• Welcome to the E-Goat :: The Totally Unofficial RAF Rumour Network.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Shoreham Ex-RAF QFI Pilot Faces Mansluaghter Charges

vim_fuego

Hung Like a Baboon.
Staff member
Administrator
Subscriber
1000+ Posts
12,273
460
83
He's going for not guilty...

The pilot whose plane crashed during the 2015 Shoreham Airshow disaster is to stand trial at the Old Bailey over the deaths of 11 men.

Andrew Hill, 54, of Sandon, Hertfordshire, faces 11 counts of manslaughter by gross negligence and one count of recklessly or negligently endangering an aircraft under air navigation laws.

He appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court on Thursday for a 14-minute hearing during which he confirmed his name, date of birth and address, and indicated a not-guilty plea to all charges.

Anyone know him? What exactly happened?

https://www.forces.net/news/former-raf-instructor-face-trial-over-shoreham-air-disaster
 

Late & Tired

Flight Sergeant
1000+ Posts
1,131
146
63
undertaking a non-currently authorized manouvre (RUMOURED/ALLEGEDLY).
Screwed up (CONFIRMED).
Bumped into the Planet (CONFIRMED).
Sadly killed 11 innocent people.
 
Last edited:

I Look Like Kevin Costner

Grand Prix fanatic..
3,847
44
48
His defence lawyer better be good for his sakes. This incident has been done to death on the Aircrew sites. I know I had a stand up bun fight with a BCAR section L LAE on the validity of an LAE determining if a life limiting part was in life or not, regardless of what the OEM had originally given it. No doubts Rigga will have his input.
 

Rigga

Licensed Aircraft Engineer
1000+ Posts
Licensed A/C Eng
2,163
122
63
His defence lawyer better be good for his sakes. This incident has been done to death on the Aircrew sites. I know I had a stand up bun fight with a BCAR section L LAE on the validity of an LAE determining if a life limiting part was in life or not, regardless of what the OEM had originally given it. No doubts Rigga will have his input.

ILLKC Thank you so much for that intro!

Yes. Making my opinion based on the accident report and subsequent AD issues, this is a 'buggers muddle' of classic Human Factors and CRM 'attitude versus authority' lessons.

IN MY OPINION: Aircrew/owners had decided they knew best (when it is mostly obvious they don't) and most of their 'airworthiness' decisions appeared to be mainly based on cost and guesses, disguised as informed assumptions (for which they weren't being 'informed' at all). To cap it all they didn't tell anyone outside their organisation what they were doing, so no-one in any other organisation/authority could query/check what they were doing. The engine suffered, performance-wise, to the point that not enough thrust could be maintained in a climb resulting in not enough momentum to perform a planned Loop which, coincidentally, was mis-calculated (or guessed/not calculated) not actually high enough to achieve ground clearance at the bottom of the Loop either!
There are other points, but its hard to put it all into a few lines.

IN MY OPINION The pilot appears to be one of those 'Ive always done it this way' 'Im the pilot, who cares what you know!' guys. And I'd seen a few of them in the RAF...in my opinion.

You may gather that I don't hold anything back for pilots - and I have told some 'well known' pilots, flying for companies I have worked in, exactly where they stand and how to avoid standing in front of MY desk without a coffee.
 

I Look Like Kevin Costner

Grand Prix fanatic..
3,847
44
48
ILLKC Thank you so much for that intro!

Yes. Making my opinion based on the accident report and subsequent AD issues, this is a 'buggers muddle' of classic Human Factors and CRM 'attitude versus authority' lessons.

IN MY OPINION: Aircrew/owners had decided they knew best (when it is mostly obvious they don't) and most of their 'airworthiness' decisions appeared to be mainly based on cost and guesses, disguised as informed assumptions (for which they weren't being 'informed' at all). To cap it all they didn't tell anyone outside their organisation what they were doing, so no-one in any other organisation/authority could query/check what they were doing. The engine suffered, performance-wise, to the point that not enough thrust could be maintained in a climb resulting in not enough momentum to perform a planned Loop which, coincidentally, was mis-calculated (or guessed/not calculated) not actually high enough to achieve ground clearance at the bottom of the Loop either!
There are other points, but its hard to put it all into a few lines.

IN MY OPINION The pilot appears to be one of those 'Ive always done it this way' 'Im the pilot, who cares what you know!' guys. And I'd seen a few of them in the RAF...in my opinion.

You may gather that I don't hold anything back for pilots - and I have told some 'well known' pilots, flying for companies I have worked in, exactly where they stand and how to avoid standing in front of MY desk without a coffee.

Rigga, you know that some of the owner operators have such a chip on their shoudlers, they are unbearable. Any of us ex FJ boys and girls knows how much time, money and effort it took to keep the war goers in the air. The last incident of course involving a PtF Jet was the Sea Vixen wheels up landing at Yeovilton. Classed as the CAA as an intermediate frame (god knows how, autostabs and no manual reversion controls should have made it complex, it needed a RAT to allow control on double EDP fails), both main engine driven pumps failed at the same time. Both broke down to contaminated hydraulic fluid. Not the first time maintenance errors have hurt a PtF.
 
