Shoreham air disaster

[mikeyjh]

If they're anything like the motorsport variation, it's a bit like the house of lords.

just quietly shuffle off to the left ole chap, we'll sweep it under, see you at the bar. Chin chin.

In fairness, AAIB reports are very fact based and in this case they make sense. Doesn't mean you're not entirely correct though.

 

[TugWilson]

You should probably read the AAIB report on the accident, it doesn't support any of you ascertains that I would suggest are a tad libellous....

And that surprises you ? . Aircraft at airshows are forbidden from any dangerous manoeuvres over populated or busy highways , there`s a reason for that ! . The coroner also ruled the pilots "significant " errors and poor flying led to the Shoreham airshow disaster , and stated the 11 victims were unlawfully killed .

I think you have got your priorities wrong .

 

[Lenny Rider]

Another landmark but ultimately sad day.

My involvement with this was clearly after the event, but its clearly changed countless lives, beyond those who perished, forever.

Will the families ever get closure? Depends what you class a closure.

Will they ever get justice? Depends what you class as justice?

A very well connected lcoal figure told me the outcome of the criminal trial long before it ever went to court.

The one consolation, but clearly not for the families of the 13 who died, it could have been far worse.

If the Sussex Pad hadn't gone bust a couple of years before those grass verges so close the the scene would have been packed with customers.

A few more yards up the road was a permanent Travellers Site full of young families.

That day Seagull Travel sent over 15 coaches along that route all full of Albion fans, imagine Andy Hill's plane landing on one of those?

Like I said no consolation for the dead or the bereaved, but think with a different set of circumstances how many more could have been killed?

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Another landmark but ultimately sad day.

My involvement with this was clearly after the event, but its clearly changed countless lives, beyond those who perished, forever.

Will the families ever get closure? Depends what you class a closure.

Will they ever get justice? Depends what you class as justice?

A very well connected lcoal figure told me the outcome of the criminal trial long before it ever went to court.

The one consolation, but clearly not for the families of the 13 who died, it could have been far worse.

If the Sussex Pad hadn't gone bust a couple of years before those grass verges so close the the scene would have been packed with customers.

A few more yards up the road was a permanent Travellers Site full of young families.

That day Seagull Travel sent over 15 coaches along that route all full of Albion fans, imagine Andy Hill's plane landing on one of those?

Like I said no consolation for the dead or the bereaved, but think with a different set of circumstances how many more could have been killed?

I myself drove along that road about 20 minutes before the crash, having picked my brother up in Sompting and having a conversation about “shall we go now, or do you want a cup of tea. We left straight away.
I’m sure many others on here would be able to say the same.

And as I was waiting to turn in to Busticle Lane, I saw a plane ahead of me looping the loop and thought, that must be fairly close to the road!

We didn’t realise anything had happened until my wife texted me a few minutes before kick-off: “are you alright? Something’s happened at Shoreham!”

 

[rippleman]

You should probably read the AAIB report on the accident, it doesn't support any of you ascertains that I would suggest are a tad libellous....

Then let the pilot sue - if he dare.

Only one person responsible for the deaths of 11 people - the pilot. As ruled by the coronor - they were unlawfully killed. There is nobody else to blame. Very sad for the families that they have not received justice for their lost loved ones. The pilot walks away scot free.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Trouble is the burden between something being unlawful and then proving gross negligence is huge. The law allows for human error and mistakes, for gross negligence to be proven, the evidence needs to show an element of knowing wreckless behaviour.

In this accident, did the pilot knowingly set out to perform that manoeuvre the way he did having been advised or told not to do it - i.e. knowing he was breaking rules and knowing what he was about to do was specifically wreckless, or did he make a catastrophic set of errors of judgement in the spur of the moment? While he has caused the accident through his mistakes as identified by the coroner, the law needs more than this for gross negligence to be proven despite the accident being unlawful.

 

[Zeberdi]

Trouble is the burden between something being unlawful and then proving gross negligence is huge. The law allows for human error and mistakes, for gross negligence to be proven, the evidence needs to show an element of knowing wreckless behaviour

I haven’t followed the thread or events after the crash although I was in a car coming back to Brighton after visiting friends and we got caught up in the tailbacks and saw the smoke so like other people here, only 7 degrees of separation and all that.

There’s nothing to stop the families of those that died or were seriously injured to bring a class Civil action for Personal Injury and Negligence is there? - The burden of proof is lower in civil law and it rests with the Defendant not the Plaintiffs to show that the accident would not have been foreseeable by a reasonable person cf to Criminal proceedings where the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt must be proven by the prosecution.

Apologies if that’s already been discussed up thread or there are Civil proceedings ongoing.

 

[Zeberdi]

There’s nothing to stop the families of those that died or were seriously injured to bring a class Civil action for Personal Injury and Negligence is there?

Actually scrap that - the accident happened in 2015 so a tort action would probably be barred out now under the Statute of Limitations- (which is 6 years I think for fatal accidents)

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Not that it matters now, but I've always wondered why the pilot didn't plan the loop

Another landmark but ultimately sad day.

My involvement with this was clearly after the event, but its clearly changed countless lives, beyond those who perished, forever.

Will the families ever get closure? Depends what you class a closure.

Will they ever get justice? Depends what you class as justice?

A very well connected lcoal figure told me the outcome of the criminal trial long before it ever went to court.

