Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby Thumper on Mon 13 Mar 2017, 11:39 pm

With regards to the 'necessity' to put vintage aircraft through aerobatics, my favourite vintage jet aircraft and display was and probably always will be the F-86/A Sabre which we have now sadly lost! That aircraft was really thrown around, it wasn't aero's at 3,000ft all the time and there were high and low speed top side passes especially at Duxford where the tank bank was the best place to be for photographs and viewing, I used to love the smokey barrel roll! Gorgeous aircraft, always displayed to it's best and flown superbly. I really miss it along with Miss Demeanour which I doubt will make a return any time soon. What we are lucky to have left is the Sea Vixen, I was not expecting much last year from one of very few vintage jets left displaying post Shoreham, how wrong was I when it tore up the sky at Yeovilton and wowed everyone there. That's a pilot who knows exactly how to show off an aircraft to entertain everyone within the restrictions. I think it's very difficult to go from what you know and love to something different. I don't want accidents to occur, I don't want people getting hurt or killed, I don't want aircraft to be lost but I also don't want a mass panic over it and 4,000 ton of cotton wool to come out, no there isn't any need to aerobat a Hawker Hunter, but then there also isn't any need to do that in any other aircraft such as a Boeing Stearman or Eurofighter Typhoon.

Out of interest, who decides on a display routine and what G can be pushed, if it's a civil aircraft flown by different pilots such as Andy Hill in the Hunter that day, who compiles the routine and if it's an aircraft such as the FNHT Sea Vixen that usually only use 1 pilot, who is putting together the display for that?
User avatar
Thumper
UKAR Supporter

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby Elliott Marsh on Mon 13 Mar 2017, 11:48 pm

The pilots themselves put together the routines and will often fly that sequence in different aircraft. John Romain, for example, will open with an A-axis Cuban-8 followed by a B-axis Cuban-8 in all single engine warbirds, from Spitfire Mk.I to Mk.XVIII to Buchon. Nick Grey will fly three consecutive loops (A-axis then B-axis) then a 360 anything from Gladiator to Sea Fury. They will adapt as necessary to different venues but broadly keep to the same series of manoeuvres.

Prominent warbird pilots like John Romain, Pete Kynsey, Nick Grey, PT, Brian Smith et al have been flying the same profile for decades. Warbird pilots all have their sequences mapped out. Those of us who have been doing the airshow thing for years and years are sad enough to identify a pilot simply by the routine the aircraft is performing. The G limits they fly to are a fraction of what the aircraft are capable of, and are in no way exceeding personal limits or CAA imposed restrictions. Most warbirds are actually flown very "tamely" compared to a) how they were flown in the 1990s and earlier and b) their capabilities. Those flying them, in some cases, have thousands of hours on type - some have been safely doing their thing for 30+ years. We have some of the most experienced vintage aviators in history flying in this country. John Romain (and I believe others) have surpassed 1,000 hours on Spitfres alone.

Banning aerobatics as a direct result of Shoreham would as knee-jerk crazy as rolling out a 230m display line. Thankfully there's been no suggestion of this by any authoritative bodies in the 18 months since the incident.
Last edited by Elliott Marsh on Tue 14 Mar 2017, 12:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Elliott Marsh

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby centaurus18 on Tue 14 Mar 2017, 8:29 am

Ex-display pilot Brian Grant flew the same routine in the Hunter that he did in the Vixen and Meteor with the necessary changes needed for each aircraft's parameters.

One saying I remember from years ago came from a display pilot.... "It is your job at airshows to show off the aircraft, not to show off yourself"
Mark
'We’re in the stickiest situation, since Sticky the stick insect got stuck on a sticky bun.'
User avatar
centaurus18

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby Thumper on Tue 14 Mar 2017, 8:14 pm

Thanks for the info there!

