Old Warden Photography

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby Pen Pusher on Fri 06 May 2016, 9:37 am

With the display datum taken at the closest point the crowd is. The dimensions are approx if I've got it right.

Image

Brian
The Future Of Photography Is Mirrorless

DUXFORDfotoGALLERY
Facebook
User avatar
Pen Pusher

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby jalfrezi on Fri 06 May 2016, 9:52 am

So was the old display line around the 100m mark?
User avatar
jalfrezi
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby LN Strike Eagle on Fri 06 May 2016, 9:58 am

jalfrezi wrote:So was the old display line around the 100m mark?

Seems like it when you see those distances above.

They used to be cleared down to 50ft as well - doubt that'll happen now.
"You really are an oafish philistine at times!"
User avatar
LN Strike Eagle
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby capercaillie on Fri 06 May 2016, 10:02 am

So that will put the pilots in more danger if one of the old kites has a splutter and needs to be put down in a hurry as they're no longer over the runway but the rough fields the other side of the fence. Pointless stupidity and utterly unnecessary for the vintage types at OW performing simply flypasts round the bend. :dunno:
"The surrogate voice of st24"
User avatar
capercaillie

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby LN Strike Eagle on Fri 06 May 2016, 10:27 am

Indeed. Let's see how it plays out on Sunday.

The assurances over the viewing paddock have just sold them three more tickets anyway.
"You really are an oafish philistine at times!"
User avatar
LN Strike Eagle
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby jalfrezi on Fri 06 May 2016, 10:30 am

Unfortunately, it'll be a RIAT like experience trying to photograph any of the large single engined fighters. I don't understand why they used max TOW for the criteria, a lot of these fighters were able to carry bombs which is no longer a factor, the empty weight plus fuel should have been used instead, even maximum landing weight would have been better....
User avatar
jalfrezi
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby Ian G on Fri 06 May 2016, 11:01 am

jalfrezi wrote:So was the old display line around the 100m mark?


That was one of the reasons I love Old Warden, along with its relaxed atmosphere you get really close to the 'action' - well ok, a nice, sedate and gentle display. Ruined! Ruined! Nae Ruined! Guess I'll see come Sunday - if anyone else is going, I'll be the billy no mates with an orange rucksack so come say hi!
Ian Garfield Photography Website!

Flickr Photostream

I should probably be working. Will work for doughnuts.
User avatar
Ian G
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby jalfrezi on Fri 06 May 2016, 11:15 am

Ian G wrote:
jalfrezi wrote:So was the old display line around the 100m mark?


That was one of the reasons I love Old Warden, along with its relaxed atmosphere you get really close to the 'action' - well ok, a nice, sedate and gentle display. Ruined! Ruined! Nae Ruined! Guess I'll see come Sunday - if anyone else is going, I'll be the billy no mates with an orange rucksack so come say hi!


I'll be billy no mates too, I'll be the fat, bald bloke - though I guess that doesn't narrow it down much.....
User avatar
jalfrezi
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby pbeardmore on Fri 06 May 2016, 11:25 am

And if the guy in the farm house decides to have a few friends over for a BBQ? Such a shame its come to this
“The best computer is a man, and it’s the only one that can be mass-produced by unskilled labour.”
User avatar
pbeardmore

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby Wissam24 on Fri 06 May 2016, 11:29 am

And it's worth making the point that none of these new regulations would have prevented the Shoreham tragedy.
Twitter: @samwise24 | Flickr: samwise24 | Shamelessly copying LN Strike Eagle's avatar ideas since 2016
User avatar
Wissam24
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby The Baron on Fri 06 May 2016, 12:20 pm

Wissam24 wrote:And it's worth making the point that none of these new regulations would have prevented the Shoreham tragedy.


Quite true, but what's to be done about it? Some of us sent replies in to the CAA during their review. There's been pilots, organisers, enthusiasts all saying it's unnecessary and yet the rulings still came in.
I can't get the nagging doubt from my head that there was an ulterior motive to these changes.
Loafer for Mr. Da Vinci.
User avatar
The Baron

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby boff180 on Fri 06 May 2016, 1:48 pm

The display line changes had nothing to do with Shoreham, they were bought in coincidently at the same review in response to the accident report into the Kemble Bronco crash.

