Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
The difference is that McRae was a normal civilian pilot, so shouldn’t have been taking risks. The Shoreham pilot was flying an aerobatic display, was trained and experienced to do so, so there is an inherent risks associated with that which the pilot was aware of and should have been mitigated as much as possible. So no real comparison with McRae situation at all. McRae was an inexperienced (relatively) amateur pilot with a fraction of the skills and experience of the Shoreham pilot. Like equating popping sown to the shops on your ford fiesta to Walter rhorl ripping a group b Audi Quattro rally car through a parting crowd of people. Completely different circumstances in terms of the skills and experiences of the pilots and scenarios.
I’m pretty sure the AAIB would have considered that if it was feasible.
And it could well be a possibility.
But good luck proving or disproving that in a 1950s analogue fighter jet, with no black box and **** all in the way of electronic sensors. It seems the AAIB couldn't even definitively rule out G-Lock.
The US airforce has spent years chasing it's tail over issues with the T-6, F22 and F35. Those are state of the art, with every systems sensor you could possibly think of and they still didn't know what the hell was wrong with them.
My point being - proving this case beyond reasonable doubt was always going to really really hard.
People talk about this pilot taking risks as if he did it on purpose like Colin McCrash did. We don't know that, even if he was totally with it in a subsonic fighter jet - if you think a 10 second quarter of a mile is fast in a car? Then you should try 7 seconds in a fighter and you are a mile down the road. You have next to no time to think between a series of manoeuvres you have lined up and simple, small errors lead to huge consequences because of the amount of distance you are covering so quickly.
Personally, I am will to give him the benefit of the doubt and apportion blame to the CAA who should have seen this coming and adjusted display routines years ago.
The reason why we have to use criminal courts and send people down to deal with it in daily driving is that we as society can’t be **** arsed to deal with the root causes of road deaths.
No, it's because the standard of driving of even the average person if equated to a professional activity would probably get you in trouble.
Imagine if your doctor did the equivelent of going through an Amber light despite there being a traffic jam and blocking a junction.
Or pilots routinely flew at 10%+3mph above the safe speed for their plane, because despite knowing it was unsafe but it wouldn't trigger a prosecution.
I used to work in HSE and as someone said it's very rare to blame a person directly, it's always an overly complicated task or their tirednesss that get the blame. I.e. "it could have happened to anyone". Car driving on the other hand, it seems like a majority or drivers just willfully act like dicks. Car crashes have very different causes to other incidents.
All this baying for a persecution. Do people really think this guy set off thinking today I’m going to **** this one up, and try and crash on a road, create a big fireball and kill 11 people !?!
Sounds like a combination of errors, air show in wrong place, aircraft not in great condition, pilot error.
Let’s hope lessons are leanrned and things move on
All this baying for a persecution. Do people really think this guy set off thinking today I’m going to **** this one up, and try and crash on a road, create a big fireball and kill 11 people !?!
Did th prosecuting authority think there's a reasonable chance of a conviction for manslaughter which requires different parameters to those you've used, yes. Did the case get thrown out at half time, no. So obviously there was a case of suspected manslaughter to answer to.
Do people really think this guy set off thinking today I’m going to **** this one up, and try and crash on a road, create a big fireball and kill 11 people !?!
No I don't think it was planned at all but 11 people were killed when he created a great big fireball.
And, he alone had control of a plane and chose to commit to aerobatics over the land and ultimately failed to control the vehicle he was piloting.
Did he “plan” to kill people ? No. I don’t think he did. Did he make massive errors of judgment? Undoubtedly. Did those massive errors of judgement lead to the deaths of 11 people ? Yes, no single doubt about that. Should a criminal case have been brought against him ? Absolutely. Should a civil case be brought against him ? Absolutely. Does the law look an arse in a situation where 11 people died at the hands of one person? Unilateral Yes.
One thing this modern society misses is the lack of responsibility, taking ownership of ones actions.
when I was on a jury we weren’t asked why or how we’d reached a verdict, just what it was.
