Teckair Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 Take a look at the map: www.google.com.au/maps/@50.8362215,-0.2980305,15z and see how the airfield aligns with the A27 bypass.OME I still think it was possible to avoid the highway. If not give the show a miss. Especially if people are flying like that.
facthunter Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 I wonder how in practice these guys are. It's often current Airline pilots and it's not like their full time job is just because it's another aeroplane. Costs a lot of money to fly and maintain those babies and keep current in every manoeuver. Nev
Bennyboy320 Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 High rates of descent in a fast jet close to the ground it's the inertia that will bite you, lost a squadron mate in the early 90's the same way. 1
facthunter Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 There's a point where you are DEAD (No possible recovery) and there's nothing you can do about it. (Except eject and that's ruled out for civvie flying)
Teckair Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 These type of crashes have been happening for years. You would think it would have stopped by now.
dominicm Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 I was part of small team of RC modellers that finished our lunchtime demonstration. We were based next to the commentary position. Can't describe the feeling of dread when we saw it happen in front of us just beyond the perimeter. Thoughts are with the casualties and those affected. There was obviously no flying for the rest of the day with the exception of Vulcan which made a slow respectful slow pass.
old man emu Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 Even if he had punched out, the plane would still have impacted on or near the road. Maybe could have been worse as a result of Newton's 3rd. The reaction force to the ejection could have caused the trajectory of the plane to change away from the direction the chair went. That would have made the point of impact before the M27 and debris could have shot across a wider swath. OME 1
Phil Perry Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 It did not look like a normal loop to me and why would you do that over a busy road? I thought that should have been done over the airfield. This is likely to impact airshows from now on. A number of pilot / witnesses have commented that the manouvre did not actually look like a standard "Loop" but more like a "Clover" . . . It's interesting also to note that the Red Arrows display team have consistently refused to fly displays at Shoreham as in their view the airfield and surrounding infrastructure is "Too Tight" with insufficient escape routes in the event of any equipment malfunction. Display organizers have a good saftety record historically though, . . .the last major loss of life at an airshow in the UK, was the John Derry incident in 1952 where his aircraft broke up and killed a lot of spectators. ( 37 if I remember correctly ) There have been other spectator injuries, ie, one person hit by the wingtip of a glider and one person injured by a failed rotor blade tip which was thrown through the air for quite a long distance before striking the spectator. But as you have said Teck,. . .regs are still going to be revised following this tragedy. The A.A.I.B. have been given quite a lot of public video footage of the event taken from several different angles. This should help with the investigation somewhat, especially if the pilot survives, he is still in intensive care at the moment. Phil
Guest ozzie Posted August 25, 2015 Posted August 25, 2015 The CAA have implemented restrictions on vintage jets to straight and level. No dynamic aerobatics permitted. In one of the videos the entry to the loop looks like it is from the side with a twist on the way up.
Mick Posted August 25, 2015 Posted August 25, 2015 In some of the photos during the loop it looks like the flaps are deployed. I would not think that would be normal for this sort of manouvre?
Teckair Posted August 25, 2015 Posted August 25, 2015 The CAA have implemented restrictions on vintage jets to straight and level. No dynamic aerobatics permitted. In one of the videos the entry to the loop looks like it is from the side with a twist on the way up. That won't cut it, modern jets will do the same if treated like that.
Bennyboy320 Posted August 25, 2015 Posted August 25, 2015 In some of the photos during the loop it looks like the flaps are deployed. I would not think that would be normal for this sort of manouvre? It's a fighter not an airliner, flap 23 degrees was commonly used during air combat maneavering & its limit speed was M0.90, hope that clarifies the flap issue. 2 2
Bennyboy320 Posted August 25, 2015 Posted August 25, 2015 Just saw this on another aviation web site.