The report concluded that in relation to the display line being used for the practice, if it had been a display at a show, the aircraft (or a significant fragment of) would have ended up in the crowd.
User avatar
boff180
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby Wissam24 on Fri 06 May 2016, 2:01 pm

I have had it confused then, my mistake
Twitter: @samwise24 | Flickr: samwise24 | Shamelessly copying LN Strike Eagle's avatar ideas since 2016
User avatar
Wissam24
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby WG655 on Fri 06 May 2016, 2:06 pm

boff180 wrote:The display line changes had nothing to do with Shoreham, they were bought in coincidently at the same review in response to the accident report into the Kemble Bronco crash.

The report concluded that in relation to the display line being used for the practice, if it had been a display at a show, the aircraft (or a significant fragment of) would have ended up in the crowd.


The 'what-if' nature of that particular comment has always seemed a crass inclusion in the report. What if the BA 777 engines had failed a couple of seconds earlier? What if the Typhoon pilot at RIAT had been a little slower to get to the throttles?

In the Bronco case, he was rehearsing for a display after a period of absence. It therefore cannot be a like-for-like comparison given that he would have been unable to fly with those currency levels at a public display (i.e. there couldn't ever have been a crowd watching). Picking and choosing arguments to support their ulterior motives - look at their hero worship of the American scene in that report, with no mention of the horrendously unsafe practice and huge numbers of accidents which occur outside the scenarios they laid down.

Seem to recall OW pilots fly many of their aircraft within gliding range of the airfield where possible - an engine failure over tall trees in an unfamiliar type isn't particularly safe and means one more pressure for the pilot to deal with should that occur. Hope the CAA can sleep at night with that on their conscience... :facepalm:
User avatar
WG655
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby LN Strike Eagle on Fri 06 May 2016, 2:09 pm

boff180 wrote:The display line changes had nothing to do with Shoreham, they were bought in coincidently at the same review in response to the accident report into the Kemble Bronco crash.

The report concluded that in relation to the display line being used for the practice, if it had been a display at a show, the aircraft (or a significant fragment of) would have ended up in the crowd.

The AAIB recommended the change based on the Bronco crash, having reviewed it/airshow regs in response to Shoreham. The original Bronco investigation in 2012 made no recommendations with regards to airshow safety distances.

AFAIK, it is at the CAA's discretion as to whether or not they adopt or reject AAIB safety recommendations - they rejected several of the AAIB's suggestions with regards to the ejector seats in ex-military jets.

I made these points before but I think there are flaws with the Bronco being used as an example - it wasn't at an air display, the pilot didn't have a current DA, and because of these factors, he'd given himself an additional 300ft. 300ft in airshow terms is quite a chunk of extra altitude, and therefore would surely have altered the trajectory of any descent and subsequent scattering of debris. Therefore it doesn't translate to public displays at all - he'd be lower for a kick off, but ultimately, he wouldn't be flying in front of the public if he didn't have a DA. The fact he was out of practice must be a factor in that crash.
"You really are an oafish philistine at times!"
User avatar
LN Strike Eagle
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby boff180 on Fri 06 May 2016, 2:21 pm

True and it is also key to point out that the MAA are in the process of a fully scientific study into crowd distances, a study that is by no way complete or has released any preliminary findings. Yet the CAA went ahead and changed the distances anyway.
User avatar
boff180
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby LN Strike Eagle on Fri 06 May 2016, 2:24 pm

boff180 wrote:True and it is also key to point out that the MAA are in the process of a fully scientific study into crowd distances, a study that is by no way complete or has released any preliminary findings. Yet the CAA went ahead and changed the distances anyway.

Yes, because the AAIB put the idea into their heads and gave them a way to do it, based on the flawed comparison to the Bronco.

Once it's been recommended to them on safety grounds, my understanding is they can rush it through. No need to offer a consultation etc when they have a safety recommendation to act upon.
"You really are an oafish philistine at times!"
User avatar
LN Strike Eagle
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby Dan O'Hagan on Fri 06 May 2016, 2:26 pm

Every chance the Sopwith Triplane incident would have had a far less happy outcome if the display line had been in the "new" position back then.

Way to go, CAA. Way to go.
Dan O'Hagan

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby Wissam24 on Fri 06 May 2016, 2:36 pm

Dan O'Hagan wrote:Every chance the Sopwith Triplane incident would have had a far less happy outcome if the display line had been in the "new" position back then.

