It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Hawker Hunter crashes at airshow; multiple dead reported

page: 9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 04:51 PM

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: Zaphod58

Tighten the loop? You know that's not likely to have changed his position much.

You've never actually done a loop in a high performance aircraft, have you? If you tighten (pull more gs/more angular momentum) after the first quarter loop, you will move the exit point farther along the original vector. If you tighten after the inverted point, you will move the exit point back. Varying the tightness will also vary exit altitude.
In any event, it appears from the video that during the first half loop some amount of bank was introduced, either by control input or tubulence or some other reason. That will result in a helical flight path. Also, no one is mentioning wind as a factor. When doing a loop, you do try to compensate for wind to keep the loop round by varying the pull. But you don't normally compensate for wind across the plane of the maneuver. Unless you are in competition and need to move along the Y axis in the aerobatic box.

posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 04:52 PM
a reply to: kamatty

The second picture, of it coming down the back of the loop. Not the wing, the horizontal stabilizer attached to the tail.

That's the elevator. It's used to move the nose up and down. There's a small tab on the back of it that can be adjusted so you don't have to hold as much pressure on the controls to keep the nose level. If that tab comes off it can affect the controls.

posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 04:57 PM

originally posted by: GBP/JPY
Did you see what he did at the last second.....roll left then quickly right......trying to get elevator authority.....for he had none for 10 seconds
good man.....

That sort of rolling movement is absolutely indicative of a accelerated stall where there is plenty of speed but wing loading from gs causes an angle of attack of the wing that exceeds the critical alpha and airflow separates from a smooth flow over the wing. You don't roll to get elevator authority, you decrease alpha.
edit on 23-8-2015 by F4guy because: ghost in the keyboard

posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 05:02 PM
a reply to: Imagewerx

From what I could see of the aircraft. It didn't appear that the aircraft had a nose up attitude...until the last seconds. Some posters have mentioned the possibility of loss of thrust as a possible contributing factor. I would surmise that thrust would only compound the problem until the aircraft was in a nose up attitude. Also it is mentioned the aircraft throttled up at the last seconds...which makes sense ..since those are the only seconds that the aircraft was headed in the right direction. unfortunately as Zaphod mentioned his sink rate was too great to overcome at that point. all those defending the pilot...I think it's great to see the camaraderie among the apparent pilots and aircraft related individuals. I don't think Kester in anyway thinks the pilot crashed into the people on purpose. And I certainly don't think he did it on purpose either. But as has been pointed out by the people in this thread who know this subject the best. This pilot was no amateur....when he started the loop he knew where he would be when he ended the loop. As also has been stated the aircraft never appears to be out of control...although the sink rate may have been greater then was allowed for ( Air density issue ??? ) and "obviously" was.

I have NO ill feelings toward this pilot I only have compassion and sorrow for him and ALL involved. It is a horrible accident. I don't think this pilot made any choices that day that me or any other person on this thread wouldn't have made if we were in his shoes. He was confident in his flying abilities and he pushed the envelope and ended up breaking out of it. Unfortunately innocent and unsuspecting people became victims of this event. The BIG question is...WHAT CAN BE DONE TO PREVENT IT IN THE FUTURE ??? IT IS NEVER EVER ACCEPTABLE TO KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE BECAUSE OF OUR CHOICES WHETHER INTENTIONAL OR NOT. Here is another video taken of the aftermath watch it and think about your wife or your child in that white car and tell me WHAT CAN BE DONE TO MAKE SURE SOMETHING LIKE THAT NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN.... I'M ALL EARS !!!!

posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 05:06 PM
a reply to: HarryJoy

Short of completely banning airshows they're about as safe as you can make them. An instructor pilot/aviation analyst put it best. With the system in place now, the odds of being in an accident at a show are about the same as being hit by lightning.

posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 05:15 PM
a reply to: stumason

I suppose, I probably shouldn`t even have "gone there" with that post. But sometimes you just cannot help but wonder how some people think.

