[Politics] Shoreham Pilot - Flying Licence Appeal Rejected 17/10/2024
- Thread starter Tooting Gull
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
mikeyjh
Well-known member
Yep, but manouvers over the A27 were not excluded. I would suggest that every single aerobatic display ever performed at Shoreham included manouvers over the road. Again, I'm not saying Hill isn't, in many ways, culpable but the CAA and display organisers have to take their share of the blame.
I've witness 3 accidents at Shoreham, only 1 resulted in non pilot casualties but were all, in some ways, a result of pilot error.
Is the process of getting his licence back one that can be impacted by a petition/judgement call. Or is it simply a process that if he meets objective criteria, he gets it back without scope to deny him because he doesn't deserve to be able to fly again?
Shoreham Airshow disaster pilot to ask for flying licence back today
The pilot involved in the Shoreham Airshow disaster is appearing in front of a panel to request the reinstatement of his flying licence.
www.theargus.co.uk
- Apr 5, 2014
- 25,892
My word, that's some cheek he's got. You would have thought he'd have quietly moved away somewhere by now.Shoreham Airshow disaster pilot to ask for flying licence back today
The pilot involved in the Shoreham Airshow disaster is appearing in front of a panel to request the reinstatement of his flying licence.
Exactly.
Whether he was liable or not, what sort of person would want to fly again after that disaster?
Withdean South Stand
Well-known member
- Mar 2, 2014
- 646
The type of person who had been flying most of their life?
Personally, if I caused the deaths of 11 people I wouldn't ever want to do it again. But then I've never been a pilot.
Manoeuvres over the A27 are one thing ( flying across the width of the road ) but he used the length of the road as the marker for that particular roll . Flying across the A27 gives plenty of time to clear the busy road if there should be a problem , forward inertia alone would clear the danger area , but to perform the entire manoeuvre over the length of the road is highly dangerous and bloody irresponsible , but hey never mind after all he was always guaranteed safety by his ejector seat . The only flying this POS should be doing is with the propulsion of someone`s toe up his afterburner .
Gabbafella
Well-known member
- Aug 22, 2012
- 4,905
The guy is an arrogant, irresponsible, remorseless piece of shit and should never be allowed to fly again.
Peacehaven Wild Kids
Well-known member
It sounds like (emphasis on sounds like) you’re trying to justify this.
I drive a bus, if I killed 11 people with it then conveniently forget how it happened, you wouldn’t find me behind the wheel of a 14 in ten years time.
But then I’ve never been a pilot.
Okay. Perhaps I’d WANT to fly again. I can’t see how I would though. With that on my conscience.
Since1982
Well-known member
Irresponsible, demonstrably unsafe, callous in his disregard for the victims families - I hope he gets told in no uncertain terms to forget ever flying again.
- Apr 5, 2014
- 25,892
The inquest verdict was unlawful killing mind. Despite the not guilty verdict. It would be better if he quietly faded away and showed a conscience. I would be shocked if his license was approved.
I'm guessing it would be nigh on impossible to have an aerobatic display that was entirely over the confines of the aerodrome (or most aerodromes for that matter). Even a relatively low flypast along the length of the runway will involve crossing above the road or flying over some residential properties. Hill was too slow and too low to start the manoeuvre but it was still incredibly bad coincidence that the point of impact was as the aircraft crossed the road. 20ft higher and the crash would not have affected anyone on the A27.
As for him getting his licence back, I think if he does, he shouldn't be allowed anywhere near an airshow. It is insensitive and you feel for the families of all of the victims.
The kind of person who show's off in public and kills people.
Watched this documentary about the crash recently. The pilot is an arrogant **** who has never shown any regret or remorse.
tv.apple.com
Fatal Flight: Shoreham - Apple TV (UK)
In 2015, a fighter jet crashed at The Shoreham Air Show, killing 11 people.
tv.apple.com
Shropshire Seagull
Well-known member
Crikey mate, awful lot of error in your comment.