The one consolation, but clearly not for the families of the 13 who died, it could have been far worse.

If the Sussex Pad hadn't gone bust a couple of years before those grass verges so close the the scene would have been packed with customers.

A few more yards up the road was a permanent Travellers Site full of young families.

That day Seagull Travel sent over 15 coaches along that route all full of Albion fans, imagine Andy Hill's plane landing on one of those?

Like I said no consolation for the dead or the bereaved, but think with a different set of circumstances how many more could have been killed?

It makes no difference – obviously – now, but I've always wondered why the stunt wasn't done over the field just to the north near the river, instead of the road? Surely that would have reduced the potential for a catastrophe like the one that followed on 22/8?

 

[GT49er]

Trouble is the burden between something being unlawful and then proving gross negligence is huge. The law allows for human error and mistakes, for gross negligence to be proven, the evidence needs to show an element of knowing wreckless behaviour.

In this accident, did the pilot knowingly set out to perform that manoeuvre the way he did having been advised or told not to do it - i.e. knowing he was breaking rules and knowing what he was about to do was specifically wreckless, or did he make a catastrophic set of errors of judgement in the spur of the moment? While he has caused the accident through his mistakes as identified by the coroner, the law needs more than this for gross negligence to be proven despite the accident being unlawful.

That's not really how it worked though, is it? Old boy network, by any chance? (just asking for a friend!) - or are pilots the sort of chaps who deserve to be treated differently to, say, motorists?

"I thought I had enugh speed and height to loop the loop, but I got it wrong - sorry" - walk away scot free.
If I killed a couple of people on the road, how would that work? - "I thought I had enough time to overtake and get back to my side of the road, but I got it wrong - sorry". One thing is for certain; if not actually going to prison (which would be quite likely) I would not be walking away scot free - fines, points, driving bans would be automatic outcomes.

 

[Bold Seagull]

That's not really how it worked though, is it? Old boy network, by any chance? (just asking for a friend!) - or are pilots the sort of chaps who deserve to be treated differently to, say, motorists?

"I thought I had enugh speed and height to loop the loop, but I got it wrong - sorry" - walk away scot free.
If I killed a couple of people on the road, how would that work? - "I thought I had enough time to overtake and get back to my side of the road, but I got it wrong - sorry". One thing is for certain; if not actually going to prison (which would be quite likely) I would not be walking away scot free - fines, points, driving bans would be automatic outcomes.

Has he not lost his pilot’s license or had any bans from flying then?

Driving convictions are incredibly lenient btw, you can literally kill someone in your car and end up with a handful points on your license - that will show them.

 

[GT49er]

Has he not lost his pilot’s license or had any bans from flying then?

Has he? Oh dear, hope his knuckles aren't too sore.

Driving convictions are incredibly lenient btw, you can literally kill someone in your car and end up with a handful points on your license - that will show them.

Penalties for killing people on the road have been ramped up considerably in recent years. Prison sentences are not so uncommon now - and you don't even need to kill double figures.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Has he? Oh dear, hope his knuckles aren't too sore.

Penalties for killing people on the road have been ramped up considerably in recent years. Prison sentences are not so uncommon now - and you don't even need to kill double figures.

It’s a bit weird you’re going at this as if I’m the pilot’s side. Just a discussion point on gross negligence.

 

[mikeyjh]

Then let the pilot sue - if he dare.

Only one person responsible for the deaths of 11 people - the pilot. As ruled by the coronor - they were unlawfully killed. There is nobody else to blame. Very sad for the families that they have not received justice for their lost loved ones. The pilot walks away scot free.

I don't think there's any doubt from anyone who was primarily to blame, I think that has been well established by the AAIB investigation - The organisers and regulators also have some culpability. My issue was with the statements made - "This "pilot" was showboating over a main road at a time of high traffic , he broke so many flight rules in a vintage jet that would have struggled to perform the manoeuvres if new". If you put aside the fact that it was an airshow and that almost by very definition the pilot was showboating, he was performing a perfectly normal manoeuvre something that would happen at every airshow. Secondly, the aircraft (as detailed in the AAIB report) is entirely capable of performing that manoeuvre, even a WWII Spitfire could perform it.

I do think air show organisers need to be better at holding pilots to account, it's not unusual, even since 2015 for overfly incidents at airshows, I think it was the Greek F16 that overflew a section of crowd at very low level and high speed at RIAT this year and escaped censure, was not told to immediately stop his practice which is quite scandalous.

 

[jessiejames]

Has he not lost his pilot’s license or had any bans from flying then?

Driving convictions are incredibly lenient btw, you can literally kill someone in your car and end up with a handful points on your license - that will show them.

As a lorry driver, If i was involved in a crash that killed someone and it was my fault due to how i was driving at the time, i am going to prison, also my TM and company could also be up for corporate manslauter im no different to a pilot.

Maybe if its in my car its different.

 

[GT49er]

It’s a bit weird you’re going at this as if I’m the pilot’s side. Just a discussion point on gross negligence.

Just highlighting the leniency and the inequality compared to other accidental killers. Nothing personal!

 

[Lenny Rider]

Has he not lost his pilot’s license or had any bans from flying then?

Driving convictions are incredibly lenient btw, you can literally kill someone in your car and end up with a handful points on your license - that will show them.

He apparently also adopts a unique handshake when meeting fellow members of society he belongs to.