Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
let alone not even been brought before a court yet… scandalous, does he have friends in high places or something?
Show More
I thought it was an accident...
It appears he may have been a bit reckless, flying too low.
Terrible way for a lot of people to die.
I do not know if he should be punished or not?
It appears he may have been a bit reckless, flying too low.
Terrible way for a lot of people to die.
I do not know if he should be punished or not?
What would be the point? It's not as if every street has a jet pilot who needs to be deterred.
jailing people for lack of good judgement. Everyone would be in jail.
unless he took drugs or drink the same day? not heard about any impairment.
a bolt could have come loose? investigations have a habit of blaming people over multi million dollar aircraft manufacturers?
unless he took drugs or drink the same day? not heard about any impairment.
a bolt could have come loose? investigations have a habit of blaming people over multi million dollar aircraft manufacturers?
Seems the police are waiting on the completion of the air accident investigation . He is not in the clear imo
Never seen this full video of it before
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvHplYmh2f8
Never seen this full video of it before
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvHplYmh2f8
tobermorey
I have never seen that particular footage, whoever filmed it kept a real steady hand and composure but can anyone see were the pilot ejected?
It must have been very close to impact.
I have never seen that particular footage, whoever filmed it kept a real steady hand and composure but can anyone see were the pilot ejected?
It must have been very close to impact.
wow so graphic Tobermory
I don't think he lost consciousness because plane doesn't deviate,he miss judged ground
I don't think he lost consciousness because plane doesn't deviate,he miss judged ground
I thought that there was a partial ejection which threw him from the plane in time, however reading up on it again he probably had a miraculous escape were he was just thrown regardless of a partial ejection.
I think the problem is that he performed a loop too low, which could be said to be reckless.
He had been reported for doing the same a year earlier at Southport.
It is an extremely fine judgement since he was putting on a show. Did he put himself and others in unnecessary danger?
The aircraft owners have admitted liability so compensation claims will be paid. Does not help those who are dead.
It is amazing he is alive himself, I don't know if a jail sentence is appropriate or not myself?????????????
He had been reported for doing the same a year earlier at Southport.
It is an extremely fine judgement since he was putting on a show. Did he put himself and others in unnecessary danger?
The aircraft owners have admitted liability so compensation claims will be paid. Does not help those who are dead.
It is amazing he is alive himself, I don't know if a jail sentence is appropriate or not myself?????????????
My decision would be a jail sentence would not be appropriate.
I am sure regulations will be toughened up after this.
I am sure regulations will be toughened up after this.
Agree that jail is largely there to act as a deterrent. Don't imagine there are many jetfighter pilots thinking they might take a few more risks because that Andy HIll got off lightly. Families of the victims will think differently.
The previous warning should now lead to action.
He had his chance and chose to ignore it.
He had his chance and chose to ignore it.
what injuries did he get ?
Possible mechanical failure ?
Possible mechanical failure ?
not intentional ,but then how do you stop an idiot from killing/injuring people ? you would then have to jail idiots before they committed any acts of stupidity
Was it a legal loop he did ?
If it was did he do if off course ?
If the answer to either of those is yes then he needs to be punished I would have thought.
Of course he never meant to crash & kill anyone but that really is irrelevant surely, death by reckless flying ( not sure that would be in the same crime bracket as death from driving offences ) but eleven people died & as far as I can tell only one person is surely accountable.
If it was did he do if off course ?
If the answer to either of those is yes then he needs to be punished I would have thought.
Of course he never meant to crash & kill anyone but that really is irrelevant surely, death by reckless flying ( not sure that would be in the same crime bracket as death from driving offences ) but eleven people died & as far as I can tell only one person is surely accountable.
Wasn't the answer to this question posted by Tobermory this morning (03.18) - Police "waiting on the completion of the air accident investigation". Seems a reasonable thing to wait for before considering "punishment".
This seems to be the best and the latest summary of the situation, which gives more detail on Tobermory's post.
http://www.shorehamherald.co.uk/news/local/key-evidence-missing-in-shoreham-...
http://www.shorehamherald.co.uk/news/local/key-evidence-missing-in-shoreham-...