Last edited:

Tin basher

Knackered Old ****
Staff member
Subscriber
1000+ Posts
9,305
721
113
Court proceedings are underway. The trial is expected to last around 7 weeks. Those with an eye for aviation legislation and the consequences of compliance or otherwise will no doubt be following this closely. Might also have a big impact on airshows in years to come.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-46882177

"Jurors were told Andy Hill's Hawker Hunter jet "disintegrated" upon impact, creating a "massive fireball" when it hit the ground in August 2015. The vintage aircraft was in "excellent working order", the Old Bailey heard, and "serious negligence" was to blame."
 

Keyser Söze

Corporal
407
9
18
Mr Hill will, in my opinion, be sent to jail for a long time for the manslaughter of 11 innocent people.

Mr Hill was involved in a previous display, in a JP i believe, 1 year earlier where his airmanship behaviour was immediatly question and his display was cut short by the show organisers. There would appear to be a rather cavalier attitude to safety of himself, the aircraft, and more importantly the safety of others.

The loop manœuvre did not have sufficient altitude (2800 ft) at the top - it should have been at least 3800 ft AGL - there was opportunity to abort the manoeuvre and roll out at the top of the loop, but Mr Hill decided to continue.

His defence, as I understand things, is that he 'blacked-out' under G, which I think is rubbish since he was pulling back on the stick as hard as he could.

The RAF display arena has a big machine behind it, with a proven engineering infrastructure, a big budget, modern equipment and young healthy pilots, and even they feck it up! So quite honestly, a 52 y/o ex Harrier pilot with limited recent currency, in an old fighter/bomber airframe of 40's/50's vintage technology, conducting this kind of manoeuvre, the likelihood of this accident increases exponentially.

The boy is going down and he deserves it
 

Rigga

Licensed Aircraft Engineer
1000+ Posts
Licensed A/C Eng
2,163
122
63
yep...IN MY OPINION, the git is taking the pi - ...5th amendment.

He knows he is as guilty as F... but is willing to have a go at his only feeble chance. His defence lawyers couldn't do any better...

If he had a part is deciding the maintenance required I sincerely hope he goes down for quite some additional time too.
 

I Look Like Kevin Costner

Grand Prix fanatic..
3,847
44
48
yep...IN MY OPINION, the git is taking the pi - ...5th amendment.

He knows he is as guilty as F... but is willing to have a go at his only feeble chance. His defence lawyers couldn't do any better...

If he had a part is deciding the maintenance required I sincerely hope he goes down for quite some additional time too.

The A8-23 org are not on trial so that does not come into play.
 

Stevienics

Warrant Officer
1000+ Posts
4,931
107
63
With some interest and now indirect experience in the interaction between Mil and Civ heritage display flying, people are right to be concerned. DASORs are not infrequent.
 

justintime129

Warrant Officer
1000+ Posts
5,833
322
83
The facts were presented. Defence and prosecution did their job. The jury deliberated and came the their verdict. That's what British justice is all about.

I'm a citizen not a subject
 

Keyser Söze

Corporal
407
9
18
I thought he was extremely fortunate not to do time for this.

Apparently he was acquitted because he passed-out caused by G during the pull-out.

Obviously the fact that he had only 35hrs in the Hunter (plenty of hrs on a JP) and the fact that he was only 3000ft AGL when he was at the top of his climb and should have been at least 4000ft AGL - all of which were when he was fully conscious seems to have been lost on the jury (who are not experts in aviation)
 

I Look Like Kevin Costner

Grand Prix fanatic..
3,847
44
48
He was aqquited as it was not beyond reasonable doubt. However, he was never incapacitated at all in the manoveour at any time, certainly not at the end as he was pole bending the control column, trying to get the nose up without stalling it (the pre stall buffet says it all). If he suffered G Loc, the aircraft would have unloaded, just like Jon Egging suffered in his fatal accident. it did not. Mate of mine is a Hawk instructor and he is adament that it was out and out pilot error. The figures at the top of a lop for speed and height should have been bug out of the manoveur as not even a Tiffie would have got around that half, certainly not a frame like a Hunter. See what the inquest says and if civil cases get persued.
 

Keyser Söze

Corporal
407
9
18
He was aqquited as it was not beyond reasonable doubt. However, he was never incapacitated at all in the manoveour at any time, certainly not at the end as he was pole bending the control column, trying to get the nose up without stalling it (the pre stall buffet says it all). If he suffered G Loc, the aircraft would have unloaded, just like Jon Egging suffered in his fatal accident. it did not. Mate of mine is a Hawk instructor and he is adament that it was out and out pilot error. The figures at the top of a lop for speed and height should have been bug out of the manoveur as not even a Tiffie would have got around that half, certainly not a frame like a Hunter. See what the inquest says and if civil cases get persued.

Totally agree ILLKC. Like you I also work with and know many instructor pilots - without exception they all fully agree that it was pilot error. The coroners report will be announced in due course and that may initiate civil cases against Mr Hill
 

Tin basher

Knackered Old ****
Staff member
Subscriber
1000+ Posts
9,305
721
113
The coroners report will be announced in due course and that may initiate civil cases against Mr Hill
Well its taken a while but the coroner has reported.

"Eleven men who died when a jet crashed on a dual carriageway during an air show were unlawfully killed, a coroner has concluded."

 
Top