Sat Aug 22, 2015 2:51 pm
hbtcoveralls wrote:Flaps may have been extended for the routine in general, being low speed maneuvering of a high speed aircraft
Sat Aug 22, 2015 3:50 pm
Sat Aug 22, 2015 4:32 pm
Sat Aug 22, 2015 4:46 pm
Matt Gunsch wrote:Firebird wrote:hbtcoveralls wrote:That is truly terrible, the classic show routine error, mis-judged low level loop trying to correct by hauling back on the stick and in the process exceeding the critical angle of attack. At that altitude there's no way out and you hit the ground pancaking in a deep stall.
Flaps may have dropped/failed prior to loop entry on on initial pull up......and pilot not been aware to allow abandoning manoevure at top of loop....?
it appears that the flaps are down in the this photo as well
Sat Aug 22, 2015 4:49 pm
quemerford wrote:
Two photos taken on different occasions: I suspect the second was taken during landing.
Sat Aug 22, 2015 4:52 pm
Bradburger wrote:quemerford wrote:
Two photos taken on different occasions: I suspect the second was taken during landing.
No, it wasn't.
It didn't land,or take off from Shoreham!
The last picture was taken just before the impact.
Cheers
Paul
Sat Aug 22, 2015 5:42 pm
fiftycal wrote::drink3:
Sat Aug 22, 2015 9:56 pm
quemerford wrote:Bradburger wrote:quemerford wrote:
Two photos taken on different occasions: I suspect the second was taken during landing.
No, it wasn't.
It didn't land,or take off from Shoreham!
The last picture was taken just before the impact.
Cheers
Paul
Well unless the drop tanks fell off before it crashed, it was taken sometime else!
Look again.
Edit: it's me who needs to look again - I was sure the externals were absent in the second shot, but I believe they are: it's my habitual distrust of anything in the Daily Mail I'm afraid! Apologies
Sat Aug 22, 2015 11:13 pm
Sun Aug 23, 2015 6:48 am
quemerford wrote:Bradburger wrote:quemerford wrote:
Two photos taken on different occasions: I suspect the second was taken during landing.
No, it wasn't.
It didn't land,or take off from Shoreham!
The last picture was taken just before the impact.
Cheers
Paul
Well unless the drop tanks fell off before it crashed, it was taken sometime else!
Look again.
Edit: it's me who needs to look again - I was sure the externals were absent in the second shot, but I believe they are: it's my habitual distrust of anything in the Daily Mail I'm afraid! Apologies
Sun Aug 23, 2015 8:30 am
Sun Aug 23, 2015 8:50 am
TOM WALSH wrote:As part of the overall safety package for conducting a safe air show, ((aside from flying), the event organizers, local police and governments must ensure to keep the roadways surrounding the perimeter of an airfield clear of people and traffic. Sometimes you have to take action to protect people from themselves.
Cheers,
Tom Walsh.
Sun Aug 23, 2015 8:54 am
Mike wrote:TOM WALSH wrote:As part of the overall safety package for conducting a safe air show, ((aside from flying), the event organizers, local police and governments must ensure to keep the roadways surrounding the perimeter of an airfield clear of people and traffic. Sometimes you have to take action to protect people from themselves.
Cheers,
Tom Walsh.
You are quoting N.American regulations, there is no requirement for a sterile 'box' in Europe. The road passing the field was the major east-west trunk road along the south coast of the UK
Sun Aug 23, 2015 10:36 am
flightsimer wrote:
No your right, both pylons on the left wing in the bottom photo are empty.
Sun Aug 23, 2015 10:51 am
hbtcoveralls wrote:That is truly terrible, the classic show routine error, mis-judged low level loop trying to correct by hauling back on the stick and in the process exceeding the critical angle of attack. At that altitude there's no way out and you hit the ground pancaking in a deep stall. It hurts even more because I've seen it in person, at a different airshow, and I've seen it so often on video. Condolences to all concerned, maybe it will eventually be time to do away with low level aerobatics at airshows once and for all. Too many good people gone.
Tom Bowers