Jump to content

Shoreham airshow


Recommended Posts

Don't worry, I didn't either & just thought it was poor French spelling until I looked up "sanqe" in the urban dictionary!

Really? The definition I get from the urban dictionary is "To quickly move through a mini van that is moving down a road and jump out of the other side".

 

I remain confused.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 101
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Oh dear, sorry about the Cinquetax . . . .

 

URN DER TWAH . . . cat SANK ?. . . . three French felines ? Thin Ice. . .? never mind, just one my Mum was fond of . . .( dunno about jumpin out of a mini van though ! ) confused dot com.

 

As OME said, wrong thread. 002_wave.gif.62d5c7a07e46b2ae47f4cd2e61a0c301.gif

 

Sorry.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah! I'd finally worked out the "SANQ" bit (it was the spelling that confused me, as OME points out should be "cinq"), but was still confused about the cats and the location of the thin ice. Thanks for explaining, I would have been up all night.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have been up all night.

 

Punching in a few extra rivets?

 

Hopefully I can get my Galaxy working, as I'm off on a 17 night cruise around Oz 2 moro.

 

If I cant get it to work, i'll miss my much loved deviate? mates on here.096_tongue_in_cheek.gif.d94cd15a1277d7bcd941bb5f4b93139c.gif

 

Life won't be the same while i'm putting on the kilo's

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Un, deux, trois, quatre, cinqCinq pronounced 'sank': http://forvo.com/word/cinq/#fr

 

OME

Thank you Sir,. . .I used the Mis-spelling of Cinque hoping that it sounded better,. . . . .Jeeze,. . .I'd better be careful with these POWs in future,. . .get dissected too much.

 

Can you,. . .or someone on here ping my email address please, ? and I'll send you the latest mail I just recieved re the Shoreham accident. . . [email protected]. . .I'm having trouble with my system, and my copy of corel 17 and also Illustrator / photoshop has crashed ( no pun intended ) I pay a cloud subscription to these graphics routines, and I've noticed that,. . .when I get a problem,. . .it's always just after all the techybuggers have gorn off for the weekend. . . . so if some clever forumite wants to deconstruct and re post it, you can. . . . . ( no viruses BTW,. . .just another problem ) I'll just do a basic email forward . . .

 

I wait with quivering anticipation. . . . ( It has already been sent to Facthunter and Turboplanner. . .whose emaild ads I am priviledged to have been given. . . .)

 

(Mind you,. . .my mate FT, being as he is,. . .a master of the interverse,. . .will probably google it, and post it with the comment . . . ."Is this the one you're on about Phil. . . .? ) 004_oh_yeah.gif.82b3078adb230b2d9519fd79c5873d7f.gif

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have been up all night.

Punching in a few extra rivets?

 

Hopefully I can get my Galaxy working, as I'm off on a 17 night cruise around Oz 2 moro.

 

If I cant get it to work, i'll miss my much loved deviate? mates on here.096_tongue_in_cheek.gif.d94cd15a1277d7bcd941bb5f4b93139c.gif

 

Life won't be the same while i'm putting on the kilo's

Deviate. . .?. . . . did you mean ( sounds like a google question this dunnit ! ) DEVIANT ?

 

OMG Planey. . . .

 

Whaddyertryintersay mate . . .? that we are all a bunch of Deviants. . . .?. . .well,. . .I fort a "deviant" or "Diversionalisticthoughtmongerist" was someone who didn't neccessarily go along with current thinkingspeak on a given specific subject which might / may / may not. . . be accepted by everyone else in a given group / all and sundry ? . . . .

 

Anyhow,. . . .

 

I hope you didn't get discount tickets for your cruise,. . . .I had one once, . . .a cruise around Ireland,. . .I got the cheaper cabin price,. .regrettably, the ship went anticlockwise around the objet du jour,. . .and my cabin was on the bloody starboard side,. . .so all I saw, without going out in the rain and walking to the other side of the boat. . . .was grey water, with a few white bits on the top. . .

 

I hope you KNOW . . and have planned for. . . which circular direction you are cruising around that tiny island continent in. . .?

 

Have you checked the amount of passengers, against the amount of lifeboats ? ? ? don't forget that if the damn thing lists to one side,. . .then only half the boats are useable. . . .( My mate captain Birdseye told me that,. . .his great grandad was second mate on the Titanic. . .)

 

Bon voyage mon ami. . . . .

 

>

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil, thread aside. Do you write elsewhere/on another forum under the screen name....Palissiano.

 

He writes/types/keyboards in the same manner/fashion using ....multiple full stops and a veritable .....thesaurus/dictionary/gobbledegook of alternative words/terms/expressions separated by slashes.

 

I would think such style would be somewhat unique.

 

(P.S. .....He usually also adds a PS in brackets.)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This morning Sunrise news reported that a prelim report stated that the pilot entered the loop some 200ft lower than the required height needed for safe completion.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil, thread aside. Do you write elsewhere/on another forum under the screen name....Palissiano.He writes/types/keyboards in the same manner/fashion using ....multiple full stops and a veritable .....thesaurus/dictionary/gobbledegook of alternative words/terms/expressions separated by slashes.

 

I would think such style would be somewhat unique.

 

(P.S. .....He usually also adds a PS in brackets.)

Hi Peter,

 

I admit to posting on forums all over the known universe ( ? ) mostly with my own name unless it's a political forum, this is inadviseable, as there are some crazies out there in Pollieforumland. Sorry for my annoying habit of using dots to emphasise a breathing space. . . . . but most forum software doesn't recognise spaces and rams all the text hard togethermakingithardertoread . . OK, that's a little excessive, but once, I typed on Bookface, ( why, I cannot imagine, I am sure there ARE some sensible people out there - but I've only found a couple thus far ) and paragraphed it nicely, but it all posted in a big lump and would not accept edit reconstructs.

 

Horrible.

 

Palissiano is not one of mine,. . . .you don't mean there are more than one of us comitting such nefarious keyboard abuse / weird word constructs which cause purists to punch screens ?

 

Well, it isn't deliberate Sir. Just a bad habit. . . . . . . If I recieve a warning about this syntaxabusementism from the site owner, then I'll have to type at 5wpm and be very careful !

 

I write a few articles for certain publications but the copywriters usually delete my paragraphs and dots and reconstruct "Their" way, . .sometimes removing the attempted irony or mild humour by deletion of the spacing here and there.

 

Did ( well I think so ) a really nice piece for a glossy mag last year, and they de-paragraphed it into a great big lump and printed it in times new Roman italics, in white over a picture of some light coloured trees,. . .illegible. Still,. . .I got me 310 quid so ask me if I really give a donkey's dongler.

 

As an aside, I have recently been totally banned from the comments sections of : The Guardian, the Daily Telegraph, The Daily Mail, The Independent, The Daily Mirror, and a couple of others, JUST FOR ASKING sensible questions. ( ? ) And NO, they were not abusive, nor $h1tstirring either. . . . some of these news sites REALLY ARE sensitive. . . . just can't get past the Moderators !

 

I use pseudonyms on Pprune, and several other sites ( As does every other poster ! ) even when I know perfectly well who I am "talking" to,. . .but you know, some pilots can be really argumentative as well ( who'd have thought )

 

Phil . . . . ( PS ) 099_off_topic.gif.20188a5321221476a2fad1197804b380.gif

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This morning Sunrise news reported that a prelim report stated that the pilot entered the loop some 200ft lower than the required height needed for safe completion.

If this turns out to be the case, Ozzie,. . . then this particular pilot has singlehandedly removed the "Gold Standard" which the UK had held for a number of decades as the safest place to witness an Air Show. . . . . . We shall not know until all the figures are in,. and he has been interviewed by AAIB people. We keep getting snippets, but all this stuff does is create supposition and speculation. . . .if it DOES turn out to be Pilot Error for whatever reason,. . .then that is what will be reported, in enormous clinical detail.

 

We've heard ALL SORTS of opinions ( here in the UK ) from supposed "Experts" as to what caused this tragedy,. . .and at the end of the day, we really now have to wait to see what the AAIB people report at the end of it all,. . .after all, they have been proven to be a very good bunch of aviation scientists, with every bit of technical equipment available to them. . . . and take no crap from external influences in finalising their reports,( They often get this from foreign governments where they are asked to assist in an investigation ) wherever this is realistically and technically possible. They have a wealth of individual video footage of the entire event, as it unfolded, something denied by a lack of today's technology to the crews of the two aircraft commanders who allowed themselves and their passengers to collide with each other over the Grand Canyon many years ago ( On TV last night ) with devastating results. . . . .