The statement made about Andy Hill perhaps confusing the Hunter with the JP he flew more regularly is something of interest, I know it takes me time to settle into driving a different car or motorcycle and that's just daily driving, not high concentration jet aircraft displays. Although there is no evidence to back that statement up I do think it is an interesting point that was made.
User avatar
Thumper
UKAR Supporter

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby andrewn on Fri 19 May 2017, 9:16 pm

st24 wrote:
andrewn wrote:
I've been attending airshows for 30yrs and I knew things had got lax and that some form of serious accident was waiting to happen. Why couldn't the regulator see this, and if they did recognise risks or issues, why were they not acted upon?

:question:?? I've got 20 years airshowing on you and I feel the complete opposite. Explain please.


OK - as a (relatively) knowledgeable airshow attendee I knew that some of the pilots displaying in front of me were flying a sequence in an aircraft that, in many cases, they had flown a handful of times previously. From a risk perspective if that sequence was a solo "straight and level" type of display in a relatively docile type (e.g. Piston provost or JP/Strikemaster) I could accept that. But you start putting pilots with low overall experience and low currency in a display environment with aeros / formation aeros in high performance jets with known "gotchas" (e.g. Meteor/Hunter/Gnat) then that starts to make me nervous.

IMO all the "blurb" post Shoreham on separation minima, secondary crowds, FDD's, paperwork, etc is just a smokescreen to cover off the fact that the regulator knew it had lost control and failed to act on the primary root cause - which was pilots with very low overall type experience being allowed to display high performance jet aircraft in a manner which was completely out of sync with their current capabilities.
User avatar
andrewn

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby Brevet Cable on Wed 07 Jun 2017, 7:21 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-40186667
The pilot of the Hawker Hunter jet which crashed killing 11 men has been re-interviewed by police.
(snip)
In a statement, which did not name Mr Hill, Sussex Police said: "A 53-year-old man from Hertfordshire has been re-interviewed by officers from the Surrey and Sussex Major Crime Team investigating the Shoreham air crash.
He attended a voluntary interview under caution at a police station in Sussex on Thursday, 1 June."
(snip)
A pre-inquest review into the deaths of the 11 men will take place on 20 June at the West Sussex Coroner's Court in Crawley, but no evidence will be heard
Brevet.. Meh !!
Not an enthusiast or a spotter
trollpikken fforwm swyddogol
User avatar
Brevet Cable

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby Dan O'Hagan on Wed 07 Jun 2017, 7:35 pm

And still it rumbles on.
Dan O'Hagan

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby Pringles on Wed 07 Jun 2017, 7:47 pm

Indeed, fortunately I expect the gutter press will be too preoccupied over the next few days to dig up the horrific photos of the event that always seem to resurface when a new development makes the news
If life gives you melons then you're probably dyslexic
User avatar
Pringles

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby Brevet Cable on Wed 07 Jun 2017, 7:49 pm

The best part of two years on and they still haven't started the inquest.
In contrast, the Herald of Free Enterprise inquest was commenced, completed and a verdict reached in around 6 months from the day it capsized.
Brevet.. Meh !!
Not an enthusiast or a spotter
trollpikken fforwm swyddogol
User avatar
Brevet Cable

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby Dan O'Hagan on Wed 07 Jun 2017, 8:01 pm

The delaying of this does nobody any good, least of all the families who need closure. Even Hill (more his family) have had to have this dragging on for the best part of two years. Nobody can move on, including the CAA and airshow industry, while this remains ongoing.
Dan O'Hagan

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby ColeTheDemolisher on Thu 08 Jun 2017, 3:49 pm

Dan O'Hagan wrote:The delaying of this does nobody any good, least of all the families who need closure. Even Hill (more his family) have had to have this dragging on for the best part of two years. Nobody can move on, including the CAA and airshow industry, while this remains ongoing.


On that subject, can hunters fly yet... ?
Uniden UBC125XLT

The Jacket kid

Sorry Goose, but its time to Buzz the tower...

Dudley, West Midlands
User avatar
ColeTheDemolisher

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby Russ on Thu 08 Jun 2017, 3:57 pm

ColeTheDemolisher wrote:
Dan O'Hagan wrote:The delaying of this does nobody any good, least of all the families who need closure. Even Hill (more his family) have had to have this dragging on for the best part of two years. Nobody can move on, including the CAA and airshow industry, while this remains ongoing.