I believe you’d be found in contempt for revealing any of the reasoning behind a decision. I’m not a fan of this, personally - life changing decisions that affect another person should come with the courtesy of an justification.
Any pilots care to give an opinion ?
There are 3 pilots at my club, none would comment when asked..
Did he “plan” to kill people ? No. I don’t think he did. Did he make massive errors of judgment? Undoubtedly. Did those massive errors of judgement lead to the deaths of 11 people ? Yes, no single doubt about that. Should a criminal case have been brought against him ? Absolutely. Should a civil case be brought against him ? Absolutely. Does the law look an arse in a situation where 11 people died at the hands of one person? Unilateral Yes.
You have literally not read ANY of the previous 88 posts have you?
Any pilots care to give an opinion ?
There's at least one professional commercial airline pilot on this thread. Which you'd know if you read it...
No, it’s because the standard of driving of even the average person if equated to a professional activity would probably get you in trouble.
Imagine if your doctor moredid the equivelent of going through an Amber light despite there being a traffic jam and blocking a junction
But that is because we as a society, are not willing to allow the kinds of constant oversight you get in other professional activities. We can't even handle a couple of speed cameras. If we had black boxes in every car that reported every time you were speeding, red light cameras everywhere etc then maybe attitudes would change.
My point was, is that society is unwilling to deal with the root causes of poor driving - which are regulatory. If airline pilots had lax regulations and poor oversight like driving does, pilots would be taking more risk.
Consequently we have to use prosecution as a tool to pretend we are doing something.
My point was, is that society is unwilling to deal with the root causes of poor driving – which are regulatory.
It's one of those strange things, I generally like to think that people are generally good and well meaning. Except when they're in cars when all of a sudden gaining 20ft in a traffic jam is justified even if it blocks two other lanes on a roundabout meaning 20 other car's don't get through the lights that turn. Ditto speeding, I know I'm forever guilty of coasting through speed limit changes* rather than braking, why do I do it?
I wonder if as car's get more intelligent whether black-box insurance will become more commonplace? No point getting a really cheap quote to insure a Volvo 90 with all it's sensors, if the insurance company doesn't know if you're not turning them off and driving like a tit.
*not 30/40's through town, I stick to those, stuff like the 70/50 changes on DC's and motorways.
If airline pilots had lax regulations and poor oversight like driving does, pilots would be taking more risk.
Do you think so? I don’t.
@bikebuoy I'm a commercial pilot now but have countless hours flying high performance aerobatics in my logbook.
I've done low level displays but never pure aerobatic ones. I've lost a good friend from am aerobatic mishap (medium level) and seen and experienced many spins for a multitude of reasons-mainly my agricultural handling!!
I personally think he made a cognitive error in his gate height and entry speed, possibly as a function of him flying so many different types. Any seasoned display pilot, current on multiple types could have made a similar error. A looping and rolling manoeuvre is very easy to get wrong. Ultimately, I wasn't there and therefore can't profess to have all the information.
I'm sure the rules will be tightened up, but display flying is a dangerous game. The laws of physics don't budge! Still, with adequate regulation, it's something everyone should & could continue to enjoy.
However here is one with 6 dead, 15 injured, the driver survived and no prosecution for the events that day: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Glasgow_bin_lorry_crash
He was at least banned from driving though, so at least a slap on the wrist.
The Pilot didn't even get a 'try not to let it happen again'.
And, he alone had control of a plane and chose to commit to aerobatics over the land and ultimately failed to control the vehicle he was piloting.
All within the context of an airshow where there is an expectation that there will be some "risky" flying, with the intention to entertain . You can't compare that to someone purely flying or driving from A to B intending to arrive safely. The pilot made a mistake or more likely an accumulation of errors only some of which he was responsible for.
Court found him not guilty so he's not, at least not what he was charged with.
He was at least banned from driving though, so at least a slap on the wrist.
The Pilot didn’t even get a ‘try not to let it happen again’.
There are no sanctions for any offence if you are found 'not guilty'.
