An Analysis of Actions: Shoreham Airshow Hawker Hunter Disaster

Before reading, please note that this is mainly my opinion on recent happenings. I do not mean to cause offence and am simply stating my own analysis. What I say sounds good in my head, but may not sound good in yours. Read at your own discretion. That said, I am open to criticism, but please refrain from abuse. I got enough of that on Sunday.

There are people questioning why a 60 year old jet was allowed to perform stunts over a busy road... and people saying that to hold the Shoreham Airshow again would be like 'sticking up two fingers at the victims'.

"Why" is the question on many peoples minds: Why was this allowed to happen?

There is a simple reason: There was no reason not to.

The Shoreham crash was THE worst case scenario, like being struck by lightning whilst you're indoors. The A27 is like the seams between polished hardwood floors: a small target, considering the jets flightpath.

Think about it. Things would be massively different had the jet entered the loop one second earlier... and even one second later. But because he entered the loop when he did... well, as I said, it was the worst possible scenario.

Then we must remind ourselves of other popular airshows. The very same Hawker Hunter that crashed has performed at Duxford before. The M11 motorway is at the foot of that runway, and was involved in a similar accident. An L-39 jet overshot on landing and hit the M11, fortunately with minimal casualties.

Farnborough Airshow takes place in a much more built up area than Shoreham. All sorts of aircraft, young and old have performed there. One fatal incident: 1952.

It is an inevitability that aircraft will pass over roads during airshows. The fact it hasn't happened until now is good. Many airshows take place in the UK every year, and the vast majority of them go off without a hitch.
As I said, this was the worst case scenario. We shouldn't ban them or stop them or anything because of this one accident. I apologise if people get offended by what I say (again), but the chances of dying at an airshow are incredibly minute. You are more likely to be killed by a domestic COW, then at an airshow.

It's like the media attention on dog attacks. If a Rottweiler kills a child, it makes the headlines for days. But if a Chihuahua kills a child, it wouldn't even make page 8. Just as we perceive different dog breeds to be more dangerous than others, we perceive airshows to be worse than they really are, probably because if something goes wrong, there's a massive cloud of black smoke. If someone breaks their neck when showjumping... well, I rest my case.

Onwards:
The CAA has grounded all Hunters, but this will likely be just a temporary measure. It is highly unlikely to be a fault with EVERY Hawker Hunter. A fatal flaw would have made itself known by now.

Case in Point: Boeing 737. First flew in 1967. It took 30 years for a fatal flaw in the rudder servos to be identified and fixed. But by then it had already taken the lives of those aboard at least two 737's. The Hunter first flew in 1951 and no crashes that I know of have been caused by a design flaw.

The pilot, in his attempt to save the aircraft, may have doomed it. In pictures, the Hunter's flaps are seen extended, potentially at full reach.
Case in Point: British Airways Flight 38. Suffered dual engine failure on approach to Heathrow Airport. Pilot took MASSIVE risk by retracting flaps one notch, from 30 degress (fully extended) to 25 degrees. This allowed the aircraft to clear a town and the A30 dual carriageway. Had the pilot kept flaps at 30, the jet would have slowed down too much and fallen on top of a much more busy road than the A27 was.

Andy Hill may have altered his flap settings in his attempt to save the craft. But it may well have led to the jet dropping like a stone and taking the lives of 11 people.