This accident is a perfect example of something that
should never happen. The ultimate responsibility for
the tragic death is that of the pilot concerned and
no-one else. No-one held a gun to his head and forced
him to fly so close to a point where he knew there
were people, and it should be emphasised that this
event occured outside the airfield boundary.
Observant readers of the report will note that the
silver car that the photographer was standing on was
situated on the left hand margin of the extended landing
area boundary which rather begs the question as to
why the pilot of the glider concerned felt it necessary
to bank to the left, with a bank angle of 20 degrees,
which on the face of it would take him further away
from the landing area. I do not have a great deal of
trouble reaching a conclusion but it is up to you to
make your own decision on that.
The photographer was going about his lawful business
in an area outside the airfield boundary, and it was
well known that he frequently took such positions.
He was an experienced glider pilot himself and no doubt
trusted that pilots would have the good sense not to
fly into him. I would refute any suggestion that he
was in any way 'responsible' for the accident, his
action may have been unwise with the benefit of hindsight
but given the known circumstances it was not unreasonable
for him to do what he did. Whether his presence 'encouraged'
pilots to fly in the way that they did is perhaps a
question that can never be answered, certainly by the
pilot concerned.
As to the future we are now in a position where the
CAA could set the rules for competition finishes in
the UK and they are not likely to consider the aspects
of fun and spectator enjoyment in their deliberations,
or at least place much weight on such considerations.
I find the worm burner competition finish acceptable
over an area where I have the control of the activity,
it is good to watch and reasonably safe provided access
to the area over which it takes place is controlled.
No competition director has any control over what takes
place outside the airfield boundary and for that reason
a margin for safety has to be set. The safety margin
that may now be imposed on us will probably be greater
that we would like.
Like the rest of life safety rules only have to be
made for the information of fools, those who are aware
of the possible consequences of their actions and are
resolved to always take action to mitigate such consequences
do not need rules to make them fly safely.
Perhaps one way forward is to require that every pilot
taking part in a competition comes with a certificate,
setting out the minimum level to which they may decsend
during a finish, from their CFI in the same way that
aerobatic pilots are cleared to minimum levels depending
on their competence, ability and experience. This at
least would enable competition directors to receive
some assurance instead of finding out to late that
what is being done is outside the competence of the
pilot concerned. It would not restrict those who are
able to fly very low safely, avoiding a blanket prohibition
which would in many ways detract from the spectacle
of well performed competition finishes.

Don
Director Tibenham Comps