The pilot of a vintage jet which crashed on to a dual carriageway during the Shoreham Airshow, killing 11 men, is to be charged with manslaughter.
Andy Hill was performing aerobatics when the Hawker Hunter jet crashed on to the A27 in Sussex on 22 August 2015.
Families of those who died have waited nearly three years to learn whether charges would be brought, an MP said.
Mr Hill, from Hertfordshire, who is 54 on Thursday, is due to appear before Westminster magistrates on 19 April.
He is to face 11 counts of manslaughter by gross negligence and one of endangering an aircraft, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said.
Mr Hill, of Sandon, Buntingford, Hertfordshire, was questioned for the first time by police in December 2015 under caution, but was not arrested. He had voluntarily attended an interview.
Families met with prosecutors at Sussex Police headquarters in Lewes earlier to discuss the decision.
Simon Ringrose, from the CPS special crime division, said he had found there was sufficient evidence to charge Mr Hill after a "careful review" of the case.
Phil and Sue Grimstone, whose son Matthew died when the aircraft hit his car, said they were pleased a decision had "finally been made" and they hoped the criminal process would "progress swiftly".
Edwina Abrahams, whose wedding chauffeur husband Maurice, 76, was on his way to pick up a bride when he died, said she was "very relieved" by the announcement.
Mrs Abrahams, 62, said: "It's taken such a long time to get here. Now we think that this time next year it will all be behind us. It has taken too long."
The Grimstones' solicitor, Jim Morris, said the decision had taken over two and a half years, and an inquest expected to take eight weeks to complete could only commence after criminal proceedings had ended.
Tim Loughton, MP for Worthing East and Shoreham, welcomed the announcement, but criticised the delay in bringing charges.
"Frankly those families have been in limbo for far too long and this should have happened a long time ago," he said.
Peter Kyle, Labour MP for Hove where some of the victims' families reside, said: "This is the right decision. My instinctive first reaction is that for the families this must be just an enormous moment for them to hear this and an unbelievable relief."
"I want this to move forward with the pace it has been missing to date."
James Healy-Prat, head of aviation at Stewarts Law, who is representing some of the victims' families, said "emotions had been mixed".
"At least the families now know what the position is with the criminal proceedings," he said.
"But it means the inquest will likely be delayed by another year at least, which is difficult for them."
"So it could be 2019, four years after the event, before they can get closure."
Mr Hill, a trained Royal Air Force instructor and fast jet pilot, was seriously injured in the crash, which saw him thrown clear of the aircraft.
He was initially placed in a medically induced coma and was interviewed by police following his discharge from hospital.
Coroner Penelope Schofield had said she was working towards holding a full inquest in the autumn, but the proceedings will be postponed until criminal proceedings have concluded.
Sussex Police confirmed that Mr Hill would be formally charged with the offences and said the force's specialist officers will continue to support the families and friends of those who died.
The Shoreham Airshow has not been staged again since the disaster, out of respect for the families of the men who died.
Andy Hill was performing aerobatics when the Hawker Hunter jet crashed on to the A27 in Sussex on 22 August 2015.
Families of those who died have waited nearly three years to learn whether charges would be brought, an MP said.
Mr Hill, from Hertfordshire, who is 54 on Thursday, is due to appear before Westminster magistrates on 19 April.
He is to face 11 counts of manslaughter by gross negligence and one of endangering an aircraft, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said.
Mr Hill, of Sandon, Buntingford, Hertfordshire, was questioned for the first time by police in December 2015 under caution, but was not arrested. He had voluntarily attended an interview.
Families met with prosecutors at Sussex Police headquarters in Lewes earlier to discuss the decision.
Simon Ringrose, from the CPS special crime division, said he had found there was sufficient evidence to charge Mr Hill after a "careful review" of the case.
Phil and Sue Grimstone, whose son Matthew died when the aircraft hit his car, said they were pleased a decision had "finally been made" and they hoped the criminal process would "progress swiftly".
Edwina Abrahams, whose wedding chauffeur husband Maurice, 76, was on his way to pick up a bride when he died, said she was "very relieved" by the announcement.
