RIAT Friday pics – a close shave

No. I agree too

Locked

Moggy
Moderator

Is it only me who is thinking that its time we moved on from this thread, Lets look at the facts.
1) A “New” Aircraft in RAF service got out of shape for whatever reason.
2)The pilot managed to recover the Aircraft and fly to a safe height.
3)He was later allowed to do his display again later and satisfied the CAA
4)Some stunning photo’s hit the net and a huge debated started
5)Nobody was hurt or killed or broke a nail(Unless of course by typing on the pc, The pilot can not be blamed for that)
6)The Mod will do some form of investigation into the incident.

The rest is just hearsay and i feel could be damaging to Airshows in general, Is there really anymore to say on the subject? I’m thinking not.

Nick and Robbo,

an excellent effort and truelly amazing to see a series of rapid still camera work built into a “moving picture” (dont tell the guys in Hollywood they might consider its a patent infringement 😉 )

Nick, I used to do hours of amateur still and video filming at airshows in the past, with nothing really to show for it,and I think you show its not just the patience and good equipment that takes such photos, its the skill and expertise to get the right position, and to watch like an eagle for such photo opportunities – well done.

I wont comment on why the aeroplane seems to be so close to the ground??)

regards

Mark Pilkington

Nice one, Nick. 8.5 fps comes in handy now and then, doesn’t it?

Rob

With a big thank you to Robbo for his help here is a GIF of my photos of the event

Its about 800k in size

Typhoon_50.gif

Damien

I am obviously wrong, I withdraw the lot, and I have no idea why anyone should complain about near miss accidents, the rising cost of Airshows, the falling patronage, the lack of funding for display teams and the rising costs of insurances?

Are airshows becoming risker?

No I dont think so, we are tending to plough in an historic aircraft or latest combat aircraft at the pretty much the same rate we always have for the last 15 years?? but now dont ask me to prove that – its a generalisation and intended so!

I am not sure what rate of near misses and hard hits is an acceptable number, 0 is a noble target to strive for, but there is a realistic limit while aircraft are flown, regardless of the safety margin.

I would hope “we”, “they”?, “someone” might reduce “the” rate of crashes and lost pilots or lost aircraft?? and all be concerned about that and try and achieve it by learning from mistakes, errors, failures etc.

I actually think Airshows could become less riskier, and that might lower insurances?? (insurance is the price of risk)

Please dont cut and past my opinions back to me, I wrote them, I know what I wrote, If you cant understand my rantings – ignore them, if you dont agree with them – fair enough – explain what you think happened and why its acceptable and just leave me out of it.

if you dislike my command of English – tuff I speak effluent Orstrayun, and besides I have got in first :rolleyes: ……..and I admit I am obviously wrong! lets just leave it at that.

I am obviously wrong, I withdraw the lot, and I have no idea why anyone should complain about near miss accidents, the rising cost of Airshows, the falling patronage, the lack of funding for display teams and the rising costs of insurances?

soory folks I love a good debate but…..I have far better things to do in my life

regards

Mark Pilkington

Name the last year any member of the crowd was killed in an airshow accident in the UK!

1952.

A testament to the safety regulations in force.

And more than a little pure luck, in several cases that I’ve been unfortunate enough to witness. 🙁

But isn’t it the case that whatever the safety margins/tolerances recommended or imposed, as soon as the human element is included, it can all go pear-shaped, because humans make mistakes, as has been seen on many occasions unfortunately. I guess we’re unlikely to get the full report from the RAF as “hats on” interviews are confidential, but I suspect we have one older and wiser Typhoon pilot, who has fortunately lived to tell the tale and doesn’t need us or anyone else to tell him that he c*cked up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_pilkington

I dont think we should tolerate (or applaud that), I dont think we should tolerate someones, (or lots of spectators lives) being put at risk

Can you explain how spectators lives were put at risk?

Just interested.

