IAT nonsense

[Andyph]

Before and after RIAT (and several other air shows) this same old "we" don't want the "crap", "non-aviation" stalls and other "attractions "."we" just want aircraft and aviation related stalls and therefore the audience in general does not want them either appears.

Rubbish. Try actually looking around the show rather than "claiming your spot" on the crowdline and not leaving it except for food and toilet breaks until the flying (or at least that part of it which is not too "boring" because it doesn't involve afterburning jets) is over.

Or maybe those expressing this narrow point of view think that the stall-holders are too thick to realise that no-one wants them there and no-one will buy their "crap" (which to be fair some of it is) but are so stupid that they come back year after year to occupy a pitch which by all accounts costs them considerably more than they would pay at other events (even Sunday Markets) which are being held on the same day, just so that they can lose some more money.

Clearly that is not the case, and the traders return each year because they know that a significant proportion of the audience is interested in browsing the stalls and even buying the "tat" and "crap".

The plain fact is that some "enthusiasts" are so blinkered in their approach that they still believe that a show the size of RIAT could exist on the entry fees of "enthusiasts" alone despite the fact that a goodly number of said "enthusiasts" will not pay the entry fee at all but prefer to freeload on the outside. Strange that so many deride Duxford "because you can't get decent shots from crowdside due to shooting into the sun", then go to Totterdown and Rhymes and shoot runway and taxi shots into the sun all day .......and then criticise a show for which they are not prepared to pay!)

Even if no "enthusiasts" turned up at all, the show would probably survive, whereas if "Joe Public" didn't turn up it would be doomed.

You obviously did not go to early IATs or Mildenhall shows.
Somehow they had zero or near zero tat and non aviation things yet were extremely successful.
I know it is novel but families seemed happy enough watch aircraft at an airshow.
The shows must have had some indepth marketing to come up with such engagement strategies!

[Andyph]

Another issue is the aggressiveness of the RAFBF. Like a good many other charities they have equated their good cause, a very good cause indeed, with utter self-rightousness and they express that self-rightousness in a most unpleasant way. Not for me thanks.

Sorry if this offends

Regards

I agree, it is off putting to say the least. I also think profits should be shared around all the service charities instead of just given to RAFBF.

[Chuck]

Another issue is the aggressiveness of the RAFBF.

This comment has caused offence indeed. Can people please get their facts right when they post, as the RAFBF has nothing to do with RIAT any more and has had nothing to do with them for a good number of years now. RIAT is run by the RAF Charitable Trust EnterpriseS. Two different charities with different fundraising methods. RAFCTE is responsible for organising RIAT, not the RAFBF.

[Abingdonman]

An airshow without some other attractions would surely be their last one!
regarding the mid 70s Tattoos,for sure they had loads of stalls of all sorts,the obligatory crafts marquee tent and funfair ....but I also remember things like a demo car fitted with the 'Denovo' tyre (IE the tyre was burst at speed to prove how the magnificent 'denovo' would save the day! ) although I believe it was done during the half hour break in the flying display they did for a year or two.

[Dragon Rapide]

"Even if no "enthusiasts" turned up at all, the show would probably survive, whereas if "Joe Public" didn't turn up it would be doomed."

That is undeniably true, but we are not debating black and white, but trying to find a balance, which does not overweight any camp and which is financially viable. Look around the country and it can be done.

[Flankerman]

A picture is worth a thousand words......



Taken at RIAT 2006.

Ken

[Light Blue Spy]

Another issue is the aggressiveness of the RAFBF.

This comment has caused offence indeed. Can people please get their facts right when they post, as the RAFBF has nothing to do with RIAT any more and has had nothing to do with them for a good number of years now. RIAT is run by the RAF Charitable Trust EnterpriseS. Two different charities with different fundraising methods. RAFCTE is responsible for organising RIAT, not the RAFBF.

Well done Chuck! A pathetic comment from Orion.

Suggest you read this Orion, Andyph, etc. . . http://www.airtattoo.com/RAF-Charitable ... y-is-spent

[phreakf4]

...You obviously did not go to early IATs or Mildenhall shows.
Somehow they had zero or near zero tat and non aviation things yet were extremely successful.

Actually, I did. My first airshow was Farnborough 1956 (aged 9) and I started attending airshows on my own in the 1960s. I attended many Mildenhalls and IATs in the 1970s and 80s (and West Malling and North Weald and Lakenheath and Alconbury etc. etc.) and you are right, they were different but I do recall many stalls and other entertainment items including "fairground" items at Mildenhall, it's just that they were not so close to the crowdline, nor were there so many. But then again I no longer drive a Ford Granada or watch one of only 3 available channels on a 14 inch monochrome TV or listen to music played on a turntable or cassette player. Times are different. Audiences now demand more variety in outdoor entertainment and, if it is not provided , they will take their cash elsewhere.

The other noticeable difference in the way shows are organised now is the prominence given to "corporate entertainment", where the corporate enclosures have the best crowdline spots and "priority" entry routes, but that is another, slightly different argument.

The point I was trying to make is that a show the size of even current RIATs which was aimed only at enthusiasts and which did not have all the other "attractions" would, as someone else posted, be the penultimate RIAT held, because although the "enthusiasts" would praise it to the heavens (though some would doubtless complain because the individual aircraft which they wished to see was not present or was "only static" or the "flyers were too far away for a decent photo") the next year the public would stay away in droves and the show would suffer a massive loss.