Mrs Abrahams, 62, said: "It's taken such a long time to get here. Now we think that this time next year it will all be behind us. It has taken too long."
The Grimstones' solicitor, Jim Morris, said the decision had taken over two and a half years, and an inquest expected to take eight weeks to complete could only commence after criminal proceedings had ended.
Tim Loughton, MP for Worthing East and Shoreham, welcomed the announcement, but criticised the delay in bringing charges.
"Frankly those families have been in limbo for far too long and this should have happened a long time ago," he said.
Peter Kyle, Labour MP for Hove where some of the victims' families reside, said: "This is the right decision. My instinctive first reaction is that for the families this must be just an enormous moment for them to hear this and an unbelievable relief."
"I want this to move forward with the pace it has been missing to date."
James Healy-Prat, head of aviation at Stewarts Law, who is representing some of the victims' families, said "emotions had been mixed".
"At least the families now know what the position is with the criminal proceedings," he said.
"But it means the inquest will likely be delayed by another year at least, which is difficult for them."
"So it could be 2019, four years after the event, before they can get closure."
Mr Hill, a trained Royal Air Force instructor and fast jet pilot, was seriously injured in the crash, which saw him thrown clear of the aircraft.
He was initially placed in a medically induced coma and was interviewed by police following his discharge from hospital.
Coroner Penelope Schofield had said she was working towards holding a full inquest in the autumn, but the proceedings will be postponed until criminal proceedings have concluded.
Sussex Police confirmed that Mr Hill would be formally charged with the offences and said the force's specialist officers will continue to support the families and friends of those who died.
The Shoreham Airshow has not been staged again since the disaster, out of respect for the families of the men who died.
Bit of a sore subject... Obviously hasnt suffered enough...
does he have friends in high places or something?
He does but only for an hour or so at a time.
He does but only for an hour or so at a time.
Like any other charged with a serious offence he has a big decision to make.
plead guilty and get 2/3 sentence or take his chance in court.
plead guilty and get 2/3 sentence or take his chance in court.
Saddo - I have no idea whether the pilot is guilty or not, but I think he is going to be asked to explain why he did the manouevre he did, in the way he did, at the height and location he did it. I doubt saying he can't remember will be given much credence.
Living down here and knowing some of the victims, in my opinion he the pilot is a flash count who has previous for showboating and as has been pointed out chose not to take heed. The lad I knew from the age of two had just had a child of his own. To rob_dylon it's not bloodlust this Pr@tt needs to be punished if proved that he was taking unnecessary risks.
His best defence is to say he can remember nowt, shirley.
Doubt that will wash - at least it certainly shouldn't
I know quite a bit about the UK airshow scene (and I've met Andy a few times and flown - as a passenger - in formation with one of the teams he flew for), and the thing that still troubles me the most about this accident (and that of the Gnat at Car Fest North not long before) was just how lax the currency requirements imposed by the regulator were. Andy is a former-Royal Air Force single-seat fast jet pilot. They don't just let any old Tom, Dick or Harry fly single-seat, particularly the Harrier, which he flew.
The problem is that in order to be considered current, he only had to have flown three displays (practices or actual displays) in the previous 90 days, and they didn't even have to be in the same classification of aircraft (eg he could switch from a small, single-engine prop aeroplane which he displayed, into the Hunter or the Jet Provost, all of which have very different speed and height requirements when performing a display) let alone the actual type. Those requirements have been tightened up in light of Shoreham (and Car Fest).
Compare those requirements to those of the Royal Air Force display teams (as well as the difference in work-up time), and the difference is stark. There's a reason the RAF does things the way it does.
The problem is that in order to be considered current, he only had to have flown three displays (practices or actual displays) in the previous 90 days, and they didn't even have to be in the same classification of aircraft (eg he could switch from a small, single-engine prop aeroplane which he displayed, into the Hunter or the Jet Provost, all of which have very different speed and height requirements when performing a display) let alone the actual type. Those requirements have been tightened up in light of Shoreham (and Car Fest).
Compare those requirements to those of the Royal Air Force display teams (as well as the difference in work-up time), and the difference is stark. There's a reason the RAF does things the way it does.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539