The CAA aren't well known for doing that at all. The accident investigation will be carried out by the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB), not the CAA. CAA will doubtless contribute evidence, but they aren't the statutory investigating authority.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Shoreham Airshow Crash
- Thread starter crispy1978
- Start date
- Status
The CAA aren't well known for doing that at all. The accident investigation will be carried out by the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB), not the CAA. CAA will doubtless contribute evidence, but they aren't the statutory investigating authority.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
backontrack
Established Member
Rather chilling video (no audio):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvHplYmh2f8
[YOUTUBE]pvHplYmh2f8[/YOUTUBE]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvHplYmh2f8
[YOUTUBE]pvHplYmh2f8[/YOUTUBE]
That's because you are a miserable so and so with no interest in aircraft and want to prevent anyone with an interest enjoying themselves!
The last spectator death was at Farnborough in 1958 (or something like that) so it isn't exactly an epidemic is it!
Lets be a bit sensible shall we or should we all wrap ourselves in cotton wool and not get out of bed because its sooooooo dangerous out there! :roll:
That's my opinion!
Last edited:
That's because you are a miserable so and so with no interest in aircraft and want to prevent anyone with an interest enjoying themselves!
The last spectator death was at Farnborough in 1958 (or something like that) so it isn't exactly an epidemic is it!
Lets be a bit sensible shall we or should we all wrap ourselves in cotton wool and not get out of bed because its sooooooo dangerous out there! :roll:
That's my opinion!
As I said above, unless those advocating banning what they think was the real cause for the incident, are prepared to take as drastic action on much more serious killing activities, (I suggested drink-driving but there are others), then such calls are disingenuous.
I was under the impression that drink driving has already been banned?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
That's because you are a miserable so and so with no interest in aircraft and want to prevent anyone with an interest enjoying themselves!
The last spectator death was at Farnborough in 1958 (or something like that) so it isn't exactly an epidemic is it!
Lets be a bit sensible shall we or should we all wrap ourselves in cotton wool and not get out of bed because its sooooooo dangerous out there! :roll:
That's my opinion!
However there have been accidents at previous air displays and many Shoreham residents felt this was an accident waiting to happen. I said previously that I have enjoyed watching air displays but do you really think vintage aircraft performing mid air stunts in close proximity to busy roads is a risk worth taking? If anybody wants to put themselves at risk that is their choice but nobody has the right to recklessly endanger other people.
I didn't say anything about 'banning' drink-driving as driving with alcohol levels above a certain level has been a criminal offence since the late '60s. Please read what I said again, because I was referring to "drastic action on much more serious killing activities" of which drink-driving is a major one. Despite continuing deaths, offenders still walk away with a fine, a short ban and a wagged finger from the beak.
That is for an activity connected with over 200 deaths per year, most of them innocent, (even though it is 45 years since it was made illegal). Whereas after the first single freak accident in 62 years, there is all this clamour for instant banning of an activity because there have been 11 deaths; - that's many 100s of times less than drink-driving over the same period.
Either there is gross negligence on the part of the legislature for it's lenience over a criminal aspect of driving, or this clamour for a display-flying ban is yet another knee-jerk reaction to recent events. Some people have a strange set of priorities.
Get used to it, - there is no such thing as a 'risk-free life' and when the uninformed mob say ban anything that they 'think' is a real risk, it won't make any measurable difference.
Whether it was mechanical failure or pilot error once the AAIB publishes its conclusions serious questions need to asked either about the maintenance of these vintage aircraft or the manor in which the pilots go about flying these displays. My sincere condolences go out to all the families of those killed in this incident.
Last edited:
An initial report has been released by the AAIB and it doesn't yet really say what caused the crash. Though they seem to be leaning away from mechanical failure, from page 5:
They do, however, point out that there was no flight data recorder and they've determined that from a video camera mounted inside the cockpit which shows the pilot and part of the instrument panel.
The investigation is ongoing and they're now looking at the wreckage and and maintenance records.
In answer to some questions on this forum the report also clarifies that an ejection seat was fitted and was available for use:
The BBC have also picked up the story here:
They do, however, point out that there was no flight data recorder and they've determined that from a video camera mounted inside the cockpit which shows the pilot and part of the instrument panel.
The investigation is ongoing and they're now looking at the wreckage and and maintenance records.
In answer to some questions on this forum the report also clarifies that an ejection seat was fitted and was available for use:
The BBC have also picked up the story here:
Human error is seemingly more likely following that interim report. It's likely the AAIB will have evidence from the on board footage to determine whether or not the pilot reached the 'gate height' for the loop. There will also be paperwork checks to see whether the gate height was calculated correctly, as well as checks to see that the altimeter was correctly set.
It's also possible that entry, speed and gate height were all correct for the manoeuvre, but control inputs once 'over the top' were insufficient to complete the loop before running out of air space.
It's also possible that entry, speed and gate height were all correct for the manoeuvre, but control inputs once 'over the top' were insufficient to complete the loop before running out of air space.
Last edited:
Yeah I kinda get the feeling that this is where we're heading towards to be honest. Especially as the report doesn't seem to contain anything to suggest a mechanical fault. If there had a a been a flame out (which I'm sure I saw someone suggest somewhere) then the attempt to restart the engine would probably have been obvious from the footage.
If you don't understand then there's no point in your commenting. Some others have not had the same problems as you.
Most people are sick of the tripe you post on here, if you want to discuss drink driving then start a thread about it
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I think that was the general opinion from the outset really from those in the know, no great surprises in the report really
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Pilot Andy Hill has reportedly been discharged from hospital and is to be interviewed by police as soon as possible
Those 'in the know' as you put it wouldn't have made such an assumption, hence the investigation... :roll:
Wouldn't they? I don't know what planet you're on but there have been a few aviation experts giving their opinion. Anyway I won't comment further let's wait for the investigation before apportioning any blame.
Last edited:
There's a difference between and opinion and fact, and saying that 'lots of people agree with me' doesn't really wash. My point was that, if you had cared to read my post properly, people in the aviation industry wouldn't speculate about such an incident. You know professionalism and all that...
Well some people have done just as they have about other incidents (MH370 for example) and I think it would be unrealistic to expect people not to offer their opinion/speculate or whatever you want to call it
There's a whole internet out there with foru for professional pilots and other aviation industry/military aviation personnel where speculation and opinion has been rife.
My opinion of this incident, based on the available evidence thus far, is human error.
Last edited:
- Status