22nd-23rd Aug - Shoreham Airshow anyone?


actech12

Link Posted 23/08/2015 - 17:44
jeallen01 wrote:
[i][quote:3496ace15f="actech12"]

Was not sure about the 2nd pedestrian bridge, so didn't mention it - but the organisers could also have opened the Emergency Exit track to the A27 much earlier than they did - the only reason I can think for that not happening is that they kept it clear for Emergency vehicles coming in from the West, but I am pretty sure that they did not have to wait until around 6-7pm before they did open it (the coaches appeared to get out much earlier - around 4pm IIRC.

Sorry if I sound somewhat "dispassionate" about those killed and injured (and, of course, their many relatives and friends) - my wife has already said this to me! - but, having been a safety engineer in the defence and other industries for many years before I retired, I tend to take a rather analytical approach to accident prevention and to identifying the causes of accidents so as to try to prevent them happening again (or even better, before they ever happen at all). Thus I don't think the risks and possible risk reduction and control issues were sufficiently thoroughly thought through before this tragic event.

No apologies necessary, John, I am the same, and somewhat analytical - must be the job! But sometimes I think we try to make things too safe for everyone and forget we also need to 'live' a little as well. If this became an everyday occurrence at airshows then I agree, but a one off is a tragic event. We cannot build every house in a faraday cage just because one was hit by lightning.

Dave
Always blame the equipment!!!!

jeallen01

Link Posted 23/08/2015 - 18:50
actech12 wrote:


No apologies necessary, John, I am the same, and somewhat analytical - must be the job! But sometimes I think we try to make things too safe for everyone and forget we also need to 'live' a little as well. If this became an everyday occurrence at airshows then I agree, but a one off is a tragic event. We cannot build every house in a faraday cage just because one was hit by lightning.

Dave

Dave

Since the last post I have been looking at a few threads on the FighterControl forum, which lead me to the PPRuNe site where there is a big discussion by aviation professionals on this tragic accident.

Whilst there is a lot about the aerial manoeuvre and the age of the aircraft, there is also a lot about the riskiness of some venues, and Shoreham is definitely one of them that raised a lot of (as yet) unanswered questions, notably as to why the risk assessments allowed the display area to extend well over the A27, whereas there seems to be quite a consensus (and official guidance!) that display areas should be within the bounds of the airfield or over otherwise unpopulated areas with little or no means of public access.

There is also a lot about acceptance - or not - of "risk" by participants, "bystanders/viewers" and totally uninterested "passers by" or "neighbours" (like some of the people living near Tianjin) - and the fact that the people on the A27 were presumably "just passing by" and had not consciously accepted any of the risks inherent at airshows. That's why when people get hurt by something they were not involved in, and over which they had no control, because they just happened to be in the "wrong place at the wrong time", then there is more public anger and likely repercussions.

See where we're going?
(and I hope I don't have to revise my opinion of Rod Dean, but then again I may have to)

John
K-3 II, K-3 and a K-70 from SRS (having now relegated the K-30 /"K-50" to a backup body) , & some Sigma and Pentax lenses (and a lot of old 35mm gear!)

actech12

Link Posted 23/08/2015 - 19:01
jeallen01 wrote:
actech12 wrote:


No apologies necessary, John, I am the same, and somewhat analytical - must be the job! But sometimes I think we try to make things too safe for everyone and forget we also need to 'live' a little as well. If this became an everyday occurrence at airshows then I agree, but a one off is a tragic event. We cannot build every house in a faraday cage just because one was hit by lightning.

Dave

Dave

Since the last post I have been looking at a few threads on the FighterControl forum, which lead me to the PPRuNe site where there is a big discussion by aviation professionals on this tragic accident.

Whilst there is a lot about the aerial manoeuvre and the age of the aircraft, there is also a lot about the riskiness of some venues, and Shoreham is definitely one of them that raised a lot of (as yet) unanswered questions, notably as to why the risk assessments allowed the display area to extend well over the A27, whereas there seems to be quite a consensus (and official guidance!) that display areas should be within the bounds of the airfield or over otherwise unpopulated areas with little or no means of public access.