On that subject, can hunters fly yet... ?

In terms of UK ones, only those on the MAA register I believe - i.e. HHA Hunters on a military contract, which is why there was one on static at RIAT last year. All UK CAA registered ones (including the Dutch Hunter) are still grounded.

That's my understanding at least, happy to be corrected if I'm wrong?
User avatar
Russ

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby Wrexham Mackem on Thu 08 Jun 2017, 4:29 pm

Russ wrote:In terms of UK ones, only those on the MAA register I believe - i.e. HHA Hunters on a military contract, which is why there was one on static at RIAT last year. All UK CAA registered ones (including the Dutch Hunter) are still grounded.

That's my understanding at least, happy to be corrected if I'm wrong?


That's absolutely correct Russ. There's a good article in Aeroplane this month, on the state of historic jets in general. Well worth a read.
its time to kick the tyres and light the fires

https://www.flickr.com/photos/151934326@N08/albums
User avatar
Wrexham Mackem
UKAR Staff

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby Reds Rolling on Thu 08 Jun 2017, 5:30 pm

Seems a bit odd that civvy ones are still grounded. :question:
Reds Rolling

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby speedbird2639 on Thu 08 Jun 2017, 6:19 pm

Reds Rolling wrote:Seems a bit odd that civvy ones are still grounded. :question:


Not really given the maintenance issues of the plane that crashed at Shoreham which were turned up in the ensuing AAIB investigation. If I remember correctly they had migrated to a much less frequent/ thorough maintenance schedule and when this was noticed (I forget by whom) they were instructed to move back and comply with the original schedule. There were also queries about the serviceability of ejection seats with some of the charges being outside their replacement dates.

I think its perfectly reasonable that all operators of classic former military jets evidence they have complied fully with all the servicing requirements and the aircraft and all of it systems are fully operational - until then it stays on the ground. I accept there is no evidence that any reported issues re serviceability contributed to the Shoreham crash but I think to protect the airshow industry having a 'belt and braces' approach is appropriate in these circumstances.
User avatar
speedbird2639

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby Brevet Cable on Thu 08 Jun 2017, 7:11 pm

Reds Rolling wrote:Seems a bit odd that civvy ones are still grounded. :question:

Because the CAA have said they are....twice.
The original grounding & the more recent issue with 100-series engines : http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/MPD2016-002.pdf
Brevet.. Meh !!
Not an enthusiast or a spotter
trollpikken fforwm swyddogol
User avatar
Brevet Cable

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby Ouragan on Fri 09 Jun 2017, 8:45 am

Some very interesting comments from Jonathan Whalley in that article regarding the ongoing Hunter grounding.
User avatar
Ouragan

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby motormouser on Fri 09 Jun 2017, 3:58 pm

See the Hunter from Scampton has been up again today...over CBY i beleive :smile:
User avatar
motormouser

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby Reds Rolling on Fri 09 Jun 2017, 5:30 pm

speedbird2639 wrote:
Reds Rolling wrote:Seems a bit odd that civvy ones are still grounded. :question:


Not really given the maintenance issues of the plane that crashed at Shoreham which were turned up in the ensuing AAIB investigation. If I remember correctly they had migrated to a much less frequent/ thorough maintenance schedule and when this was noticed (I forget by whom) they were instructed to move back and comply with the original schedule. There were also queries about the serviceability of ejection seats with some of the charges being outside their replacement dates.

I think its perfectly reasonable that all operators of classic former military jets evidence they have complied fully with all the servicing requirements and the aircraft and all of it systems are fully operational - until then it stays on the ground. I accept there is no evidence that any reported issues re serviceability contributed to the Shoreham crash but I think to protect the airshow industry having a 'belt and braces' approach is appropriate in these circumstances.