Moggy

Moggy,

Yes – I can explain “how” in the portion of the quote you have cut and pasted. (see below)

No – I cant explain “how” spectators lives were put at risk? at the RIAT Typhoon display?? I dont think I have implied anywhere in my posts in this thread that I thought that was the case??? and I dont think I have seen details from others that would suggest they were?? and certainly not intentionally in the portion of my post quoted by yourself?

your cut and paste in its full context is from my post of 19th July 2005 07:40, and reads more fully as :

The “Showing Off” by organisations – anyone – increases the frequency of “accidents” both near miss and fatal, and that will kill off the airshows.

I dont think we should tolerate (or applaud that), I dont think we should tolerate someones, (or lots of spectators lives) being put at risk by placing aircraft so close to safety limits – purely for an afternoons entertainment, (that should be reserved for combat.)

I am not sure my Grammar is perfect, nor my English Teacher would agree with my style, but my intention in that paragraph was to speak “generally” of the increasing need for “Airshow” demonstration of aircraft to be at increasingly smaller limits of safety to make it more exciting, to make it more attractive to the General Public, to attract more gate takings, to simulate modern or wartime combat manoeuvres, to “show off” the full performance capability of a new aircraft to taxpayers or prospective purchasers etc, increasing the risk of accidents, (both near misses or hard hits).

Therefore impacting on the future of airshows (insurances rising etc) and that the purpose of Airshows are to provide an afternoons entertainment not to risk the lives of the pilot, the safety of the aircraft or spectators.

This has been the point of all of my posts on this subject? and I continue to believe we should not tolerate, support or encourage that.

I do not recall making any comments in my posts? in this thread regarding any threat to spectator lives in this specific “Typhoon” incident, I am not aware there was any, my concerns related to the safety of the demonstration routine, the “near miss” accident that did occur and the obvious risk to the pilot and aircraft, and the follow on impact on insurances, viability of airshows etc etc etc (sounding again like a broken record)

In all of this I wish to confirm I do not think the pilot is the only one who should be concerned or learning from this accident to try and avoid a future repeat.

My first post was primarily concerned at our own attitude here in this forum to be applauding the quality of the photo’s rather than being concerned about the near miss accident it recorded, while other threads in this same forum complained about the rising costs of Airshows, and the rising costs of aircraft Insurance – they are all linked!

No doubt someone will now take offence to something above, I believe I have been on my soapbox enough on all this, I have no wish to continue debating or defending my position.

However I stand by my own words, posted under my own name, and am happy to clarify any poor expressions of my thoughts/position if unclear, directly via PM.

I am still entitled to my opinion, and my concerns (even if I am wrong??) and am happy to hear others (to learn how I am wrong) and to hear more facts from the future incident report about what happened and how it will be avoided in the future and how other display managers will apply that to other demonstrations of totally different aircraft etc

regards

Mark Pilkington

MOTF,

I stand corrected and my abject apologies to the nerds who designed the software. However I think I might have popped in a bit of extra code to initiate a command ejection when the safety parameters were going to be eroded to the extent evident in the excellent photography on view in this and other websites. Food for thought perhaps………?????????

It reminds me of that doyen of the ancient helicopter world, Elfan Ap Rees, whose camera just happened to be ready and pointing in the right direction to record my mid-air collision at that Weston super Mare display back in 1972. He made a mint out of it as the photo was reproduced in the printed media all over the world. I got slight concussion thanks solely to an ex-RAF bonedome that smashed rather than my skull.

Whatever the cause, the incident report would make essential reading for any display pilot, service or civil. I doubt if it will ever emerge into the semi-public domain.

Cheers,

Trapper 69

I’ll take your word for it JDK, I can’t face logging on to Pprune, that place makes me lose the will to live. 🙁

Moggy

It wasnt software it was Pilot. He held his hand up and said “I screwed up” to the FDC.

FDC and Pilot worked together to amend the display so it couldnt happen again.

As one of the grounbdcrew said, we learn the lesson and move on.

A software problem, minor or otherwise, is absolutely no excuse acceptable to me. In the civil display world in the UK we grant display authorisations to pilots, not software engineers.

