Shoreham airshow crash

[B58Hustler]

I still believe, as I always have, that his muscle memory reverted to the JP, and that's the profile he flew.
There's an argument for displaying (or NOT) multiple types I think.

[raptor9]

If he reverted to 'muscle memory' whilst flying exacting flying displays, then he had no business being allowed anywhere near an aircraft. The great thing about flying is that is is much more discipline orientated than driving a car, which makes it extremely important that you are concentrating 100% on what your doing in his environment. Sorry, I cannot go along with the' Muscle memory' theory!. As a week-end flier for 10 years on six different types I never had that problem, nor have I heard of anyone even admitting to it happening. Surely if he thought he was flying the JP he would be looking at much lower entry speeds in the first place!.

[B58Hustler]

So what would be a more plausible explanation then? I don't believe the ALOC theory.

[raptor9]

Criminal carelessness. Familiarity breeding contempt in my opinion.

[Sparts99]

I flew as a passenger in a display aircraft in the 80s as part of the groundcrew. Things were slacker then, we had one pilot in particular who we binned in the end because of his reckless attitude and chancey flying, not only on displays but the transit flights too. Display flying is inherently dangerous, performing manouvres close to the ground you have to have your wits about you and fly within the limits of yourself and the aircraft. He didn't, that's all there is to it. The defence in his trial played on the ignorance of the jury, if the jury had been aviation experts he wouldn't have got away with it. As Jonathon Whalley said, if ALOC was a thing then any aerobatics or combat flying would be too dangerous to consider.

[Mark]

I still believe, as I always have, that his muscle memory reverted to the JP, and that's the profile he flew.
There's an argument for displaying (or NOT) multiple types I think.

He got black flagged in a JP doing the same manoeuvre at Southport as well though..

[raptor9]

Silly thing is that of all the basic aerobatic maneuvers a loop is by far the easiest. Watch the entry height, power setting, 'G' meter and watch the GATE HEIGHT!!! at the inverted position. Coming down is the same!!. Cannot understand how he got it so wrong in a perfectly capable aircraft!. Should he be allowed to fly again?. I don't really know. If he had crashed on his own, then it would be a less serious accident, obviously, but he killed people. The fact remains, however, that the offence would have been the same. So, was the offence dangerous flying, or dangerous flying resulting in peoples death?. Tragedy, of course in the latter case, but dangerous flying is surely just that. I would be veering towards him being allowed to fly at the moment.

[quid21]

I think it sets an unhealthy precedent.

I'm no expert, but apparently he told paramedics that he blacked out. So if he blacked out surely that was after he commited to the loop as he tried to pull hard back on the stick to avoid hitting the ground.

If I were in his shoes, I don't think I would even attempt to get the licence back out of respect for the families.

[Agent K]

Irrespective of all the opinions. one way or the other, to me I am stunned by the complete lack of self awareness and ownership by Mr Hill, and dare i say arrogance in trying to get a licence back. It astounds me that there seems to be no (visible) consideration by Mr Hill for the victims and their families. Even if legally he is entitled to a licence, just think of the impact of that on them, It seems to be just about him and not the bigger picture.

Also, I can only imagine the unwarranted position he is putting legal professionals and CAA people in, within the media and the wider community, and whom will attract unfair anger at having "let" him fly again. Should, having made an error on his JP display and caused this catastrophe, the worse happen again they will be seen by some to be responsible and attract "blame" and be tried by the press and perhaps also legal attention for being responsible for letting it happen again.

[raptor9]

As a codicil to my couple of posts back, crashing yourself is dangerous flying, killing other people by dangerous flying is, of course Manslaughter.

[Hurn]

He got black flagged in a JP doing the same manoeuvre at Southport as well though..

Yes, he appeared to be very lucky to not hit the ground there too.

As Jonathon Whalley said, if ALOC was a thing then any aerobatics or combat flying would be too dangerous to consider.

According to military experts, ALOC IS a thing, and it is reportedly what caused Jon Egging to crash in 2011. On that occasion (iirc) he had just pulled over 6G though, and as they were breaking to land, didn't have much height in which to recover once he seemed to becoming cognitively aware again.

[raptor9]

Someone who knows much more about aerobatics in jets than most of us described the high temperature on the day as the FINAL nail in the coffin that didn't allow the pull-out to be successful. I alluded to that some time ago myself as a possible cause, having downed half a bottle Scotch at Brian Lecomber's house many years ago, when he told me the same thing nearly cost him his life at a display in China, long before Shoreham.

[Supra]

A very valid point raptor9.
Personally, with little to no experience of high performance flying, I'm inclined to agree with your (Brian's) view that high air temperature played a crucial detrimental role in the resulting incident. From the very beginning of the downward trajectory I have multiple high-quality images which show the elevators in the fully upward position. This did not seem to have any affect on the dive angle, probably due to air density & plain lack of velocity! (Query ALOC without high G?)
The velocity being a factor of the two un-commanded throttle reductions in the climb which must've reduced the altitude & speed achieved prior to committing to the looping manoeuvre. (req'd Gate Height)

That was in fact retrospectively the optimum time to abandon the display & retreat out to sea to interrogate the apparent issues?? Also given the clear visual breach of regulations on the loop entry altitude, the FDD/ FCC should have called the 'knock-off' before that anyway?

Relative to the high temperature was the lack of humidity! So quite why the Airshow Commentator would make comment via the P/A system about the 'vapour' coming from the Hunter in the dive is beyond me....especially when he was seeing a 'vapour trail' caused by a substantial fuel leak from the underwing tank!
The AAIB Report states that the main fuel tanks were full on impact, soooo, by reasonable extension the engine was being fuelled by the wing & underwing tanks? That same tank that was peeing jet fuel to atmosphere, instead of the engine?
As only a truly reckless Pilot would throttle-back in a climb to a minimum required altitude, could it be the cause of the acknowleged throttle reductions was actually fuel starvation?

Either way, the outcome was that had Andy Hill commenced the climbing part of the manoeuvre at or above the approved minimum altitude & without a minimum of 15 degrees of flap deployed, he would have most likely have not impacted the cars & people by a small margin outcome.... very small, but a miss is a miss!
Deluded witnesses & some self-appointed experts on the show-site claimed all sorts of speculative developments, particular favourite of mine is that that Andy Hill "pulled-up at the last minute, but it was too late!" All they saw was a fireball behind the trees & the brain fills in the rest of the 'memory'. Clearly the high Alpha AoA was in fact Ground Effect due to the terminal proximity of the A27 IMO.

I was located on the A27 near the previous Sussex Pad PH & just 30 metres from the initial ground impact point reducing to under 20 metres as the jet slid down the westbound carriageway disintegrating & exploding!
Yes....I had put myself in a dangerous location of my own free choice, but also accept that your risk to life is greater on the journey to & from the Airshow than whilst actually around any part of that event!
Whilst it was latterly confirmed a real 'Danger Zone' it could've happened anywhere around there. On that point I would like to clarify that 6 out of the 11 deaths were people like myself who were specifically there to see the flying, unlike the other 5 victims innocently going about their everyday business. Maybe harsh?... but the reality is that contributory negligence on the part of those spectators is a real thing too!

[FlyingFairy]

CAA have removed his flight & radio licenses.

Link here: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqxrvld1evgo