Shoreham Air Show Plane Crash

[Pontius Navigator]

A jury of eight women and four men. Oh bloody hell. How do you explain an aerobatic display in terms of a knitting pattern. I guess just pull the wool over their eyes.

Equally, what would happen if you had a pilot on the jury, or better a display pilot, better yet a fighter jet display pilot?

He would of course be told to disregard his own opinions and experience and judge purely on the evidence.

[CremeEgg]

In most "technical" trials the Judge tells the jury what verdict to reach. Certainly complex fraud trials. Even in relatively simple trials like a straightforward murder trial the Judge virtually tells the jury what their decision should be. Anyone with an ounce of sense can read the Judges, often not so subtle, directions.

In this case unless you have flown yourself you can have no idea of the third dimension. Driving a car, funfair rides, video games come no where near trying to explain. I doubt they will have had access to a full motion simulator either. Have any of them flown whilst pulling several g; have they experienced any form of disorientation.

As a typically cocky know it all teenager I could never understand my fathers stories of being a long way out over the Atlantic in a Halifax on a moonlit night but not knowing if the moon was in the sky or reflected off a calm ocean. Never understood his mantra of having to believe your instruments. Yes, I was a very lucky teenager to have had a play on the Trident simulators at Heston but was never allowed to crash them as they were delicate things and took hours to re-set if pranged. Still no real appreciation.

Then I started gliding and that first time climbing under a nice puffy cumulus cloud it all became clear. I climbed to cloudbase and then up inside that dome under the cloud where the edges of the cloud come down around you to lower your horizon although you are still in clear air. Then up that bit higher with the horizon lowering all the time. Then up some more with the sudden realisation that the only bit of ground I can see is virtually right below me. Time to pull the airbrakes quick and descend to get some horizon. Suddenly Dad's pearls of wisdom became real.

No way can anyone realise or appreciate that without having experienced it.

I was at Shoreham that fateful day - I was amazed that AH survived and I'm glad that he looked a much fitter man in tonight's news pictures than any previous photo's I've seen. However, he has to live with it forever. I'm not religious but there for the grace of God..............

[Cacophonix]

It didn't fill me with much faith in the knowledge and ability of the average layman to cast a verdict in this case when the BBC4 news announcer tonight spoke about the trial and described the "loop the loop" that precipitated the accident!

Caco

[Undried Plum]

Even in relatively simple trials like a straightforward murder trial the Judge virtually tells the jury what their decision should be.

What makes you think that a judge knows any more about an aerobatic gate speed/height than any of the jurors?

I remember a trial which involved an arsehole judge and another airline pilot:

[Pontius Navigator]

"I remember a trial which involved an arsehole judge and another airline pilot:"

Actually that could be a benefit at appeal as the defence can challenge the verdict on incorrect summation and direction.

[Undried Plum]

It is for the jurors to determine matters of fact, not the judge.

The judge's job is to determine matters of law only. His(her) opinion on matters of fact ought not to be expressed.

[Ex-Ascot]

Right, so for the defence we seem to be going for Cognitive impairment.

When a person has trouble remembering, learning new things, concentrating, or making decisions that affect their everyday life.

Roger.

[Pontius Navigator]

Has G loss of consciousness been mentioned? It was mentioned pre trial in the press.

[Boac]

It has, but the jury has, I understand, seen the Go-Pro internal footage (not released publicly, as far as I am aware) which should show IAS and altitude in the manoeuvre. This should allow expert opinion on the likelihood of impairment through 'g'.

[Undried Plum]

The jury will also be told how a pilot controls g with that stick thingy.

[Pontius Navigator]

UP, or not as the case may be . . .

[Ex-Ascot]

Derek Davis, chairman of the show's flying control committee, said in the seconds before he knew something was wrong with Andy Hill's flight.

"I thought the aircraft on the descent was not being controlled," Mr Davis told the court.

Mr Davis, a former RAF flight instructor, said he only realised something was wrong when the plane began to descend as part of a bent-loop manoeuvre.

Mr Davis said the way in which the plane was "waffling down" towards the ground indicated "there is something wrong with either the aircraft or the pilot".

"He was not desperately trying to miss the ground or anything. He was doing nothing," Mr Davis told the jury.

Asked what led to his concern, he said: "He did not apply power which would have been needed.

I think that Davis is appearing for the prosecution but in this statement he is supporting the defence.

[Boac]

Hmm - that sort of statement (if accurately reported) leaves me wondering wtf he is on about! - "a former RAF flight instructor"?

"I thought the aircraft on the descent was not being controlled," video evidence disagrees.
"Waffling down" - a new aeronautical expression to me. Does he mean it was very slow?
"He was not desperately trying to miss the ground or anything. He was doing nothing," - not good! Is that perhaps why he hit it?
"He did not apply power which would have been needed." I suspect full power was already applied! As (reportedly) he started the pull-through 1000' too low and several knots slow, I would expect the pedal to be well to the metal.

supporting the defence

- well, with a defence witness like that................

[Ex-Ascot]

Only 'a remarkable pilot' had not made errors during their careers, said Mr Khalil. But prosecutor Tom Kark QC said exposure to Gforce was 'routine' for any experienced pilot and Hill's 'catalogue of errors' made a crash 'inevitable'.

He said the pilot had a history of playing 'fast and loose' with flying rules and a 'cavalier attitude' towards safety.

This is going to be a very interesting case.

[Pontius Navigator]

BOAC, with that edited transcript you would need to have heard the questions that elicited those responses. Did the prosecutor pose his questions in a way that invited those responses?

[Boac]

(if accurately reported)

[om15]

This video was shown to the Jury, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-englan ... wn-to-jury

One thing that struck me is that after the top of the loop the aircraft seem to descend vertically for quite some time before continuing the loop, is this just camera angle or was the loop itself not performed properly?

I was involved in an incident with fatalities some years ago, the AAIB Inspector told me that the perfect witness was someone who knew absolutely nothing about aircraft or aviation, it may well be that a Jury comprised of non aviation civilians may in fact be better than those of us that have come to our own conclusions.

[Capetonian]

I thought that vertical descent was rather slower than perhaps one might expect. Again, maybe just camera angle and not being able to judge speed in the absence of any other markers in that shoot.

[G-CPTN]

I thought that vertical descent was rather slower than perhaps one might expect. Again, maybe just camera angle and not being able to judge speed in the absence of any other markers in that shoot.

That is clearly 'waffling down' . . .

[Capetonian]

Does 'waffling down' mean anything in flying terms or is it just waffle?