Way to go, CAA. Way to go.


There are definitely quite a few cases now where lives (specifically, pilots and crews) are in more danger due to new display lines. It's absurd, these kind of blanket rule changes are divorced from reality - if they needed to re-evaluate safety, it should've been done on a venue by venue basis. Clearly Shuttleworth didn't need changes at all.
Twitter: @samwise24 | Flickr: samwise24 | Shamelessly copying LN Strike Eagle's avatar ideas since 2016
User avatar
Wissam24
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby jalfrezi on Fri 06 May 2016, 2:41 pm

Wissam24 wrote:
Dan O'Hagan wrote:Every chance the Sopwith Triplane incident would have had a far less happy outcome if the display line had been in the "new" position back then.

Way to go, CAA. Way to go.


There are definitely quite a few cases now where lives (specifically, pilots and crews) are in more danger due to new display lines. It's absurd, these kind of blanket rule changes are divorced from reality - if they needed to re-evaluate safety, it should've been done on a venue by venue basis. Clearly Shuttleworth didn't need changes at all.


Agreed, let's just hope the MAA don't push the display lines out even further as well.....
User avatar
jalfrezi
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby Dan O'Hagan on Fri 06 May 2016, 2:51 pm

Wissam24 wrote:
Dan O'Hagan wrote:Every chance the Sopwith Triplane incident would have had a far less happy outcome if the display line had been in the "new" position back then.

Way to go, CAA. Way to go.


There are definitely quite a few cases now where lives (specifically, pilots and crews) are in more danger due to new display lines. It's absurd, these kind of blanket rule changes are divorced from reality - if they needed to re-evaluate safety, it should've been done on a venue by venue basis. Clearly Shuttleworth didn't need changes at all.


Plus the lives of people encouraged to find alternative, closer, vantage points. Which surely should have been the main thing the CAA wanted to discourage.
Dan O'Hagan

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby pbeardmore on Fri 06 May 2016, 3:02 pm

I read the Bronco Report over lunch and could find no recommendations re putting the crowd line back so assumed I was looking at a draft or wrong version as I had heard that this event was the motivation behind the new changes re greater distances. I am completely confused. :dizzy: The Bronco crash was 2012 so, IF distances were not safe then, why have they allowed the same distances to remain until Spring this year.

And if Shoreham had not happened, would distances be as now or as before?
“The best computer is a man, and it’s the only one that can be mass-produced by unskilled labour.”
User avatar
pbeardmore

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby LN Strike Eagle on Fri 06 May 2016, 3:10 pm

pbeardmore wrote:I read the Bronco Report over lunch and could find no recommendations re putting the crowd line back so assumed I was looking at a draft or wrong version as I had heard that this event was the motivation behind the new changes re greater distances. I am completely confused. :dizzy:

As above, the original report made no recommendations about airshow crowd separation.

The AAIB recently re-visited the Bronco crash in a bulletin they posted about airshow safety, and used it as a case study to recommend increased distances.

See here - http://forums.airshows.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=69082&start=850#p711524
"You really are an oafish philistine at times!"
User avatar
LN Strike Eagle
UKAR Staff

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby pbeardmore on Fri 06 May 2016, 3:19 pm

Is "re-visiting" a way of saying "our first report was wrong" and, if so, airshows for 2013-15 have carried more risk than they should have because these changes were not introduced at that time?

Did anyone (including CAA staff) attending an Old Warden event over the last 3 years think "goodness, thats a bit close, they should be further back over Manner's house?"

Its interesting that we have read the reports etc but its only now when we see the changes "in the flesh" that the true results can be seen. Something is not right here.
“The best computer is a man, and it’s the only one that can be mass-produced by unskilled labour.”
User avatar
pbeardmore

Re: Old Warden Photography

Postby AlexC on Fri 06 May 2016, 3:23 pm

Unfortunately I can't make it on Sunday, but will be very interested to read what visitors have to say about the effect on photography at Old Warden on here from Monday onwards. Hope it's not too bad.
Pte. Aubrey Gerald Harmer, R. Suss. R. (att. to the Sherwood Foresters) KIA 26/9/1917 Polygon Wood, aged 19, NKG. RIP
User avatar
AlexC

PreviousNext

Return to Old Warden Air Displays

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests