Shoreham

[smiffy]

@Gremlin I do agree with you and I also wonder whether manslaughter charges are necessary. However as a society we try to establish cause and responsibility. If we don't hold people responsible, does it start to make avoidable accidents acceptable?

If a lorry driver has a lapse in concentration and runs his truck into a bus killing passengers, would we say "never mind mate, these things happen", I doubt it.

 

[abh29]

@abh29 I hold a pilots license, I've flown aerobatics. My mentor was a former fast jet pilot, by coincidence a Hunter display pilot and an air warfare instructor, also in Hunters. On that basis, I think I'll stick with my own ideas thanks.

I think your understanding and management of risk is different to that in aviation, I would suggest possibly booking a session with these guys might be a real eye opener for you and help you understand the processes and mindset involved.

https://www.ultimatehigh.co.uk

As I said at the start, I don't think discussing the specific incident is appropriate in a public forum considering the current court case.

As I have said I have no knowledge of flying , and you will note I have not commented on the pilots flying , I have been concerned with the organisers apparent lack of proper management of the Health and Safety risks , particularly in respect of the risk they were managing with respect to the third party involvement. At no point have I brought risk assessment as far as aircraft and pilot ability into my consideration as I have insufficient knowledge.
This apparent lack of control of the risk was very clearly indicated in the link you were good enough to send me.
As I do not intend to fly I don't consider I require a course to understand the mindset required to do so, but if you are organising an event that has the potential for putting lives at risk , particularly third party then I consider that risk should be fully controlled as far as is reasonably possible, a point explained better in the CAA report than I can comment on. It can be seen in one of the documents that the CAA [ AAIB S1/2016]confirm that displays come under the normal HSE Event Safety Guide [Purple Book" , ie hazard risks not just limited to Aircraft matters.
My thoughts on the current court case is that I am surprised the pilot is not be the only person being asked to account for his actions.

 

[Redline]

Air crashes rarely result from a single cause. It is usually a chain of events where, if just one hadn’t happened, the disaster wouldn’t have occurred.

In this case, sadly lots of people lost their lives or were severely injured. The cause was clearly avoidable. So, is it not right that all areas and contributory causes are investigated.

Even if there were massive checks and balances put in place, there will always be risk.
Pilots doing aerobatics know that, in the limit, they and only they have final control, and, it is themselves that have to decide what should be done in any situation. That applies irrespective of what other directives have been given.
The court will decide if the manoeuvre could never have been completed safely, and, if not, then the pilot was either negligent in not understanding that, or, they failed to react accordingly. That doesn’t mean the organisers are not in any way culpable.

We have to differentiate between the cause and effect here.
There are rules applying to flight lines over crowds and built up areas. It’s possible that the risks of a crash directly on the road hadn’t been fully understood by the organisers, nor had the fact that it was possible a pilot would use the road as a sight line during the display. However, if the crash occurred because of pilot error or negligence, irrespective of what other controls were in place, then that has to be tested in court. Those killed and injured deserve that.

If lessons can be learned in other areas by transferring responsibility and accountability to organisers, then that too has to be looked at. However, that isn’t what is being tested in court today.