There is also a lot about acceptance - or not - of "risk" by participants, "bystanders/viewers" and totally uninterested "passers by" or "neighbours" (like some of the people living near Tianjin) - and the fact that the people on the A27 were presumably "just passing by" and had not consciously accepted any of the risks inherent at airshows. That's why when people get hurt by something they were not involved in, and over which they had no control, because they just happened to be in the "wrong place at the wrong time", then there is more public anger and likely repercussions.

See where we're going?
(and I hope I don't have to revise my opinion of Rod Dean, but then again I may have to)

John

Quite agree with you on that, John. However, this must have been discussed before every airshow at Shoreham as it probably is at other venues (eg Duxford and the M11). Could it not be probable that on this instance there was some pilot error as to what was allowed? By this I mean is it possible that the loop (can't remember its name, but the 'climb/roll inverted/pull under back down the crowd line' manoeuvre) was meant to be performed slightly later over the fields along the river Adur, which was just another hole in the cheese?

Dave
Always blame the equipment!!!!

ilovesaabs

Link Posted 23/08/2015 - 19:20
Weren't there a few mentions about the wind conditions by the PA? Not long before the Hunter arrived if I remember correctly.

I was more concerned at the time about people of my height coming within my personal space and then complaining when the lens hood of my Sigma caught them on their face The largish chap who stood in front of me at least prevented me from seeing the immediate impact but not the fireball.
AKA Welshwizard/PWynneJ
Assorted Pentax/Nikon/Mamiya stuff

jeallen01

Link Posted 23/08/2015 - 19:30
actech12 wrote:


By this I mean is it possible that the loop (can't remember its name, but the 'climb/roll inverted/pull under back down the crowd line' manoeuvre) was meant to be performed slightly later over the fields along the river Adur, which was just another hole in the cheese?

Dave

Dave

I think I gathered that the manoeuvre is called a "cloverleaf" - and it is possible that the organisers and the pilot did plan for that, but that would still have meant that the display area included the A27.

The latter seems to me to be somewhat confirmed because, as we queued to get in, there was a lot of aerobatic activity over to the North of the road in the area you mention. Presumably the assumption was that when aircraft crossed the road in either direction then they would be flying pretty much straight and level - that assumption tragically turned out to be incorrect.

PS: the Duxford/M11, Waddington and Fairford issues are all talked about on PPRuNe.
K-3 II, K-3 and a K-70 from SRS (having now relegated the K-30 /"K-50" to a backup body) , & some Sigma and Pentax lenses (and a lot of old 35mm gear!)

jeallen01

Link Posted 23/08/2015 - 19:40
ilovesaabs wrote:
Weren't there a few mentions about the wind conditions by the PA? Not long before the Hunter arrived if I remember correctly.

There was a crosswind appeared to be coming from the South/South East, which was making it difficult for some smaller lighter aircraft to land against it to the South, but I doubt that would have affected the much heavier/faster Hunter very much unless he was also landing.

OTOH, flying downwind to the North would have meant that the wings would have generated less lift than had he been flying upwind. In addition I did see (think it is on PPRuNe) that the high (30C+, I think) air temperature might have reduced the air density and thus further reduced the lift that the wings generated.

Someone on that forum also commented about the relative shortness and narrowness of the tarmac runway, as compared with those at many other airfields, as that may have mislead the pilot into thinking he was flying higher and faster than he actually was - this was mentioned over the PA sometime before the accident, so it should have been well-understood nevertheless.
K-3 II, K-3 and a K-70 from SRS (having now relegated the K-30 /"K-50" to a backup body) , & some Sigma and Pentax lenses (and a lot of old 35mm gear!)
Last Edited by jeallen01 on 23/08/2015 - 19:42

actech12

Link Posted 23/08/2015 - 19:44
jeallen01 wrote:
actech12 wrote:


By this I mean is it possible that the loop (can't remember its name, but the 'climb/roll inverted/pull under back down the crowd line' manoeuvre) was meant to be performed slightly later over the fields along the river Adur, which was just another hole in the cheese?

