accident, did it? |
|
23 Aug 15 - 04:41 AM (#3732511) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: GUEST Insurance is not a means of preventing accidents (though insurance conditions can be) but a means of planning to meet the financial consequences of an accident. Sad to know the fate of a few innocent road-users, not the sort of accident its victims could do anything about, not even by staying home. |
|
23 Aug 15 - 06:01 AM (#3732522) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Keith A of Hertford It was not a serving RAF pilot, so it was not an RAF plane. However old the aircraft, they are required to be proven air worthy. |
|
23 Aug 15 - 10:41 AM (#3732574) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker yet more people are dead and another rare vintage aircraft is destroyed... Just what is the point and entertainment value of forcing elderly aircraft to their structural limits performing loop stunts and other childish show off air acrobatics... Unless it's the morbid risk and thrill of watching spectacular crashes...??? It's great that enthusiasts rescue these old planes for museums and keep some airworthy... But it's surely satisfaction enough that they still exist and can get up in the air for the occasional sedate memorial commemoration flyover..... leave the stunt flying to young specialist military display pilots in state of the art modern aircraft... |
|
23 Aug 15 - 11:01 AM (#3732580) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Megan L Another crash at an air display in Switzerland just been reported two light planes wing tipped and crashed a third plane in the display managed to land safely. |
|
23 Aug 15 - 11:29 AM (#3732591) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: GUEST,mauvepink This Hunter had just celebrated it's 60th birtday of flight on 15th July. It had a fully valid permit to fly up to March next year. At it's last inspection it had just under 6000 hours on the airframe (equating to 100 hours a year for it's lifetime). The CAA site shows it was first built in 1959 but it's first flight was 1955 so I think something is a little out there. It was initially an RAF airframe but was later transferred to the Royal Navy FRADU unit. It has then been owned by several heitage jet owners. These aircraft are meticulously maintained and, to be allowed to display at an airshow, they HAVE TO be kept within prescribed limits or they get called off the display. The pilots, civilian or ex military, still have to have the necessary hours on their licence and a display certificate for type before they are allowed near a display line. I am fed up of reading all the conjecture and accusations today about this tragic event. At this time the Air Accident Investigations people are on site and they will find the cause. Accidents seldom occur with just one root cause and I fear there will be a couple of things that brought this event into being. The fact the aircraft is so old I doubt will have any bearing as there will be so little of the original parts still on it. One has to question allowing high energy manoevres and decents being allowed over a busy main road BUT I have no idea at all where the crowd line was supposed to be or what brought that aircraft into the place it was. Going over the crowd, below 500 feet or closer than a prescribed distance from the crowd line are major infringements of any display, but one cannot factor out all risks totally when dealing with men and machines. There could even have been a bird strike. I have gone to airshows the past 40 years. I accept that accidents can happen as a spectator. The sad thing here is that most of the people killed were not involved at all with the airshow. They were just travelling along a busy road going about their business. This accident is more akin to some over-tired driver crossing a reservation and going into a pile of traffic (an event that happens far too frequently on our roads but we do not ban lorries!) My thoughts go to the relatives and friends of those affected. No amount of conjecture can restore those killed nor help anyone involved. The pilot is still fighting for his life and heaven only knows if he survives what will be in his heart and head for years to come. However, he may be able to also give some clue as to what happened. Let's have no more blame to his abilities, nor to the aircraft, until the AAIB have made their report huh? I lost a good friend in a mid-air collision when he was practicing displaying. He trained up all the time to be as good as he could be. He was a highly experienced pilot. His death brought home to me how much we ask from these men and women we love to go seeing throwing their aircraft around the sky. But they are not 'stunt people'. They are professional pilots, highly skilled, flying aircraft that are highly maintained and fit for purpose. We should respect that |