 

Let's wait and see.

 

Kind regards,

 

Phil

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This morning Sunrise news reported that a prelim report stated that the pilot entered the loop some 200ft lower than the required height needed for safe completion.

Actually I thought they said last night he entered the loop at 200ft when it should have been 500ft.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter at what height you enter a loop. The important thing is to what height you climb before going over the top. Climbing to that correct height is dependent on the power/speed you have at the time.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil sent this through to me:

 

'No abnormalities' with Shoreham jet, interim report finds

 

_85370100_planecrashshorehamairport1.jpgImage copyright eddie mitchell Image caption Eleven people died in the crash on the A27 in Shoreham last month

 

The jet which crashed at the Shoreham air show killing 11 people showed "no abnormal indications" during its flight, an initial report has found.

 

The Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) report said cockpit footage showed the plane "responding to the pilot's control inputs".

 

It also said pilot Andy Hill was thrown clear of the aircraft during the later part of the crash on 22 August.

 

The AAIB said it was not clear whether Mr Hill initiated his ejection.

 

The 51-year-old pilot is currently in a serious but stable condition in hospital.

 

The report says the Hawker Hunter's canopy was released at the initial impact. At this time fuel and fuel vapour was released and then ignited.

 

The jet split into four parts and both Mr Hill and his seat were thrown clear off the cockpit.

 

The report states: "The investigation continues to determine if the pilot attempted to initiate ejection or if the canopy and pilot's seat were liberated as a result of impact damage to the cockpit."

 

_85373221_85372756.jpgImage copyrightReuters Image caption The crash site was littered with wreckage from the jet. The AAIB's report also revealed there was no "blackbox" flight recorder on the vintage jet, however, there were two cameras positioned in the cockpit.

 

It revealed: "To date, no abnormal indications have been identified [from the footage].

 

"Throughout the flight, the aircraft appeared to be responding to the pilot's control inputs."

 

The AAIB said it has received a "large amount" of video footage and photographs of the aircraft, many of which were taken in high resolution, from a variety of locations on and around Shoreham Airport.

 

It said an analysis of the still and moving images using "photogrammetry techniques" will be undertaken to establish the parameters of the aircraft's manoeuvres, including flight path and speed.

 

OME

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter at what height you enter a loop. The important thing is to what height you climb before going over the top. Climbing to that correct height is dependent on the power/speed you have at the time.

If you have insufficient power / speed to climb high enough to go over the top then it does matter.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An air show performer will generally have his display designed around a series of "gates". The gates are normally established for entry, during and exit from manoeuvres and generally consist of location/altitude/speed/bank angle etc. targets which if not achieved will result in a "knock it off". The "knock it off" recovery will also be preplanned.

 

A looping manoeuvre such as the one flown at Shoreham would normally have had a gate going over the top of the loop which would have included a minimum altitude and a speed range. The pilot would check this gate going over the top (indeed he would be anticipating it on the upside of the loop and relax the g a bit if he could see that he was not likely to achieve the minimum altitude at the apex for example). If at the apex of the loop the gate was not achieved then the pilot would bug out of the manoeuvre (generally roll right side up) then re-establish the routine to achieve the gate for the next manoeuvre.

 

The routine and gates would be established such that if there was an event, such as a loss of power, that a recovery to controlled flight would be possible. This is why the STOL aircraft hanging on its prop at 100' above the runway at minimum speed is not smart. A loss of power from this flight regime would result in an uncontrolled crash. If done at 500', a loss of power could give the pilot a reasonable measure of control into the ensuing impact with terrain.

 

In an accident such as the one at Shoreham, there could have been any number of factors contributing to the accident; failure to achieve a gate, failure to fly the required profile accurately, systems failure of the aircraft, environmental factors (bird strike etc.) etc.. With the availability of information about this accident, I anticipate that the AAIB will be able to fairly accurately determine what factors contributed to this tragedy.

 

 

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...