Dave

Dave

I think I gathered that the manoeuvre is called a "cloverleaf" - and it is possible that the organisers and the pilot did plan for that, but that would still have meant that the display area included the A27.

The latter seems to me to be somewhat confirmed because, as we queued to get in, there was a lot of aerobatic activity over to the North of the road in the area you mention. Presumably the assumption was that when aircraft crossed the road in either direction then they would be flying pretty much straight and level - that assumption tragically turned out to be incorrect.

PS: the Duxford/M11, Waddington and Fairford issues are all talked about on PPRuNe.

And here is the crux of the matter, straight and level. Should adjoining manoeuvres separated by level flight over a road be allowed? Civil aircraft regularly overfly houses and roads with a descending manoeuvre at low altitude close to stalling but it is deemed ok.
Dave
Always blame the equipment!!!!

ilovesaabs

Link Posted 23/08/2015 - 19:54
I guess the intention was that he would be straight and level once the maneouvre was complete. Looking at the BBC footage, the plane appeared (to me) to level and then suddenly lose height.

I hope the pilot recovers and that he is able to inform us what happened.
AKA Welshwizard/PWynneJ
Assorted Pentax/Nikon/Mamiya stuff

jeallen01

Link Posted 23/08/2015 - 20:01
actech12 wrote:

And here is the crux of the matter, straight and level. Should adjoining manoeuvres separated by level flight over a road be allowed? Civil aircraft regularly overfly houses and roads with a descending manoeuvre at low altitude close to stalling but it is deemed ok.
Dave

A very good question, and not one that I have seen mentioned (as yet) anywhere else, especially as rapid sequences of aerobatic manoeuvres are obviously physically and mentally stressful for the pilot - whereas normal civil aircraft landings (and take-offs, of course) are generally planned and performed in relative "slow time" whn compared with aerobatic sequences and with few violent changes in direction or height - and so pilot disorientation could occur.

What a combination of possible contributory factors - chances are that there was no single main contributory cause of the aircraft hitting the A27 EXCEPT for the decision to locate part of the display area to the North of that road. Whether it would happened if that had not been done, we will never know.
K-3 II, K-3 and a K-70 from SRS (having now relegated the K-30 /"K-50" to a backup body) , & some Sigma and Pentax lenses (and a lot of old 35mm gear!)

broadstairs

Link Posted 23/08/2015 - 20:38
Having read some of the comments on here about this tragic accident ( and I for one believe it is just that a tragic accident) I feel it right to point folks at this blog post by a very respected aviation commentator. Right now there is no need for ANY speculation on this and in due time and after careful consideration by the professionals, the Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB), of all the available evidence we will find out what happened and IF there is any need to change the details of what is done at airshows you be sure that it WILL be implemented.

Right now all we need to concentrate on is our condolences to all those involved in any way in this tragedy and our prayers for those who right now are fighting for their lives in hospital.

Stuart

DrOrloff

Link Posted 23/08/2015 - 21:35
I read that there are inherent risks with an airshow and that there should be some risks in life. I accept if I were to go to an airshow that there is a remote possibility of a tragic accident impacting me. However, the impact here is on those who just happened to be passing. I have no particular knowledge of airshows or aerobatics but a loop the loop manoeuvre in a dense urban conurbation strikes me as inherently reckless. The sea is very close and a good view would have been had by all - why could it have not been performed higher in the sky and over the sea? I think I know why since spectators would have been more inclined to watch for free from the beach.