Ive only ever flown a Hunter in the FSX simulator so I'm no pilot myself but watching the ailerons going nuts towards the end has me thinking Mr. Hill was trying hard to maneuver the aircraft away from the highway or was possibly trying to recover. Unfortunate for the people on the ground, the pilot who will probably never fly again and the Hawker Hunter that will most certainly not be flying again.

posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 06:36 PM
You can see in this video that as he levels off he has a high sink rate and the left wing drops as it goes out of frame.

posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 06:49 AM
Here is a quote from an article written about the airshow accident.

Today it was also claimed the RAF’s Red Arrows display team refuse to take part in the Shoreham show because it takes place in such a built-up area.

A former promoter said: “They have refused point blank to do an acrobatic display. There is nowhere for them to put a plane down without killing someone.”

Apparently the Red Arrows Team has been asked to participate in the Shoreham Airshow in previous years and refused based upon the location of the show. That shows how Professional and responsible the Red Arrows are. That's very commendable of them.

posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 10:29 AM
Just read a little report on ITV news that the CAA (civil aviation authority) have put restrictions on vintage aircraft flying in displays and that they can only do fly pasts .. No looping manoeuvres are to be done

There more to read here

What will these mean for future air shows?

posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 11:09 AM
a reply to: ThePeaceMaker

They are only "until further notice" and are likely to be reviewed and refined as more is learned. It seems the rules only covered keeping a distance from spectators and the A27 did come under the planned route as per the old rules which was fine. It seems future displays will have to also take into account things like roads and other built up area's. I think we will see a return of aerobatics but with much stricter rules about exactly where they can fly, which might kill off a few airshows in built up area's.

posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 12:49 PM
Two factors being looked at are altitude and crosswinds. They're still very early in the investigation, but those have already been mentioned.

posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 12:58 AM
It appears the ejection seat at least partially fired. The pilot was found 10 meters away from the wreckage. He's been placed in a medically induced coma.

The wreckage was removed and sent to Farnborough for examination.

posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 04:37 AM
a reply to: HarryJoy

The Red Arrows and the college accurately predicted the likely outcome and insisted on not being involved. That leaves everyone else who was in a position to make choices holding responsibility. They chose to take the risk with random strangers lives. Evading responsibility is not an option.

While walking along a ridge in Wales two jets flew up one valley, over the ridge, and down the other valley. I could smell the exhaust fumes after they'd passed. I admired their flying skill.

A gentleman who gave me a lift told me that he'd flown to Germany earlier that day, navigated to a particular valley, flown past a stationary train and photographed it while mentally taking note of the number and type of goods wagons and carriages. When he landed back in England the photograph was immediately developed and he was asked to describe the train. Then the photograph was put in front of him and the accuracy of his description was discussed. Admirable training and skill.

But here's the problem. In the 1980's some RAF pilots targeted some traveller camps. Some of them repeatedly. Children were severely traumatised. Mothers found their little children were permanently changed, their lives had been shattered by deliberate low flyovers. How do these pilots feel about this now? In their memories was it all just a laugh? Those children were permanently changed, they were never such happy little children again. What contribution or otherwise to society did they go on to make? I would like to know how those pilots feel about this now and what they think they could do to put things right.

edit on 25 8 2015 by Kester because: spelling

posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 04:46 AM
a reply to: F4guy

Therefore you do it where there's room for error. Red Arrow type common sense.
edit on 25 8 2015 by Kester because: remove word

posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 08:32 AM
a reply to: Kester

Well hell, why don't we just ban pilots and aircraft completely then. Will that satisfy you, since apparently all pilots are hot dogging idiots.

posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 08:43 AM
In 1952 the prototype De Haviland 110 crashed at the Farnborough airshow killing 29 people. In 1958 three people on the ground died in an accident, one died in an accident in 1968. From then until now there have been no known deaths of people on the ground at a UK airshow, either spectators or bystanders.

posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 09:29 AM
a reply to: Zaphod58

I've made the reason for my obvious bitterness over this matter clear. Without those cruel and stupid pilots of the 80's I would never have contributed to this thread.

