Shoreham crash injustice

ALOnG with the relatives of the deceased of the 2015 Shoreham Airshow disaster, I too am aghast at the verdict of the recent court case involving the pilot of the crashed plane, Andrew hill.

however, we have a legal process in this country. As far as I am aware, the due processes have been correctly followed, and thus the evidence and crash investigators’ findings were presented to a jury of independent people. We should respect their decision.

I have no connection to, or involvement in, the world of aircraft/ display flying and have not been to an air show for 50 years — I never really saw the point of them.

however, as a general observation, and as a professional engineer, I have several areas of doubt. Flying fast jets which incur high ‘ G’ forces is normally the province of young, fit people. As an experienced flyer, Mr hill must have been only too well aware of the risk of impairment due to high ‘G’ forces.

I am not aware that there has been any comment in respect of the effect of age on a pilot’s ability to handle those forces, and/or whether or not this had a bearing on the incident.

I am also aghast at the air display’s organisers, who have said that they are not responsible for the incident. Without the air show, the risk of Mr hill’s action would not have been there.

Personally, I hope that this sorry saga brings to an end Mr hill’s display-flying career, though I feel no ill towards him.

I think that he should have been bold enough to have admitted his shortcomings, rather than hide behind technical or legal arguments.

On a broader note, I hope that the fallout from this sad affair will also lead to a full formal review of air display safety.

I would like to see coherent rules being observed and enforced by clearly identified responsible people, and stricter control of the medical standards of pilots taking part in such events. Mr C.E. sayERs-lEaVy, Broadstairs, Kent.