I think the Shoreham airshow will not happen again and I would not want it to.
You can see some of my photos here if you are so inclined

actech12

Link Posted 23/08/2015 - 21:46
jeallen01 wrote:
actech12 wrote:

And here is the crux of the matter, straight and level. Should adjoining manoeuvres separated by level flight over a road be allowed? Civil aircraft regularly overfly houses and roads with a descending manoeuvre at low altitude close to stalling but it is deemed ok.
Dave

A very good question, and not one that I have seen mentioned (as yet) anywhere else, especially as rapid sequences of aerobatic manoeuvres are obviously physically and mentally stressful for the pilot - whereas normal civil aircraft landings (and take-offs, of course) are generally planned and performed in relative "slow time" whn compared with aerobatic sequences and with few violent changes in direction or height - and so pilot disorientation could occur.

Granted, John, but the display pilot is also performing a well rehearsed sequence that has been passed by the CAA (albeit in this instance something went wrong), and he does not have the same distractions as a commercial pilot such as the level of traffic and Airprox issues that face them daily.

Dave
Always blame the equipment!!!!

actech12

Link Posted 23/08/2015 - 22:08
DrOrloff wrote:
I read that there are inherent risks with an airshow and that there should be some risks in life. I accept if I were to go to an airshow that there is a remote possibility of a tragic accident impacting me. However, the impact here is on those who just happened to be passing. I have no particular knowledge of airshows or aerobatics but a loop the loop manoeuvre in a dense urban conurbation strikes me as inherently reckless. The sea is very close and a good view would have been had by all - why could it have not been performed higher in the sky and over the sea? I think I know why since spectators would have been more inclined to watch for free from the beach.

I think the Shoreham airshow will not happen again and I would not want it to.

Adrian, the area where the display line was could not be described as densely populated (I live in Shoreham) but it does overfly a dual carriageway. In previous years the roadside would have cars parked end to end on both sides but health and safety laws have changed that. The crash of a Hurricane a few years ago happened on the north side of the road away from the airfield, and there were plenty of spectators viewing from that side when it happened. There is a coast road linking east and west but like everywhere else the area is being built up and the planes also overfly this. I have noted at previous shows that many of the faster jets or bigger prop planes usually turn once clear of these roads (over sea or fields). I for one would want it to continue even though they regularly fly directly over my house. my job is aviation, my hobbies are aviation and photography. Many people want to experience these planes in their natural environment and get great enjoyment from it. I don't like football but I don't want to stop other people from enjoying the 'sport' even when there seems to be the odd occurrence of senseless violence toward others, and the same can be said of many other pastimes. What happened was tragic, we can only try to learn from this but please stop trying to ban everything that has the potential to go wrong or we might as well all stay in bed.

Dave
Always blame the equipment!!!!

broadstairs

Link Posted 23/08/2015 - 22:13
DrOrloff wrote:
I think the Shoreham airshow will not happen again and I would not want it to.

That is your opinion and you are quite correctly entitled to it.

However I do take issue with he word reckless in respect of what this pilot was doing. I can assure you that no pilot in his right mind would ever do anything which was considered reckless. These displays are VERY carefully choreographed and practised prior to any authorisation being given for them to be performed in any UK airshow, however sadly accidents do happen. I for one do not believe any action should be taken in the heat of the moment, we have an enviable safety record here in the UK with respect to injuries to the public whether attending an airshow or not. I have been present in the past 10 or so years where three aircraft crashed two of which were fatal to the crew (one where the pilot walked away with no serious injury) but it has not changed my mind on air displays. As I said in my previous post we should all wait for the outcome of the AAIB investigation and them make a considered decision as to what if anything needs to change.

Stuart

Stuart

DrOrloff

Link Posted 23/08/2015 - 22:18
I'm not trying to ban everything. It would make sense to me to perform dangerous manouevres over the sea not an A road, especially given the fact that an airplane crashed near there before. Unless that happens there will be no more Shoreham airshow. I doubt there will be another anyway,
You can see some of my photos here if you are so inclined
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.