Phil Perry Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 Worth reading and sharing. . . .Written by a specialist and a Hunter Pilot, and actual owner of "Miss Demeanour" The Hunter aircraft involved in the accident. Following ill informed comments and inappropriate speculation by so-called "experts" on display flying and Hunters in particular, I’m breaking cover from media calls and emails to me. What follows must be read in the context that on Saturday an aircraft crashed and not beyond that. I would have written almost the same words if the pilot had walked away from something other than a normal landing and no one had been injured, fatally or otherwise. The AAIB will take what time is necessary to gather all relevant and perhaps what others might think irrelevant information, before even starting to piece together events. Only then will they go on to draw conclusions. Following that, they will undoubtedly make recommendations in the wake of their enquiry. In the following I have used the expression “they will” but it is only my assumption of would seem logical, so take it as “they PROBABLY will”. The AAIB will look at the operator’s Organisational Control Manual, (OCM) which sets out how an organisation operates its aircraft. (At the end of this post, you’ll see the sections in the OCM for Miss Demeanour.) They will look at the maintenance records, the After Flight and Before Flight (AF/BF) records which will show amongst other things, the pre-start fuel state, oxygen levels, Anti-G system nitrogen gas levels, etc. The Flight Authorisation sheet will show the details of the planned flight, such as where the pilot intended to land after displaying. They will rebuild his planned flight as if they were flight planning it themselves. I would hope they would use an experience Hunter display pilot to do this, someone not connected to the organisation. They will listen to the chain of radio communications from the departure airfield to starting his display. Just listening to what is said and how it was said will be factors, ranging from absolutely normal to there being intimations of other factors at play. They will look at radar tracks along side those communications. Tracking around London from North Weald is flying in some of the most congested areas in UK General Aviation. Everyone else is also “going around” London but at less than half the Hunter’s speed. They will analyse in great detail and probably develop a computer model of the display flight profile, from his positioning for the run in until moments after impact. This they can do using combinations of primary and secondary radar information together with photos and video from the general public. There is the possibility that any GPS in the aircraft will have recorded the flight profile. Nothing near a Flight Data Recorder but it could give track, speed and height information. They will look at everything they can which is external to the aircraft. Such factors such as visibility, birds or other aircraft that could have been in the pilot’s view. Anything that could have distracted the pilot or physically affected the aircraft. Photos and video of the jet exhaust, its heat haze etc can provide them with information. There will be things which even I haven’t thought of. They will look at the pilot’s log book and any video they can get showing his previous displays in Hunters. They will look at displays he has flown in other aircraft. They will talk to people regarding personal details, medical history, occupational flying and to his Display Authorisation Examiner, etc. They will interview other Hunter display pilots to get an understanding as to what we do and the different ways in which we might go about displaying. They might even present those pilots with the information they have gathered and ask for second by second comments. They will obviously want to interview the pilot himself as soon as he is medically fit to be interviewed. All this will take some months and can not be rushed. They may come up with an interim finding if there is something that can not wait for the full report.. The CAA also has to play its part by way of immediate and future actions. I can not fault what they have done so far. As I write this is the status: No flights by Hunter aircraft. Vintage jet displays OVER LAND will be ..... “limited to flypasts, which means ‘high energy’ aerobatics will not be permitted.” They are actively reviewing air show safety. See www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx… I was just typing “ you’d think they’d give a simple link!” when this link came through: http://www.caa.co.uk/SN2015003 That is the LEAST they could do. They might easily have applied the ruling to all aircraft over certain horsepower and weight, warbird or otherwise. They might even have stopped all air shows pending their review. The UK has the Gold Standard when it comes to do with everything related to air shows. Every year, the CAA holds seminars for Display Pilots and seminars for Display Authorisation Examiners (DAEs) such as myself. It is compulsory for DAEs to attend at least two out of three seminars. Display organisers may also attend these seminars. The Military Aviation Authority (MAA) likewise holds annual seminars, to which civilian display pilots are welcome to attend. Senior officers from the MAA also attend the CAA seminars. Finally we have the British Air Display Association ( www.bada-uk.com) who bring together civilian operators & pilots, military senior officers & pilots and display organisers, not only from the UK but Europe. BADA also arrange seminars. Display Safety is the foundation stone of all these gatherings. Apart from reviewing the previous year’s display activities and any incidents, safety procedures are reviewed both in terms of compliance and coverage. Whilst these events might have lectures on a wide range of air show aspects, they are also an interactive event where everyone can have an open discussion. The British aviation community has been and continues to be world leaders when it comes to openness and examination of anything to do with aviation. Even the medical fraternity has taken lessons from this ability for introspection. Comments about Hunters in general. I’m often asked if they are difficult to fly. The answer is absolutely not. They are one of the most delightful and simple aircraft to fly. Yes, more demanding that a light aircraft because things happen more quickly. Their weight and speed makes inertia a big factor compared to a light aircraft. From a systems aspect, you could loose all hydraulic and electrical supply (they have two generators and batteries) and fly safely to land. In a Hunter in the UK, a suitable runway is no more than five or ten minutes away. I would go so far as to say that the skill level required to fly a Hunter is not as great as say flying a Spitfire. In a Spitfire or other big piston warbird, a pilot must have a definite feel for aircraft, an affinity for flying. In fact the further you go back in warbird aircraft age, the more difficult they become. The Hunter is at the peak of simplicity for all military jets of any type before moving on in time to later military aircraft. With regards to the Hunter’s age, Hunter aircraft are still be operated by civilian contractors providing the military with services for which the military do not want to tie up their own more costly assets. Why, because they are simple and safe to operate. About the only downside is an axial flow engine which lacks the fuel economy of a by-pass jet engine. Before the Hunters were allowed in to civilian hands, the type’s service record was examined in detail by the CAA, to assess its reliability. It was and I believe still stands as the UK’s largest exported military aircraft type and was revered by all countries and pilots who flew them. It’s Avon engine is regarded as one of the most robust engines ever built by Rolls Royce. It is still used by power stations for auxiliary power generation. The London Underground also used them, I think again as an auxiliary power source or something to do with ventilation. Why? because they ran for hour upon hour with faultless reliability. While I was flying in the Fleet Air Arm, we had a Rolls Royce engineer talk to us about the Phantom’s engine. He had also worked on Avons. We still flew Hunters and I asked him how long could the engine run without oil pressure. I think his reply was something on the lines “we gave up try to find out after eight hours”. Hunters, along with all ex military jets, indeed all ex military aircraft, are maintained and inspected beyond that called for by normal aircraft. That is NOT because they need it. It is because those who have the