Plane crashes onto A27 at Shoreham Air Show

[Citizen66]

Nope you have the last ditch stick pull up.

It reminds me of the tube crash in Moorgate. I don't think the driver's body didnt produce any useful info. It remains a mystery what actually happened. Suicide is one of the more controversial theories despite family members being adamant that he wasn't particularly troubled by anything.

 

[weltweit]

Apparently the pilot is recovering and will be questioned by the police and AAIB.

Shoreham Pilot To Be Questioned By Police

 

[D'wards]

Family friend was killed in this - riding his motorbike. Apparently there are no remains, he was identified by parts of his bike

 

[weltweit]

Family friend was killed in this - riding his motorbike. Apparently there are no remains, he was identified by parts of his bike

Nasty, sorry for your loss.

It struck me as a little odd that all the victims are male. That has to be a bit unlikely?

 

[ffsear]

My theory. Aircraft failed to respond to throttle inputs by the pilot. On the downwards part of a loop you are supposed to come off the power, which reduces the angle as you pull up. The plane seemed to take a long time to pull out of the loop (The plane was nose up when it hit the ground) suggesting that he could have been stuck on full/medium power.

 

[weltweit]

My theory is that I don't know enough about the intricacies of this to have a theory

 

[existentialist]

Nasty, sorry for your loss.

It struck me as a little odd that all the victims are male. That has to be a bit unlikely?

If it were an exactly 50:50 chance of each victim being male, the odds would be 1:2048 (2¹¹). That's not ludicrously unlikely.

I don't think there's any great significance in it.

 

[5t3IIa]

Family friend was killed in this - riding his motorbike. Apparently there are no remains, he was identified by parts of his bike

Jesus, sorry to hear that

 

[D'wards]

Jesus, sorry to hear that

To be honest I hadn't seen him for a very long time, but they lived next door to my auntie growing up, in the days when your next door neighbour was your best friend, and they had always stayed close when they moved out.

Strange there were no remains - it must have been an immense fireball.

 

[5t3IIa]

To be honest I hadn't seen him for a very long time, but they lived next door to my auntie growing up, in the days when your next door neighbour was your best friend, and they had always stayed close when they moved out.

Strange there were no remains - it must have been an immense fireball.

I don't suppose you want to spend too much time examining the footage but the plane does kind of hit the ground, blow up a bit then bounce/skid/carry on down the road and be more on fire a second later. It's not great

 

[David Clapson]

My theory. Aircraft failed to respond to throttle inputs by the pilot. On the downwards part of a loop you are supposed to come off the power, which reduces the angle as you pull up. The plane seemed to take a long time to pull out of the loop (The plane was nose up when it hit the ground) suggesting that he could have been stuck on full/medium power.

Boffins like David Learmount have said he shouldn't have started the loop below 500'. This guy started at 200', giving him no safety margin for a tiny error or a patch of sink. The cockpit videos have apparently shown that the aircraft was responding normally to the controls. He should have known he was too low before he started the loop. He should have either not started the loop or changed it to some other manoeuvre, e.g. rolling upright at the top of the loop. He could have corrected his mistake at any time during the loop. But he didn't. Very puzzling.

 

[ViolentPanda]

To be honest I hadn't seen him for a very long time, but they lived next door to my auntie growing up, in the days when your next door neighbour was your best friend, and they had always stayed close when they moved out.

Strange there were no remains - it must have been an immense fireball.

It's the heat that jet fuel burns at (as high as 1500F in the right conditions), combined with the brisance (the destructive quality) of the explosion - the more rapidly the explosion develops its' force, the greater it's destructive ability, and the lesser likelihood of human remains. The explosion of a barrel of black powder develops relatively slowly, compared to the combination of jet fuel and air that the crash caused.

 

[elbows]

Just to make it even worse it wasn't only those kind of deaths either. Certain youtube footage made it obvious that at least one of victims cars was horribly squashed rather than burnt.

 

[bi0boy]

It's the heat that jet fuel burns at (as high as 1500F in the right conditions)

It can't melt steel beams though.

 

[ViolentPanda]

It can't melt steel beams though.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

It can't melt steel beams though.

The plane might have been carrying the materials to lay some low level chemtrails. Who knows how hot that burns?

 

[ffsear]

Boffins like David Learmount have said he shouldn't have started the loop below 500'. This guy started at 200', giving him no safety margin for a tiny error or a patch of sink. The cockpit videos have apparently shown that the aircraft was responding normally to the controls. He should have known he was too low before he started the loop. He should have either not started the loop or changed it to some other manoeuvre, e.g. rolling upright at the top of the loop. He could have corrected his mistake at any time during the loop. But he didn't. Very puzzling.

Started at 200, but the apex of the loop was recorded at 2,600' So why he could not pull out the loop from that height is puzzling. Still sounds like some kind of engine throttle failure too me.

 

[David Clapson]

I read in various places that you generally finish a loop at the same height you started it at. I think the investigators will take a very dim view of his start height. He must have given them his side of the story by now. If the engine/throttle didn't respond normally he ought to have been aware of it. There's no black box so I suppose they have to rely on his account.