|
23 Aug 15 - 11:46 AM (#3732597) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: GUEST,mauvepink ... by the way The pilot is currently a British Airways Captain and used to fly Harriers. Anyone will tell you who know anything about the Harrier is that their pilots were exceptional - a kind of cross between rotary and fixed wing pilot - so this chap yesterday was more than qualified for a Hunter. Take a look at a display from September last year I just found https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGCfg7Wbuvs Far better than the morbid videos that are out there just now showing no regard for relatives feelings. |
|
23 Aug 15 - 11:49 AM (#3732599) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Backwoodsman Amen, Mauvepink, amen. A thoughtful, well-written and, unlike some of the stuff above, a knowledgeable post. |
|
23 Aug 15 - 11:50 AM (#3732600) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker mauvepink - are your reflexes and reaction responses as quick and keen as they were in your late teens / early 20s...??? I'm not even 60 yet; but if i'm honest I know I take fractions of a second longer to think my way out of trouble in potential traffic accident situations.. I'm not too proud to admit I'm not as fit or equipped to handle high adrenaline speed challenges as I used to be... Experience is a well earned asset, but maybe it's ego that kills older display / 'stunt' pilots...??? |
|
23 Aug 15 - 12:01 PM (#3732604) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Megan L I guess, this is the computer age equivalent of gossiping round the village well conjecture and supposition all we do know at the moment is both here and in Dittigen people have lost their lives or are critically injured, let those whose job it is to investigate do their job and families grieve in peace. |
|
23 Aug 15 - 12:20 PM (#3732609) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: GUEST,mauvepink @ Backwoodsman... thank you :) @ punkfolkrocker... I do hear you BUT these men and women are checked out by peers who are unforgiving on check rides. They have to be. That is how it works. Commercial pilots have to stop commercial operation at 60 - no matter how good or experienced they are - because that is the rules. Read their "Civil Air Displays: A guide to pilots" https://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CivilAirDisplaysAGuideforPilots.pdf It will serve batter than any trash on the media just now. CAP403 (125 pages of pure fun!) covers all the legal aspects of flying displays and special events. Display pilots have to fill in an SRG1300 to dispaly and an SRG1302 to renew permission. SRG 1303 is for display notifiaction. SRG 1304 covers special events This all aside from having type ratings and being current on ANY aircraft you fly, CPL ratings and other certificates. Regular medicals and statutory reporting. Practice makes perfect. There are old pilots and bold pilots, but there are few old bold pilots! |
|
23 Aug 15 - 12:50 PM (#3732618) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker Like a lot of blokes here, I have a deep regard for vintage aircraft. My dad was RAF - late 1940s national service, stuck deep underground in a radar bunker. I don't think he ever got airborne, but he still brought me up with a fascination for aircraft. 30 odd years ago when I worked in industrial museums, I had the thrill of touching one of the last remaining fragments of the Bristol Brabazon... and looking at research photos could only feel sad that such a beautiful creation had vanished forever. That's why my inner impulse is to see these vintage planes preserved for posterity... |
|
23 Aug 15 - 03:40 PM (#3732664) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Alan Day Like Will I know this area very well and within a very small area you have Shoreham,Portslade,slightly widening you have Worthing,Hove and Brighton.It could have been a disaster involving thousands. The airport is adjacent to the A27 so it is a bit surprising that they got permission ,but easy to say after the accident. My condolences to all involved. Al |
|
23 Aug 15 - 07:12 PM (#3732723) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: ChanteyLass I taught in a US town that had a naval air station. Early in my career I worked in a school filled with the children whose parents were in the navy. They asked me if I would go to the annual air show held on the base. I had no interest but remembered my college professors' advice to learn as much about the students' lifestyles and interests as possible. Off I went. There was a crash. A father and son flew twin biplanespecially in formation. Over nearby woods, their wingtip touched and the planes crashed. One pilot died; the other, though seriously injured, survived. That was my first and probably will be my last attendance at an air show. My heart goes out to all those affected by these crashes. |
