Forum menu
I never realised how difficult it was to nail a good analogy until this thread.
I have learned that we lack reasoned statisticians though.
From the previous page:
Have you even vaguely stopped to consider the stupidity of comparing the number of participants and minutes of travel in the entire national road network daily (tens of millions daily) with the 'huge numbers of people ' attending airshows (a few hundred thousand annually)?
and
The correlation of risk comparing the sheer massive volume of car journeys taken daily by UK citizens alone (millions and millions)- against the couple dozen(?) air shows in the UK - blows the infamous car journey/hit by a bus statement clear out of the water ,particularly now that up to 20 people, sorry, non-pilots, have died since 1960something.
Airshows are up there with football as one of the biggest spectator events in the UK. 200,000 people can be at the big ones (RIAT, Farnborough) and 50,000 is not uncommon elsewhere. I went to Leuchars a few years ago and they reckoned 70,000 at that.
I think they reckoned 35,000 people went to see the two Lancasters doing a flypast through the Derwent Valley.
Rhyl this coming Bank Holiday weekend are expecting 180,000 over the three days although they may get fewer now based on the Shoreham incident.
Depending on how you define "airshow" there are approximately 400-500 a year across the UK. (That's counting a weekend as two separate shows). Plus you can add in flypasts on top of that where the aircraft doesn't do a full arerobatic display.
So the risk figures are out by a fair bit since annually you've got several million people (or the same 500,000 people going multiple times) to many hundreds of events.
That said, the other comment about "it's not happened in 60 years" is referring to UK only - in 2011 there was a crash at an airshow in the US which killed 10 spectators.
Cardiff Airshow not going ahead this w/e I just read on the BBC News..
[url= http://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/566533-hawker-hunter-loss-shoreham-airshow-16.html ]pprune thread[/url]
Some more informed speculation here for those interested.
what keeps preying on my mind, and it may be a little morbid to do so, is the reason(s) that all the victims haven't been identified and that people are still regarded as missing.
would the fire or impact have been so ferocious as to have obliterated people that much?
Not sure I really should answer this.....
My father was a dentist in the Royal Navy, based at a naval air station in the late 60s, early 70s. His skills were used more than once to identify aircrew. Fairly sobering when you have been in the wardroom with them the night before. Aviation fuel burns hot and aircraft carry a lot of inertia.
Aviation fuel burns hot and aircraft carry a lot of inertia.
The Hunter wasn't going this fast (or at least I don't believe it was) but this is the best example I've seen of the forces involved (this was at 480mph)
Twixhunter
An acquaintance who has flown aerobatics said for planes like that when at the top of the loop, the power should be reduced to prevent the g-forces ripping the engine off and to provide more time to make the turn.
I think your mate might be on some seriously powerful meds. The G-Forces over the top are pretty low (some people talk of G-Loc at that point which is unlikely) and the thrust would be at a fairly constant level throughout the loop in normal circumstances. High thrust equates to high pitching ability but obviously you don't want the speed shooting up out of control on the way down from the loop. Selecting idle thrust in this case would reduce your acceleration but would compromise pitching ability too on the way down.
The engine will be stressed to the same limits that the airframe would be and a loop should be well within those limits (nominally 4g for a loop).
Can't comment on what thrust was set here as I have poor internet access so haven't seen the video for a few days and it'd be hard to tell I'd have thought.
The jet looked like it is doing what is asked of it up until the crash so it doesn't appear to be overloaded in structural terms.
I'm sure the AAIB will get to the bottom of this tragedy, not STW!!!.
Two cyclists heading for a SDW ride have also been named as fatalities now 🙁
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-34101625
I knew Richard when he worked at Velocity in Cosham too. Only a nipper.
I'm pleased and surprised to see he's recovered to the point where he can be interviewed.
http://m.theargus.co.uk/news/13711134.Shoreham_airshow_pilot_to_be_interviewed_by_police/