In the past there have been low altitude crashes caused by misinterpreting the altimeter reading. It measures altitude with the air pressure so you're supposed to reset it at take-off to allow for the weather conditions. If you forget to do that the altimeter may say you're a few hundred feet higher than you really are. Another error you can make is fly to an airfield which is higher than the one you took off from. If you then do a low level display at the second airfield you need to bear in mind that your altimeter may give you a confusing reading. There was an infamous fuckup of this type by a display pilot in 2004 Thunderbird accident report released

 

[weltweit]

Shoreham air crash pilot interviewed by police

 

[Mr.Bishie]

Investigators release second report into Shoreham Airshow disaster

AAIB Report - https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/media/5677d6bfed915d144f000000/S4-2015_G-BXFI.pdf

Poor maintenance, & ejector seat parts had expired.

 

[likesfish]

Which doesnt mean the plane cant fly martin baker who make the seats decided quite rightly they werent going to certify 40 year old seats that they had no spares for

 

[redcogs]

"Organisers of the Shoreham air show, where a jet crashed last year killing 11 people, were unaware of the pilot's display plans, an interim report says.

The Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) also said they failed to carry out a proper risk assessment".


Shoreham crash: Air show 'unaware' of pilot's display plan - BBC News

 

[redcogs]

Shoreham crash pilot facing possible manslaughter charge over 11 dead - BBC News

Pilot interviewed under caution.

 

[Falcon]

I read somewhere that there were no indications of technical malfunction, and that he commenced the loop below the safe minimum height. I don't know how they know that but, if it's true, he's in trouble. The base height is a protocol they teach you early in flight school, and he was an RAF Qualified Flying Instructor.

 

[bi0boy]

The final 451 page report is out

 

[bi0boy]

I read in various places that you generally finish a loop at the same height you started it at. I think the investigators will take a very dim view of his start height. He must have given them his side of the story by now. If the engine/throttle didn't respond normally he ought to have been aware of it. There's no black box so I suppose they have to rely on his account.

Concerning the height of the manoeuvrer they say this:

"Although it was possible to abort the manoeuvre safely at this point, it appeared the pilot did not recognise that the aircraft was too low to complete the downward half of the manoeuvre. An analysis of human performance identified several credible explanations for this, including: not reading the altimeter due to workload, distraction or visual limitations such as contrast or glare; misreading the altimeter due to its presentation of height information; or incorrectly recalling the minimum height required at the apex.

The investigation found that the guidance concerning the minimum height at which aerobatic manoeuvres may be commenced is not applied consistently and may be unclear.

There was evidence that other pilots do not always check or perceive correctly that the required height has been achieved at the apex of manoeuvres.

Training and assessment procedures in place at the time of the accident did not prepare the pilot fully for the conduct of relevant escape manoeuvres in the Hunter."

 

[redcogs]

From the report:

"The investigation found that the parties involved in the planning, conduct and regulatory oversight of the flying display did not have formal safety management systems in place to identify and manage the hazards and risks. There was a lack of clarity about who owned which risk and who was responsible for the safety of the flying display, the aircraft, and the public outside the display site who were not under the control of the show organisers".

Prosecutions should be considered. People have died, and a loose regime of controls had significance in this.

 

[BigTom]

From the report:

"The investigation found that the parties involved in the planning, conduct and regulatory oversight of the flying display did not have formal safety management systems in place to identify and manage the hazards and risks. There was a lack of clarity about who owned which risk and who was responsible for the safety of the flying display, the aircraft, and the public outside the display site who were not under the control of the show organisers".

Prosecutions should be considered. People have died, and a loose regime of controls had significance in this.

wow, that's incredible and yes I would say prosecutions should happen, both the organisers and the local council. Where was the council's Safety Advisory Group (SAG)? Any festivals or outdoor events I've been involved with have had heavy oversight through the licencing process and clearance from the SAG, which includes ensuring H&S policies and procedures, ie formal safety management systems. I'd have assumed that a high risk event like an airshow would be even tighter on this from the council's side if not the organisers themselves.

 

[cupid_stunt]

The pilot is being charged with causing manslaughter by gross negligence.

SHOREHAM Airshow pilot Andy Hill will face trial for manslaughter over the 2015 plane crash which killed eleven men.

Hill, 53, will be charged with causing manslaughter by gross negligence, and also faces a lesser charge of endangering an aircraft.

In a statement, Simon Ringrose from the CPS Special Crime Division said he had found there was sufficient evidence for a prosecution and that a prosecution was in the public interest.

Gross negligence manslaughter carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

The case was delayed and complicated when a court ruled the police could not have direct access to evidence gathered by the Air Accident Investigation Board.

I wonder why the court made such a ruling, seems totally illogical to me.

Shoreham Airshow pilot Andy Hill will be charged with manslaughter | The Argus

 

[Nivag]

Why on earth wouldn't they give police access to that information?
Sounds like they wanted to cover something up.