|
23 Aug 15 - 08:06 PM (#3732736) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Charmion Once upon a time, I was a medic serving on a fighter base. I still sometimes hear the crash bell in my dreams. I hate aur shows -- too much risk for no good purpose. Entertaining the masses and enteancing young people with the magic of flught are not good purposes. |
|
23 Aug 15 - 08:26 PM (#3732741) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Joe Offer I think it's quite remarkable that 60-year-old aircraft are still flying, but apparently it's quite normal. Airplanes ordinarily have exceptionally high-quality maintenance, so overhauls replace all parts subject to metal fatigue or other deterioration. I think the usual overhaul period for private planes is every 2000 hours of operation. But air shows stress aircraft to their limits - over crowds of people. It's thrilling to watch, but crashes at air shows happen all too often. Still, I'm glad I've seen a number of air shows. While he was in high school, my stepson was a member of the local chapter of the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA - Harrison Ford's organization). The EAA people were very good to him. They sent him to their camp in Oshkosh, Wisconsin - that's where we saw the AirVenture show. But when he got his pilot's license, he dropped out of EAA and joined the Airplane Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA). He said there were too many people in EAA who took too many chances. I think I'm glad he's careful. Any day now, he should pass his instrument certification. He's planning to get his commercial license and then an instructor licence. He expects to get a job as a pilot. I hope this happens soon. He's 26, and he's costing me a lot of money.... I have to admit, though, that I'm proud of him. -Joe- |
|
24 Aug 15 - 02:15 AM (#3732784) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Backwoodsman Joe,mat UK air shows, no aircraft is permitted to fly over or towards the crowd. There is a display line parallel to the crowd line, but around 100 yards distant (I may be wrong on the distance, but it's something of that order). The only display aircraft permitted to fly towards the crowd are the RAF Display Team, The Red Arrows, whose skill, airmanship and professionalism is absolutely second to none. In the case of the tragic accident this weekend, no-one in the crowd of spectators was involved - the aircraft crashed on a nearby highway, outside the airfield perimeter. |
|
24 Aug 15 - 02:19 AM (#3732785) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Backwoodsman Incidentally, the last time a spectator at a UK air display was killed was in 1952. |
|
24 Aug 15 - 07:47 AM (#3732809) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Keith A of Hertford The number killed may be as high as 20, it is now said. Extraordinary videos and stills of the crash have been shown. What do you make of it mauvepink? Remarkable that the pilot was not killed outright, and still clings to life. |
|
24 Aug 15 - 02:18 PM (#3732866) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: GUEST,mauvepink @ Kieth of Hertford.... I think these people's pictures would have been far better being sent to the AAIB for investigative purposes and that greater sensitivity should ALWAYS be shown when disaster strikes anywhere. There have been a plethora of films put out ther that should not have been shown and the Police have now made an appeal for people to stop posting. No-one has a right to see these films showing people being killed, but the footage could help the AAIB with their investigation. That the pilot is alive is miraculous still. He must have hit at an extrenely shallow angle of attack for the aircraft to have 'skidded' along. I have not watched any of the footage so cannot make any conjecture. I do not know the area at all but have looked at a map of the roads and runway directions. I have no idea of crowd line so will make no comment because I simply know nothing. One thing I will say. He could have 'punched out' and left the aircraft to it's fate into the crowds. He stuck with it and I would suspect tried to hit a spot with what looked like the least damage if he could. He could have been incapacitated before that, or distracted, or an engine power problem, or any other myriad things that affect such happenings. All speculative and having no place in proper accident investigation. We should leave that to the experts. Extremely modern aircraft are involved in accidents. Increasingly the pilots get the blame because 'modern aircraft are designed not to crash'. Electronics and computers make spurious alarms and pilots get distracted every single day. Older aircraft tend not to suffer the same fate and the pilots at at the top of their game because