1/ The flight path was not along the length of the road - AAIB report states "The manoeuvre was continued and the aircraft struck the ground on the northern side of the westbound carriageway of the A27 close to the central reservation with a ground track at a slight angle to the direction of the road." Additionally, the AAIB report states: "A change of ground track during the manoeuvre positioned the aircraft further east than planned producing an exit track along the A27 dual carriageway." [he didn't "plan" to be above the road]
2/ The manoeuvre was not a "roll", it is described as a "bent loop".
3/ "Flying across the A27 gives plenty of time to clear the busy road if there should be a problem" - Time was not the issue, AAIB report states "The aircraft did not achieve sufficient height at the apex of the accident manoeuvre to complete it before impacting the ground because the combination of low entry speed and low engine thrust in the upward half of the manoeuvre was insufficient." The AAIB report adds: "an escape manoeuvre was not carried out, despite the aircraft not achieving the required minimum apex height."
4/ "he was always guaranteed safety by his ejector seat" - whilst the ejector seat was active in this aircraft the AAIB report states: "The pilot did not attempt to jettison the aircraft’s canopy or activate his ejection seat. However, disruption of the aircraft due to the impact activated the canopy jettison process and caused the ejection seat firing mechanism to initiate. The seat firing sequence was not completed due to damage sustained by its firing mechanism during the impact. The seat was released from the aircraft and the pilot was released from the seat as a result of partial operation of the sequencing mechanism. Some of the pyrotechnic cartridges remained live and were a hazard to first responders until they were made safe." On 21 December 2015, the AAIB published 7 recommendations, specifically with the safety of first responders to the accident scene.
5/ I know your last bit about an "afterburner" was not referring to the aircraft. But just for completeness the Hawker Hunter T7 G-BXFI was fitted with a Rolls-Royce Avon-122 turbojet engine and the version fitted to G-BXFI did not have "re-heat" aka afterburner.
Factoid - Hawker Hunters were still in active service with 19 air forces including with the Lebanese Airforce (retired in 2014)
The full AAIB report is 452 pages but there is a shorter GOV.UK summary here which also includes an informative visual animation.
If Andy Hill (claimed to have) suffered "cognitive impairment" 9 years ago, what's happened to suggest he won't have the same happen again - lifetime ban on flying would be my decision.
Last edited:
I don`t know or care why you see fit to defend this person i just know his incompetence and lack of the necessary ability to fly this plane safely caused the DEATH of 11 very precious lives to a lot of people .
These men were affiliated in one way or another with OUR club , 2 worked at Lancing , i know a little about the Hunter such as it was the only fighter of it`s time to reputedly successfully escape from an inverted spin ( in the late 50`s ) so why 65 years later would a " professional " pilot put an airframe that old through anything other than a respectful (to the aircraft ) fly by .
My knowledge on jet fighters is no more than any other person with an amateur interest , yours is probably far more than mine but apparently not enough to see that my (afterburner) comment was a polite way to say that i dislike this horrible little man intensely and am utterly amazed at his sheer nerve and utter gall .
Knowing the craziness of this country he may well get his licence back - Question - would you allow a loved one to fly with him ? .
Shropshire Seagull
Well-known member
Forgive me if I have, but where have I defended Andy Hill?
I can't and wouldn't - indeed the words of my last sentence "lifetime ban on flying would be my decision" should clarify my stance on his application to regain a pilot's licence.
The Hunter he was flying that day was a two-seater, one possible misjudgement he made that seems to emerge on PPRuNe (Professional Pilots Rumour Network) is that he thought he was in a Jet Provost. Again, if this sounds like I'm excusing him, it's unintentional, I'm really not, just stating facts.
It was negligent flying - at the Old Bailey, Hill admitted his Hunter experience was "relatively limited" (35 hours and a handful of displays) but this was deemed adequate by the CAA as ability to fly a Hunter and to allow Display Flying. But he made a very serious error of judgement that caused the crash and subsequent deaths. I wish he would just hold his hand up and admit this rather than hide behind "cognitive impairment".
This crash was hugely emotive for many and I'm sorry if my comments appeared to defend the pilots actions. I was only trying to correct your errors with facts - sorry again ....
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
Is this bloke for real ? Unbelievable