I suppose I am a bit of a luddite in that my whole 51 years as a pilot have relied on rods and cables to connect my brain to the control surfaces through hands and feet. However the F16 has been a factor in UK airshows for probably a couple of decades and they have not had problems.

Is it a couple of years too soon to be displaying the Typhoon in public if such a situation can arise..?? Have they got all the glitches out..?? Comments appreciated.

Cheers,

Trapper 69

Moggy,
I wasn’t there, but I’ve learnt some stuff, particularly from PPrune’s thread.

Have a look at the PPrune thread regarding the views from the chalet. Several spectators said they reckoned it wasn’t worth running.

I also refer you to Darren H’s comment above.

Like it or not, IF there’d been a bang, and even if no-one was hurt, the papers would be speculating wildly about risk to the public. If even one person (other than the pilot) had been killed, we’d have a very nasty situation to deal with vis-a-vis airshows continuing. Whatever the reason, that was not a good situation. Too close, must not happen again.

I dont think we should tolerate (or applaud that), I dont think we should tolerate someones, (or lots of spectators lives) being put at risk

Can you explain how spectators lives were put at risk?

Just interested.

Moggy

Damien, my editor may be interested in your photos. The photographer was visiting Mr Walls. I think you may know my e-mail address. Can you send a slightly larger sample copy through?

story I heard was a minor software problem….. soon fixed…. superb flying saved the computer boys blushes????

darren,

Excellent pics, and a plausable reason as to why the Typhoon pilot has “consumed” much of its safety margin in recovering at the “bottom” of the manuvoure, indicating much skill and expertise in doing so, without disproving some equipment failure or other cause of the problem in the first place.

Yes the display probably had an adequate safety margin, for most of the time, for that recovery so much of the safety margin was consumed that it became very thin.

And Yes, there are some failures that will cause a Typhoon to fly like a brick, regardless of the safety margin – flameout of engine etc.

But this extra information is still leaving me with the same view, the “Airshow” has encouraged the “demonstration” of this aircraft in so tight safety limits that the margin is approaching “reckless” – I never said the pilot WAS the “Show-off”.

The “Showing Off” by organisations – anyone – increases the frequency of “accidents” both near miss and fatal, and that will kill off the airshows.

I dont think we should tolerate (or applaud that), I dont think we should tolerate someones, (or lots of spectators lives) being put at risk by placing aircraft so close to safety limits – purely for an afternoons entertainment, (that should be reserved for combat.)

I would still rather see a one-off historic aircraft, etc do a tight turn at 1000 feet, or a high speed straight and level “FLYING”, than to see them ONLY in Museums on the ground, because we reduced the safety margin of operation to increase the “quality/excitement” of the display.

Just because we have lots of Typhoons, (or Typhoon pilots) and the pilot is safer because of a bang seat, we should not operate at a tight safety margin of operation to increase the “quality/excitement” of the display to “Show Off” our “New Toy”.

I still believe that while we all want Airshows to be entertaining, the closer we allow demonstration flying to push those safety limits, the more often they will be exceeded and more often the risk as seen by the Insurers will be increasing – and so will their premiums – killing off the warbird operators that we all come here to encourage and support.

And any of us can come to such conclusions and opinions, or debate them, without having the need to be qualified by many hours in Typhoons or any other aircraft.

regards

Mark Pilkington

As if there were not plenty of shots already, here is my contribution. The Typhoon went out of position directly above me, and the shots show the sequence of events that led up to the hard pull. Yes..these shots are the correct way up! 😮

I posted my pics over on the Modern Military Aviation forum – I didn’t realise it was ‘Historic’?? – although, come to think of it, as it happened on Friday, it obviously is…….

Anyway, FWIW, here are my two pics of the near-disaster.

Ken

PS – I photographed the pilot climbing out of the Typhoon on the Saturday – and then bending over getting into the courtesy car. I did think of Photoshop, the airbrush tool and brown paint, but common sense got the better of me.