they still have old fashioned flying skills I never ever have gone to an airshow in the hope of seeing a crash. I go with full respect for the airframes and the men/women who fly them. I am awestruck at their skills and abilities. It could be argued if any of us have a right to be entertained by such shows considering risk and potential for harm when not needed. Ban the motor racing, ban the motor cycling. Ban civilians flying helicopters for fun. Hell, ban football (people get killed and trampled on every year over football and they often do it to each other for fun!). I also visit museums and see the great work people do in restoring all sorts of things to their original glory. But an airctaft is never meant to be on the ground. It's like caging a wild bird. They should be seen flying for them to be fully appreciated. Perhaps I belong in a museum? Some day I undoubtedly will end up in a place that looks like one (should I not die a fast death) My hope would be that if I ever have a crash in my it will never involve injury to another person because of me. Every single pilot that flies goes out with safety and survival in his mind too... (with the exception of the odd one that deliberately crashes his aircraft) I'm babbling... I'll shush :) |
|
24 Aug 15 - 04:32 PM (#3732892) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Backwoodsman Amen again, Mauvepink. |
|
25 Aug 15 - 03:11 AM (#3732991) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Mr Red well there was something on video that clearly showed the plane doing a smooth maneuver until it was flying horizontal, then dip suddenly. The trees in the shot did not show any strong winds. Conclusion, something failed at that moment. Pilot, or mechanical. FWIW the expert on TV pointed out that the maneuver was not called a loop-the-loop but something else. The graphics on TV showed a loop that was not co-planer, there was a twist in it that meant what started parallel to the runway flared-out parallel to the road some 30 deg acute. |
|
25 Aug 15 - 03:29 AM (#3733000) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Backwoodsman Speculation here is pointless. Video, even professionally-shot video, is difficult to understand because perspective changes (especially long-range, highly-zoomed shots) without fixed reference points can change what the viewer 'perceives to be 'happening'. Analysis of video evidence, like examination of the remaining physical evidence, is best left to those experts trained in that science. IMHO. |
|
25 Aug 15 - 03:52 AM (#3733007) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: GUEST In a statement released before the CAA announcement, the British Air Display Association said: "It is certainly not a time for uninformed or mis-informed rule making, especially when the existing rules have worked so well for so long." (from The Independant) The trouble is if you don't do something unless the assessed risk of an accident with fatalities in the general public is, say, less than 1 in 200 years, then having an accident shows that your risk assessment methodology may be wrong. Or that your risk assessment may be correct but the public find the accepted risk too great. |
|
25 Aug 15 - 04:45 AM (#3733016) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Backwoodsman I suspect that there will be rule changes, but not knee-jerk stuff - the different bodies will assess, consult and, after that, make revisions as deemed appropriate. It's impossible to remove all risks. The point was made on BBC Breakfast this morning that the suggestion of displays being restricted to over-sea events, which people were expressing within hours of the accident occurring, would increase risks for those flying the aircraft and, on this occasion, would have almost certainly resulted in the death of the pilot. A further point was made that, although display-flying is inherently more dangerous for pilots than, for instance, airline flying, every display pilot is statistically in more danger driving to the display than he/she is during the display flight. Tragic though this accident is, it's important to retain a sense of proportion when assessing risks and rule changes. Living our daily lives is dangerous in all sorts of ways. I'm pretty certain that 1,500 Titanic passengers were considered to be at no risk whatsoever when they sailed away that fateful April day in 1912. |
|
25 Aug 15 - 05:39 AM (#3733022) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: GUEST,Iain All fatalities and injuries are regrettable and have a devastating impact on the families involved. This was an accident irregardless of human or mechanical failure and similar things happen on the ground in the air or underwater. The age of the plane is irrelevant, the airworthiness checks are stringent. This was a plane with a long successful history unlike the prototype DH110 that crashed at Farnborough in 1952 and killed 27 and seriously injured 63 spectators. Risk can only be mitigated not eradicated. There is an element of risk attached to every human endeavour, even something as innocent as crossing the road. |
