Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2 Light A/C crash over Shoreham Airport, South England

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by landing-gear View Post
    At the end of the day, i live where this happened and the point of collision is some way from the point of impact!!! this guy could have just dumped it into the sea!
    If he wasnt bothered about the houses etc he would have just dropped it there and then.

    This guy died.....
    Stop analysing his last moments as if he was an complete novice pilot
    I'm absolutely not judging his actions. I don't know him or what experience he had, but from the news reports it looks he was a very experienced guy. My respect goes to him and my condolences to the family.

    What I'm saying is just that, typically, and not in this specific case, planes in a dare emergency that are controllable and that the pilot has control crash land somehow in-control in some way or another, with better or worse results, they don't dive into the ground. O the other hand, if the plane is uncontrollable, no matter how good the pilot or how heroic he might be, typically he will not be able to steer the plane to where he wishes, because you need control to steer.

    In this particular case, and now I' speculating based on the little news report linked in this thread:
    - There was a mid-air crash.
    - There are witnesses reports saying that the plane rolled inverted.
    - There are witnesses reports saying that "the back of the plane popped" (whatever that means).
    - The wreckage seemed to be concentrated in one spot, what would indicate a high vertical speed and little forward speed.

    This sounds consistent with a plane with structural failure that becomes uncontrollable and crashes out of control. If that's the case, then even Sully, or even Bob Hoover, could have not done a thing to steer the plane away from the houses or wherever they'd wished.

    No disrespect intended, implied or stated in there.

    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
      And don't forget the common sense factor:

      Planes where the pilot has enough control typically don't crash at very extreme attitudes, like nose into the ground and inverted.

      Planes where the pilot doesn't have enough control typically can't be steered to the pilot's will.

      Firs step, regain enough control if you can. Then try to steer it to the best crash spot you can find and reach. Chances are the best for you will be the best for those in the ground too. (for example, the park next to the houses is better than the houses themselves).
      Indeed a very sad situation- no doubt the poor fellow was doing all he could.

      However, those that seem so opposed to factual discussion and so convinced that the pilot was steering away from innocent by standers must be omnipotent deities, or on a conference call with a very talkative, doomed pilot.
      Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Evan View Post
        This isn't a funeral, it's a forum, where people analyze plane crashes. All Gabriel is saying is that it appears that the plane was [likely] uncontrollable when it came down. I see no disrespect in that.
        Fixed.
        Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by 3WE View Post
          Indeed a very sad situation- no doubt the poor fellow was doing all he could.

          However, those that seem so opposed to factual discussion and so convinced that the pilot was steering away from innocent by standers must be omnipotent deities, or on a conference call with a very talkative, doomed pilot.
          I am not opposed to fatual discussion what so ever, i am opposed to comments from the other side of the world from people that have very little info on this event.
          For your information, numerous witnesses that were on the park where the aircraft finally crashed, have all said this pilot, although immeasurably losing height, had some control that allowed him to deviate away from numerous people in the park that day.
          As i said in earlier posts, he had managed to get the aircraft quite a way from the initial collision point, it didnt just fall out of the sky! had this been the case he would have crashed into the sea.

          I dont appreciate these condescending types of comments, its funny how all forums have these "superior" beings.

          Comment


          • #20
            Gabe, there are hundreds of American and Brit pilots who made it back with varying degrees of critical components remaining on the aircraft.

            There are also hundreds of American and Brit pilots who did not make a heroic landing.

            Your "book talk" can be a source of amusement and other days not worth the powder to blow it up with.

            In Flanders Fields ....
            Live, from a grassy knoll somewhere near you.

            Comment


            • #21
              That's why I've used words like "typically", "looks like", "speculation", "if that was the case", etc...

              While it's true that there were witnesses reporting the pilot steering away from the crash, there are also others reporting that the plane rolled 180 degrees upside down. A plane can fly quite a bit while out of control, and the fact that he missed the houses and crashed in an open area could be not thanks to the pilot but despite him.

              Or it could be not. I've just made a speculation, made it clear that it was a speculation, and made it clear that it was based in the little I knew from the news reports (because yes, I was not there and I am at the other side of the world). I can be wrong, it wouldn't be the first time, and I have no problem to accept it if that's the case, and it wouldn't be the first time either.

              Please understand that absolutely no disrespect was stated, implied or intended.

              Yes, I have the tendency to say what I think even if I am not 100% sure, and I also tend to explain the reasons why I think what I think. I hope you don't have a problem with that but if you do, well, I can live with that.

              --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
              --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

              Comment

              Working...
              X