If you were charged with death by dangerous driving and found not guilty, you'd also walk away without a 'try not to let it happen again'.
He was at least banned from driving though, so at least a slap on the wrist.
Except it wasn't a slap on the wrist, he was banned because that is standard procedure with the DVLA if you start blacking out at the wheel. That guy also didn't stop after he first suffered a black out, the Shoreham pilot did no such thing and there is no medical evidence that he will suffer another episode.
Do you think so? I don’t.
I know F-111 pilots who used to smoke in the cockpit whilst flying and watching bombs fall on Nevada ranges. How many fast jet pilots do silly things like fly under bridges these days? How many pilots used to drink heavily the night before or fly ridiculous amounts of hours back in the 60's-70's? More than they do now.
https://www.agcs.allianz.com/insights/expert-risk-articles/how-aviation-safety-has-improved/
Human factors
While technology has helped drive improvements in the aviation industry’s safety record, great strides in safety management systems and insights into human
factors have also contributed significantly.“Aviation accidents are a chain of events that almost always involve an element of human error,” Downey says.
“However, the safety culture in the aviation industry has changed significantly during my career. Flight training has become a more controlled and professional environment with the development of recurrent training. The utilization and technological enhancement of flight simulators has been one of the biggest changes I have witnessed.”
Personally, I am will to give him the benefit of the doubt and apportion blame to the CAA who should have seen this coming and adjusted display routines years ago.
I agree.
Way back when I was the other driver in the dance routine with Russ Swift at Brands Hatch. We did the lunchtime slot and the stunt pilots who'd watched came over and offered us a ride during their routine. As we climbed we had time for a chat. My pilot explained about the air space they had (a triangle delimited by roads around Brands up to a certain ceiling) and how the routine was designed to look as impressive as possible from the ground with minimum risk in the air, and plenty of margin for error. There was communication with air trafic control right up to the point they started the display. It all went fine, I particularly liked the flying backwards bit as the plane hangs on the prop then falls backwards. In the unlikely event anything had gone wrong there were a hell of a lot of people in that triangle, a reasonable risk in the 80s, but now?
It's 2019, the days of barnstorming have long gone. Time to limit stunt flying to air space over really deserted areas (so not an air show near an urban area) or over the sea it seems to me.
There’s at least one professional commercial airline pilot on this thread. Which you’d know if you read it…
Is that you crazy-legs or are you now stroppy-legs ? 💁♂️
Serious question - why was he performing the manouvre where he was? I thought aerobatic displays were to be held over water and away from the crowds/surrounding roads to minimise this kind of thing happening
They don’t operate over the crowd line, but this was a crash outside the airfield boundary.
... I was the other driver in the dance routine with Russ Swift at Brands Hatch...
Respect!
Pro pilots do seem pretty sorted bunch.
So what about Dave Ibbottson, the pilot in the Sala crash?
Not qualified to do commercial flights.
In a US registered plane.
Only supposed to get recompense for costs on a flight he was making anyway.
Now that sounds shifty as ****. And really needs to be sorted.
I’m sure the rules will be tightened up, but display flying is a dangerous game.
I think it will be pretty much game over after this.
The families of those killed won't be accepting of the court decision, so it will more than likely move on to who decided where the display could take place and under what rules. I think anyone thinking of having a display will take one look at this and say, no thanks.
El-bent
Let's hope it won't be game over. 🤞🏼🤞🏼
I'm still undecided about going to the IAT after all this. Wondering what limitations will be enforced for that.
Just as well I remember the good old days of the 70's & 80's! Only incident I saw was a C130 that landed & stopped quickly, blowing a tyre in the process & having to trundle off the runway in embarrassment.
Airshows in those days were the mutts nuts.
He was at least banned from driving though, so at least a slap on the wrist.
He didn’t get banned for causing the accident. As I understand it his license was medically revoked six months after the crash, he later got his car license back. In the meantime he drove anyway - and as a result of ignoring the DVLA revocation got disqualified for 3 yrs (and a tag).
Medical revocations are not a ban, are not a punishment and are not a slap on the wrist!