|
25 Aug 15 - 09:47 AM (#3733088) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Mr Red Clacton are going ahead with air displays. They have the luxury of having the aircraft over water. Risk only to the risk taker. Unless boats refuse to heed warnings. There has been a knee-jerk reaction. All Hawker Hunters grounded, all vintage planes banned from doing any fancy maneuvers, fly-past only. We expect such, it is called learning from experience. |
|
25 Aug 15 - 11:00 AM (#3733110) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Backwoodsman No, it's called 'immediate safety measures until all of the circumstances of the accident have been analysed by the appropriate authorities, and informed decisions can be made as to the best way to minimise risks in the future'. That's what we expect, that's where we are. When the investigations are complete, and the resulting recommendations are implemented I, for one, hope that vintage aircraft will once again be cleared to give aerobatic displays, provided that such aircraft are certificated as suitable. |
|
25 Aug 15 - 11:09 AM (#3733113) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker Backwoodsman - fair objective assessment.. To which I'd only add "... and provided that such older and vintage pilots are also certificated as suitable" Some of us still reasonably fit over 50s get giddy turns just getting up off the sofa and farting to hard.. Let alone coping with high speed aerobatic G forces and split second life or death decisions.. |
|
25 Aug 15 - 11:23 AM (#3733116) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Backwoodsman PFR - they already are! There are very stringent rules for certification of all pilots. When I flew gliders, we had a very highly experienced pilot who was not permitted to fly solo because of health issues - I forget exactly what they were, it was a good many years ago, but it meant that every flight had to be in a two-.seater with another qualified pilot in the other seat. And, of course, it wasn't an 'older and vintage pilot' who flew the Germanwings Airbus into the mountainside recently! |
|
25 Aug 15 - 11:36 AM (#3733120) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Megan L I was told that pilots have to undergo regular medicals. yet the DVLA still relies on self reporting which allowed a man who had been having fainting fits for 30years to drive a bin lorry and kill 6 people injuring many more and it has not sadly been the first such incident where a driver deliberately did not report a preexisting medical condition then went on to plough into innocent pedestrians killing them. |
|
25 Aug 15 - 01:22 PM (#3733151) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: McGrath of Harlow Any songs about it yet? There should be in time. |
|
25 Aug 15 - 11:36 PM (#3733241) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: Fossil I was horrified to see the films of the accident on NZTV News, because I spent a lot of my time in the late '70's flying hang gliders at Mill Hill, which overlooks the Shoreham Airport. Shoreham has had an Air Day since time immemorial. The airfield long pre-dates the A27, so there would be no reason to prevent them having a show there. Of course, we must wait for the official investigation to determine the cause of the crash. In the film I saw, the plane was almost straight and level at about 200 feet at the bottom of its loop, then seemed to pitch slightly nose down just before it hit the ground. Why would that be? Some speculation also seems to be happening over a vapour trail visible in some shots streaming from the starboard wingtip. Personally, I think this looks a lot like a simple wingtip vortex made visible by the reduction in air pressure at the centre of the vortex causing water vapour in the air to condense: such vortices are commonly observed in damp conditions. A sad business, the loss of so many lives and the wreck of an historic aircraft. Lets hope the lessons will be learned. |
|
26 Aug 15 - 02:52 PM (#3733362) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link There was footage of the plane leaving to go to the air show on TV news tonight .The commentary was that some experts say that it seemed slow and taking all of the runway. |
|
27 Aug 15 - 05:37 AM (#3733483) Subject: RE: BS: Shoreham Air Show disaster From: GUEST,Sapper sans cookie Coming from a Railway background, safety is part of a long process of lessons learnt, all too often tragic lessons too. The RAIB and AAIB both tend to work on the principal of "When all the crying's done and the clearing up begun, learn to fix the problem, not the blame. |