What are your motives for deliberately misrepresenting my comments? You must have motives.

posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 09:52 AM

An expert pilot has suggested Andy Hill, the pilot of the Hawker Hunter jet that crashed, was "showing off" as he performed a "lunatic" manoeuvre.
Leslie Hatcher, 71, a former RAF aerobatics instructor who flew Hawker Hunters, told The Times that the sort of accident seen at Shoreham "should never happen".
He said: "Your display should be done up and down the runway. You should stay within the boundaries of the airfield. He should have been nowhere near that road.
"He was carrying drop [auxiliary fuel] tanks on each wing. To make it as safe as possible, you take an absolute minimum of fuel. Even if they were empty, they should not have been there. They cause drag on the aircraft.
"That guy came in at about 100ft, much lower than the 500ft minimum height allowed. He pulled up and he was going too slowly. He looked unstable as he was going over the top [of the loop]. He should have rolled out at the top.
"The guy must have been a complete lunatic to come in at 100ft and think he could pull out of it [the loop] safely.
"This guy — I think simply he was just showing off. This sort of accident should never happen. Even if he had taken a bird strike in the engine, he would have been able to recover that [if he was flying above 500ft].
"You do not fly over crowds. You do not fly below 500ft."
Mr Hatcher said he had flown 60 hours in one and two-seater variants of the Hawker Hunter before graduating to fly the supersonic English Electric Lightning. He later became an aerobatics instructor at RAF Training Command. In 1981 he won the Wright Jubilee Trophy for best display by an RAF pilot.

A celebrated RAF display pilot and aerobatics instructor has called the pilot a complete lunatic.

Two of the crashes I mentioned earlier involved showing off to a particular individual on the ground. One a cousin, the other a fiancee. Here's the most dreadful suggestion I've made yet. Was there a particular individual at or near the crash site that the pilot was trying to impress?

This was all deliberate. Except of course he expected to roar over the busy public road at a breathtakingly low altitude. Didn't quite work out, did it guys. And that's you if you do this over populated areas. You may even live to face the music. I might also add that's your motorbike going through the windscreen of a minibus full of nuns while you slide along relatively unscathed in your protective gear.

Risk taking. Do it where you won't kill innocent and uninvolved people.

Remember, what we learn from this for future occasions is the purpose of the discussion. All the rest is 'just' a lifetime of grief for the survivors.

posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 10:42 AM
Shoreham is not unique in the fact that it has a major road running within spitting distance, both North Weald and Duxford are very close to the M11 so I can imagine heavy restrictions being put in place at any future shows. I concur however that airshows are about as safe as they can be whilst still being able to give a "display" to the crowd, the other option is to just shut up shop on the whole thing and not have displays full stop.

Things can go wrong however and when at the time Mark Hanna had his crash he was probably the worlds best and most sort after display pilot so experience does not mean immunity if it all goes wrong.

Reading the quotes from his peers in the Telegraph is eye opening, some saying they cannot imagine he would make a mistake to one person claiming he must be a lunatic, that is a broad wave on opinion right there and all these people seem to be respected RAF bods.

I would have thought that his display program would be something that was practiced 100s of times and I would also be sure that if he did start the loop to low then there would be evidence to back it up, as it is my understanding that a full display report is submitted prior with all information on the display. There was a video online with what I believe was a Typhoon with a in cockpit camera that was told to land and for him to go into see the flight director due to going below the Altitude limit set for event..

I must say the first thing I thought when I caught the start of the loop on TV that he was very low going into it but then camera angles can show things in a totally different light.. I just hope the pilot pulls through and can give his account of what happened.

posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 01:09 PM
a reply to: Kester

I'm not misrepresenting them. You've looked at a handful of pilots that did stupid things and have decided they were the norm and not the exception. That's obvious from your comments.

new topics

<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in