responsibility for the rules of their operation but do not understand the aircraft in fine detail, will see the buck stopping with them. There is a public outcry for “something to be done”. It is natural. The question is where is the line drawn? Accidents, at the most banal, it is not golf balls that kill people, it is the golfers who hit the ball. Why else do most Golf Clubs insist that their members have indemnity insurance? It must happen enough times that this is deemed necessary. It’s not cars and lorries that kill it’s the people driving. I am NOT saying pilot error, I’m saying that wherever there is an inanimate object under the control or lack of control by a human, accidents happen. Ban flying, driving and golf, problem solved. There will be lessons learnt and things will change. Whether there is an over reaction we will have to wait and see. You will have been disappointed if you were expecting comments or views on what happened on Saturday. It is human nature to speculate but such speculation should not be made public where others might take it as gospel. It doesn’t help if that person’s speculation was based on the fact that they looked in their log book and saw they once flew a Hunter forty years ago. Again, as in my previous post, my heart goes out to all the families and friends of those innocent people who were traumatised, injured or died as a result of the crash. Jonathon. Index of Heritage Aviation Developments Ltd Organisation Control Manual, 1 Introduction 1.1 Organisation Control Manual 1.2 Aims and Objectives of Heritage Aviation Developments Ltd 1.3 Contents and Amendments 1.4 Aircraft Operated 2 Personnel and Responsibilities 2.1 Managing Director and Chief Pilot 2.2 Aircraft Captain 3 Aircrew 3.1 Pilot Qualifications 3.2 Flight Authorisation 3.3 Licence Exemption, Annual 3.4 Licence Exemption, Training 3.5 Currency - Aircraft (Experienced Pilots) 3.6 Currency - Aircraft (Inexperienced Pilots) 3.7 Display Authorisation and Currency 3.8 Display Awareness 3.9 Carriage of Passengers 4 Documentation, Flight Management and Flight Safety 4.1 General 4.2 Promulgation 4.3 Documentation 4.4 Pre-Flight 4.5 En Route 4.6 After Landing 4.7 Oxygen Requirement 4.8 Flight with Unserviceable Equipment 4.9 Fuelling and De-Fuelling 4.10 Life Preservers 4.11 Ejection Seats 4.12 Abandon Aircraft Policy 4.13 Stores Jettison Policy 5 Standard Operating Procedures 5.1 Flight Operations 5.2 Weather 5.3 Charts 5.4 Self Briefing 5.5 Take-Off 5.6 Descent and Approach 5.7 Diversion 5.8 Crew Drills and Check Lists 5.9 Communications 5.10 Flights is excess of 250Kts IAS below FL100 5.11 Minimum Landing Fuel 5.12 Use of Brake Parachute 6 Displays 6.1 General 6.2 Display Minima 6.3 General Provisions 6.4 Display Manoeuvres 7 Engineering 7.1 General 7.2 Pre-Flight Requirements 7.3 Accepting Aircraft for Flight 7.4 Post Flight 7.5 Pilot Turnaround Requirement 7.6 Test Flights 8 Accident Procedures 8.1 General 8.2 Aircraft Accident 8.3 Actions to be taken 8.4 Subsequent Actions 8.5 Statements to the Press or other News Agencies 9 Maintenance and Flight Line Operations Interface Appendix A Hunter Mk9/Mk58 Conversion Flights Appendix B Hunter Mk9/Mk58 Technical Exam Appendix C Ground School Training Declaration and Certificate 1 7
Phil Perry Posted August 30, 2015 Posted August 30, 2015 ** UPDATE** I have to apologise here folks, The Hunter which crashed, WAS NOT "Miss Demeanour" G-PSST - this is owned by the author of the mail ( Mr. Jonathon Whaley, and his company ) Somebody down the line had made an error and made him "The Owner" of the crashed aircraft, when it should have read "Also an Hunter owner and display pilot" The aircraft involved was ( unless they've got this wrong as well ! ) G-BXFI, A Hunter T7. If you have a look on G-INFO it gives more details of the company, etc. My apologies for not thoroughly checking this one out prior to posting. Phil.
old man emu Posted August 30, 2015 Posted August 30, 2015 Keep up this sloppy, Jimmy, and we'll have to sell you off to The News of the World. Where's your update story on the Bulldog? White, Perry Editor in Chief 1 1
planedriver Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 That's biased OME. What's wrong with "The Screws of The World"? Probably a lot more truths in their rag, than the guilty would admit to:drool: It was after all, the Sundays cheap jollies read.