The Pilot didn’t even get a ‘try not to let it happen again
Do you know what sanctions the CAA have taken wrt to his commercial pilots license or permissions to do display flying? That would be the equivalent to the DVLA revoking a license... if he ignores them I assume the consequences are very significant?
@EGF
I’m still undecided about going to the IAT after all this.
Why, out of interest?
Why, out of interest?
Well in case the displays are even more muted than now or even if theyr'e sacked off altogether of course.
Ah, I see. Let's hope they're as good as they've ever been 👍🏼
I dout he’ll ever be flying any aerobatic display ever again
Or anyone else. Aerobatic displays in UK are over, if not airshows in general. Give it ten years, there will be very few left.
imo, shouldn’t have been performing that manoeuvre over a populated area.
Surely the fault of the organisers then?
Now corrected though. See above, end to air shows (Farnborough has struggled despite fencing off Long Valley and now they've binned public display. They just can't put on the displays in the area they have got. Other than that it's sea shows but they're getting fewer).
and other than that it’s sea shows but they’re getting fewer).
I'd imagine that's down to funding. Sunderland airshow is (I think) funded by the council (who no doubt recoup some of the revenue from trade stands etc) but the IAT is funded by admission prices (not cheap) & have more than just a few visitors! Correct me if I'm wrong on that though.
One thing that's stopped me attending over the years is the lack of 'exciting' aircraft on display nowadays, there just isn't the variety anymore.
Do you know what sanctions the CAA have taken wrt to his commercial pilots license or permissions to do display flying? That would be the equivalent to the DVLA revoking a license… if he ignores them I assume the consequences are very significant?
CAA doesn’t work like that. It’s not like pilots get points on their licences for exceeding speed limits or not following ATC instructions. Head/wall/etc. There are draconian punishments under the ANO for misrepresentation with regard to licences and fitness to fly, but it’s not like the DVLA (fortunately).
A jury of our peers was presented with the evidence and found him not guilty. Civil claims are an entirely different thing, but as it stands your obsessive desire for punishment is inappropriate and frankly rather concerning.
Overall, having now read the AAIB report (oops), right decision I think. Lots of contributory factors, not all under pilot control.
Airshows have changed as a result. What more can you want, that is not revenge on the obvious target.
lack of ‘exciting’ aircraft on display nowadays, there just isn’t the variety anymore
Less variety in the new airframes all round.
Lots more safety things are involved in a new type these days, end result, less appetite for big new projects. Lots of tickles to existing airframes. Etc.
Any pilots care to give an opinion ?
There are 3 pilots at my club, none would comment when asked..
I live local to the airport and have flown similar aircraft in the past.
I will keep tight lipped other than saying that some of the footage I saw at the time raised questions about the aircraft.
CAA doesn’t work like that. It’s not like pilots get points on their licences for exceeding speed limits or not following ATC instructions. Head/wall/etc. There are draconian punishments under the ANO for misrepresentation with regard to licences and fitness to fly, but it’s not like the DVLA (fortunately).
CAA doesn't work like what? They don't revoke pilots licenses for either misconduct or medical reasons?
A jury of our peers was presented with the evidence and found him not guilty. Civil claims are an entirely different thing, but as it stands your obsessive desire for punishment is inappropriate and frankly rather concerning.
What? Where have I been obsessed with a desire for punishment - I'd suggest you re-read the posts. The analogy was drawn to motoring incidents. There is an obvious comparison to the Glasgow Bin Lorry case in that there were a large number of bystander casualties and the implication that the person at the controls was at the time incapable of intervening to avoid it. I've never said what outcome I think is proper for either case as I haven't heard all the facts. In the bin lorry case it was suggested that he had received a "slap on the wrists" but in fact that wasn't for the incident on that December day but for the subsequent stupidity.
To me this case suggests that contrary to what we read on here every time a "driver gets away with murdering a cyclist" juries don't acquit because they are drivers too, but perhaps because they don't believe there was any intention to cause harm or disregard safety.