Hunter crash at Shoreham air show

Pilot error - not helping his case was that had been cautioned earlier at Southport Air Show regarding his skill level. BBC News also reported that the aircraft was operated outside its licence conditions.

 

And the pilot cant remember a thing about the accident, so he says.
How he is a free man after killing 11 people is beyond me, I know they were waiting for the air accident report, but to still be able to walk around and do what he wants, he can still go to the pub for a pint go for a walk breath the air, if it was a road traffic accident something would have been done by now.

 

The notion that locking up everyone who makes a mistake is silly. It does far more harm than good.

 

So you advocate locking people up in advance of all the evidence being gathered and a trial being held?

 

As for having no recollection of the accident, have you ever spoken to servicemen who have given detailed statements over horrific scenes they've experienced, but on returning home have developed PTSD and then have no recollection of the incident, or those who have had a terrible road accident, appeared fine and coherent at the time only to collapse, have a brain injury, be in a coma (induced or not) and then wake up not even knowing who they are any more?

 

if someone commits a criminal act , they should suffer the full rigours of the Law, but as said, jailing someone for making a mistake helps no one. Due process will decide eventually.

 

Not saying that the perpetrator of a criminal act should escape the Law here and elsewhere, some people seem to want Andy Hill locked up before due process has taken place.

 

Quite so. This is why the police are excluded from AAIB investigations.

 

one thing that came out was that the pilot may have gotten confused , he also flew a jet provost and may have remembered the wrong data, and flew the Hunter to the parameters of the Provost which has a lower stall speed, and strangly enough had he been flying the Provost, the height and speed into the loop are what you would expect to perform that maneuver , in airshows display pilots do fly more than one type, a pilot can be in in a russian mig, then a vampire, or a sea vixen, all in the same display, same as some piston jockys will fly an edge 300, land, takeoff in a mustang, etc, so they have to know in minute detail what the aircraft 's envelope is.
Shoreham had insufficient safety margins, for instance, the active area, ie over flight on displays should have never included overflying the main road, i would have gone as far as to say Shorham might not have be a suitable venue for fast jet display other than flyover, with no aerobatics allowed due to the closeness of the main road, Eastbourne for example only allows aerobatics over the sea, away from any possible public danger, where possible the display envelope should be with in the airfield boundary. that i believe was always the rule the CAA set.

 

Harsh. I had a relatively minor head trauma in a cycling accident when I was younger, and when I woke up in Addenbrooke's I had no recollection whatsoever of the accident (and still don't to this day). I know what happened because others who were there have told me. Same for my godsons's father who had a severe (life changing) motorcycle accident, and can remember nothing about the accident or the preceding 15-20 minutes. I think it's fair to say that it's extremely probable that Andy Hill genuinely can't recall anything about the accident.

 

So..........

Deaths due to air accidents in the UK are extremely low, in fact I don't know when the last fatality was on a UK Commercial Flight, similarly the number of deaths of people on the ground as a result of air accidents is vanishingly small.

By comparison there are currently just under 2000 road deaths each year plus serious injuries. These include victims of drunk drivers, drivers using phones, drivers speeding etc etc.

If I was going to start doing unpleasant things to anyone who causes an accident I would start with these. I'm not aware of anything in the report that suggests the pilot was doing anything reckless, he simply got it wrong.

 

I hope you wouldn't start doing unpleasant things to anyone who causes an accident whatever their culpability. It would do little if anything to reduce the accident rate and would have other detrimental consequences.

 

Hum, having just looked at a report it seems that the fatalities at the Shoreham Air Show were the first 'non flying' casualties at an Air Show since 1952 which rather puts things in perspective.

My point however is that if you look at accident statistics, there are much bigger issues to start on, notably on the roads as this affects all of us, and that many of those incidents are caused by individuals whose behaviour is entirely avoidable and inexcusable so should be subject to the full force of the law and of public opprobrium.

 

In most cases in an accident where the pilot has an aircraft related problem, they will try to avoid built up areas, often to their cost, that is why Shoreham was so bad, the pilots should have been brieffed about the closeness of the main road, and amended their datum points accordingly, so that their display didn't take them over the road during the display except for positioning , i have to question Shorehams suitability for fast jet display, they are faster, need more space in the sky so if you want someone to blame, blame the organisers for not ensuring a pilot knows the no fly areas, blame the council for allowing the Airshow to happen with inadiquate safety rules, could the A27 hae been closed and traffic diverted? whilst the flying display was happening? blame the pilot for displaying the aircraft in such a way to have got it so wrong, he had been warned previously about his flying , should he have been grounded at the time? its wrong to blame one person, yes he was the effect, but the cause, the events that lead up to the accident are most important , if only to ensure no such accident can be repeated,

 

The AAIB report is explicitly a "no blame" report, so let's not go there ...

But to pick up one point (highlighted): The accident report shows that the pilot had with them a map (shown on page 57) that clearly marked areas with absolutely no overflight, and areas for no overflight below 500 feet. So I think one can assume that the pilot was briefed about the specific constraints of the display area.

(Disclaimer - I have skim-read, the report, not yet read it in detail).

Tom

 

I have never seen the logic in the current obsession with jailing people for human error, in all accidents of this type it is usually a combination of circumstances that lead to tragedy. I this case there were things wrong with the aircraft that the pilot may not have known about, he perhaps should have been grounded previously and the organisers have also been found lacking.

I have just reread an account of the 1913 Ais Gill accident when, due to poor quality coal a train stalled short of the summit and was hit by the following train which had run past the Mallastang signals at danger. The proximate cause was the driver of the second train not keeping a proper lookout but other railwaymen were also lacking in their duty, the guard of train one should have placed detonators on the line to protect his train but didn't, the driver was also persuaded to take an overloaded train without a pilot much against his better judgment. There is a lesson to be leant here as the Midland Railway, much against what would be expected given the harsh discipline of the age, did not dismiss the guilty driver but kept him on doing menial labouring jobs around Duran Hill Shed as a constant reminder to his collegues about the consequences of his actions.

The pilot at Shoreham will have the lives of those he killed on his conscience for the rest of his life. I agree he shouldn't fly again but why would justice be served by a prison sentence when countless Home Secretaries have told us that jail is about protecting the public and rehabilitation not retribution

 

With no disrespect to the bereaved BUT if the pilot can't remember the accident - or any details of it - he would have nothing to affect his conscience hence might be unable to sense any consequences .

 

I'm sure he will have seen the consequences on video and will know exactly what happened even if he can't remember it.