Phil Perry Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 Keep up this sloppy, Jimmy, and we'll have to sell you off to The News of the World.Where's your update story on the Bulldog? White, Perry Editor in Chief Velly Solly Mate. . . . . . Every one of the employees at Tatenhill have been instructed very well, NOT to talk to Phil. . . . .as I am some kind of threat to their continued existence, and I'm being treated like a sun OR daily star JOURNOE. . . . ie,. . ."Don't even speak to the bar$tard". . . . Flew in there this weekend and got the "Silents". . . . Simply for asking questions about this bloody whirlygig gyrocopterthingummy,. . .a type of aircraft in which I have NO REAL INTEREST whatsoever. . . . . But the whole thing is becoming interesting to me, as though it was a bloody UFO which some prat had reverse engineered. . . . now THAT would really be worth keeping a secret. . . . Still,. . .they DID serve me in the cafe,. . . .their bacon and black pudding with sliced mushrooms sandwich with Daddies brown sauce on toasted fresh crusty bread was exemplary. . . . .( As one should expect after paying £3.25 for a bloody sandwich for JC's sake. . . . not including filter coffee) Later,. . .after they'd appeared to lose interest in my presence,. . .I sneaked around the back of the site and actually SAW the prototype thru a 10mm wide crack in the severely locked hangar door. . . .but I couldn't get anyone to tell me if the thing had flown yet. . . . . What the bloody hell is the CIA style secrecy all about ? ? ? One "Whisper" Is that they may be having trouble with the lightweight rotor hub / rotor blade engineering,. . .as their much vaunted test flight still has not happened,. . .but then,. . .who knows ?. . .we believe that there is only ONE prototype, so they would have to be really sure before flying it,. . .as any PUBLICLY noted incident could weel scupper their selling at a very high price programme. ( Supposition on my part ) My one remaining spy has told me that the thing has had some taxying trials,. . with no rotors installed. . .? . . .but nowt else. . . .he's been sworn to secrecy too. . . .Maybe they are having problems that they don't want anyone to know about, given the rather high selling price which has been mooted in their web advertising. All very curious. . . . . . I might have to kidnap the MD, and perhaps drive him up to Cannock Chase forest in the dead of night, and do a Ku Klux Clan false execution ceremony to get the bar$tard to squeal. . . .. .bit excessive though that, innit ? ? ? Bet it would work though, just after the guy had crapped himself as the rope went around his neck with all my mates chanting Buddhist Monk crap in the background. . . .?. . .I have to earn a crust, so I can't be there, or spend too much effort on this subject folks,. . . I've been in Scotland for a while,. . . too far away. . . . . .working for a Muslim Gaffer. . . .( Currently known as "JOCKISTAN" ) I dunno,. . .anyone got a more placid idea ?
Marty_d Posted September 1, 2015 Posted September 1, 2015 Don't do it Phil. You're bound to get mud on the white sheet, not to mention cutting eye holes in the pillowcase - the reaction from She Who Must Be Obeyed would be severe. I'm happy to remain in ignorance about the Bullfrog. (They'd probably make more if they took off that silly rotor thingy and put some biplane wings on it.)
old man emu Posted September 1, 2015 Posted September 1, 2015 Well done, Jimmy! I think I'll team you with that Smalltown boy, Clark Kent and he can help you look in to it. I swear that he has X-ray vision when he's chasing a lead. I was going to assign him a story about an alleged haunting in a church graveyard, but he ran off mumbling something about not wanting to go near a crypt tonight. White, Perry Please get back to the Bulldog Autogyro thread for any more comments about it, so we can keep this thread for the Shoreham incident. - OME 2
Marty_d Posted September 1, 2015 Posted September 1, 2015 ... but he ran off mumbling something about not wanting to go near a crypt tonight. Very clever... pun of the day! 1
Phil Perry Posted September 2, 2015 Posted September 2, 2015 Very clever... pun of the day! A PUN ? ? That's not a PUN. . . . . it's a P O W . ( Play On Words ) Y'know,. . .like the three pussycats who went skating on THIN ice on the Seine near Paris. . . .? Une, Deux, Trois, Quatre, Sanqe. . . . ? geddit ? Do keep up dear boy.
Marty_d Posted September 2, 2015 Posted September 2, 2015 A PUN ? ?That's not a PUN. . . . . it's a P O W . ( Play On Words ) Y'know,. . .like the three pussycats who went skating on THIN ice on the Seine near Paris. . . .? Une, Deux, Trois, Quatre, Sanqe. . . . ? geddit ? Do keep up dear boy. Er... no. Sorry Phil - too subtle for me!
dutchroll Posted September 3, 2015 Posted September 3, 2015 Don't worry, I didn't either & just thought it was poor French spelling until I looked up "sanqe" in the urban dictionary!
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now