As I understand it, the term 'grounded' means that the type is not allowed to fly whether it is in a fit condition to or not. As such it seems odd to me that a military contracted Hunter can fly, yet a civilian one cannot, even if they were both maintained to an equal standard.
Reds Rolling

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby G-CVIX on Fri 09 Jun 2017, 7:52 pm

Ouragan wrote:Some very interesting comments from Jonathan Whalley in that article regarding the ongoing Hunter grounding.


Perhaps I'm being stupid but which article? I'd be interested to read what he has to say!
User avatar
G-CVIX

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby G-CVIX on Fri 09 Jun 2017, 7:56 pm

Elliott Marsh wrote:The pilots themselves put together the routines and will often fly that sequence in different aircraft. John Romain, for example, will open with an A-axis Cuban-8 followed by a B-axis Cuban-8 in all single engine warbirds, from Spitfire Mk.I to Mk.XVIII to Buchon. Nick Grey will fly three consecutive loops (A-axis then B-axis) then a 360 anything from Gladiator to Sea Fury. They will adapt as necessary to different venues but broadly keep to the same series of manoeuvres.

Prominent warbird pilots like John Romain, Pete Kynsey, Nick Grey, PT, Brian Smith et al have been flying the same profile for decades. Warbird pilots all have their sequences mapped out. Those of us who have been doing the airshow thing for years and years are sad enough to identify a pilot simply by the routine the aircraft is performing. The G limits they fly to are a fraction of what the aircraft are capable of, and are in no way exceeding personal limits or CAA imposed restrictions. Most warbirds are actually flown very "tamely" compared to a) how they were flown in the 1990s and earlier and b) their capabilities. Those flying them, in some cases, have thousands of hours on type - some have been safely doing their thing for 30+ years. We have some of the most experienced vintage aviators in history flying in this country. John Romain (and I believe others) have surpassed 1,000 hours on Spitfres alone.

Banning aerobatics as a direct result of Shoreham would as knee-jerk crazy as rolling out a 230m display line. Thankfully there's been no suggestion of this by any authoritative bodies in the 18 months since the incident.


Appreciate this is going back a little but that's a cracking post. :clap:
User avatar
G-CVIX

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby RAF4EVER on Fri 09 Jun 2017, 7:59 pm

G-CVIX wrote:
Ouragan wrote:Some very interesting comments from Jonathan Whalley in that article regarding the ongoing Hunter grounding.


Perhaps I'm being stupid but which article? I'd be interested to read what he has to say!


7 posts before yours,Wrexham Mackem,dated 8 June,

try to keep up to date :smile: :smile: :smile:
RAF4EVER

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby G-CVIX on Fri 09 Jun 2017, 8:11 pm

RAF4EVER wrote:
G-CVIX wrote:
Ouragan wrote:Some very interesting comments from Jonathan Whalley in that article regarding the ongoing Hunter grounding.


Perhaps I'm being stupid but which article? I'd be interested to read what he has to say!


7 posts before yours,Wrexham Mackem,dated 8 June,

try to keep up to date :smile: :smile: :smile:


Ah I was scanning for links, I will pick a copy up.
User avatar
G-CVIX

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby RAF4EVER on Fri 09 Jun 2017, 8:16 pm

deleted
Last edited by RAF4EVER on Fri 09 Jun 2017, 8:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
RAF4EVER

Re: Hunter accident at Shoreham (discussion)

Postby RAF4EVER on Fri 09 Jun 2017, 8:18 pm

G-CVIX wrote:
RAF4EVER wrote:
G-CVIX wrote:
Ouragan wrote:Some very interesting comments from Jonathan Whalley in that article regarding the ongoing Hunter grounding.


Perhaps I'm being stupid but which article? I'd be interested to read what he has to say!


7 posts before yours,Wrexham Mackem,dated 8 June,

try to keep up to date :smile: :smile: :smile:


Ah I was scanning for links, I will pick a copy up.


Try reading the topic,not every one posts links. :smile: :smile:
RAF4EVER

PreviousNext

Return to Aviation Waffle

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DMH, MicrolightDriver, neilatter, speedbird2639, Xm657 and 25 guests