[DanH]

I think its time that the entry ticket price is restructured. If you consider the current price of early bird tickets for RIAT compared to advance ticket prices for Waddington for example, you only get a good deal if you have a child under the age of 16 with you, getting in for free.
Now I'm not saying that people should have to start having to paying even more than they already do in order to bring kids with them, but I would like to see a separate option for an adult ticket without accompanying children at a lower price.

[Liveforriat]

Wouldn't be children under 16 go free then would it ?

[Orion]

Another issue is the aggressiveness of the RAFBF.

This comment has caused offence indeed. Can people please get their facts right when they post, as the RAFBF has nothing to do with RIAT any more and has had nothing to do with them for a good number of years now. RIAT is run by the RAF Charitable Trust EnterpriseS. Two different charities with different fundraising methods. RAFCTE is responsible for organising RIAT, not the RAFBF.

Well done Chuck! A pathetic comment from Orion.

Suggest you read this Orion, Andyph, etc. . . http://www.airtattoo.com/RAF-Charitable ... y-is-spent

It may be the case now that the RAFBF doesn't organise RAIT but it certainly was the situation in years gone by that there was at least a very close connection between the RIAT and the RAFBF. I can remember doing an on-line booking for RIAT and I was inundated with all sorts of promo material from the RAFBF, but I didn't book the ticket from them.

My opinion of the RAFBF is that it is too aggressive. It is not alone in this, a good many other charities are too; and in being aggressive they put people off from donating.

[phreakf4]

Good Lord! A charity which actually has the nerve to ask for money! Whatever next, perhaps they may even try advertising on TV and such. Disgusting. Do you suggest that I should only give my money to charities which do not mount appeals and which do not use advertising methods designed to reach the widest possible audience? Er...what charities would those be then.....?

If their approach does "turn off" possible donators, it can not be very many, since the RAFBF (and many other charities which employ "aggressive" appeals and advertising) seem to do quite well at raising funds.

[Andyph]

Another issue is the aggressiveness of the RAFBF.

This comment has caused offence indeed. Can people please get their facts right when they post, as the RAFBF has nothing to do with RIAT any more and has had nothing to do with them for a good number of years now. RIAT is run by the RAF Charitable Trust EnterpriseS. Two different charities with different fundraising methods. RAFCTE is responsible for organising RIAT, not the RAFBF.

Well done Chuck! A pathetic comment from Orion.

Suggest you read this Orion, Andyph, etc. . . http://www.airtattoo.com/RAF-Charitable ... y-is-spent

Why do you find his comment pathetic? Because he thinks their marketing is too aggressive?

While I can see that some of the charity causes are somewhat worthy, others I find a bit ho-hum.
I have just come back from some grim parts of the third world where a pound will save a life type poverty is rife and somehow station sports equipment, TVs for crew rooms and stained glass windows I don't consider high on my list of worthy causes.

[TomG]

Another issue is the aggressiveness of the RAFBF.

This comment has caused offence indeed. Can people please get their facts right when they post, as the RAFBF has nothing to do with RIAT any more and has had nothing to do with them for a good number of years now. RIAT is run by the RAF Charitable Trust EnterpriseS. Two different charities with different fundraising methods. RAFCTE is responsible for organising RIAT, not the RAFBF.

Well done Chuck! A pathetic comment from Orion.

Suggest you read this Orion, Andyph, etc. . . http://www.airtattoo.com/RAF-Charitable ... y-is-spent

Why do you find his comment pathetic? Because he thinks their marketing is too aggressive?

While I can see that some of the charity causes are somewhat worthy, others I find a bit ho-hum.
I have just come back from some grim parts of the third world where a pound will save a life type poverty is rife and somehow station sports equipment, TVs for crew rooms and stained glass windows I don't consider high on my list of worthy causes.

They may not be high on your list of worthy causes, but if they can improve the lot of those who are serving both at home and overseas and who, in a rapidly shrinking military, have been deployed pretty regularly to some locations rather short on 'comforts' that some take for granted then they certainly come high on my list.

Tom

[81TFW]

At the risk of getting shot down...here's my thoughts. I've been going to IAT/RIAT since it was at Greenham Common, the fantastic Mildenhall shows, etc, and those days of big shows with lots of action are gone.

The airshow at RIAT will inevitably shrink. Air forces are smaller, budgets are tighter, aircraft types are fewer. I'd love to see some Greek F-4s for instance, but with the Euro situation the way it is there's no way I will. If the RAF only have Typhoons & Tornados as frontline fast jets then that's all they can send for us to see. We are where we are. Saying "It used to be better" is no doubt true, but that was then. Expectations are way too high for what is achievable now.

Maybe the problem lies with RIAT's marketing department, who advertise RIAT as an amazing FLYING experience to the enthusiast market when they are really delivering a family day out with added aircraft. RIAT obviously think that's where the money is.

Does the problem lie with the sponsors? Do BAe want F-22/F-35 at RIAT when they have Typhoons and Gripens to sell? (Different markets, I know, but do you want someone else's wonderplane to outclass your own product?)

I may go next year, I've not decided. Fairford is a long journey, the ticket is expensive - but Yeovilton is on my doorstep and provides much better value for money.

[stonesfan]

The current decline is due to a) the economic crisis and b) a lack of understanding by current politicians, none of whom have served in the military or been to war, of the value of the utimate insurance policy.

Lastly, please don't castigate the airshow organisors - they can only get what is available.

I'd disagree with that to an extent. The ultimate insurance policy is the upkeep and renewal of the Trident nuclear deterrent. At least our politicians have had the sense to keep that in operation, even if its use is questionable.

However, RIAT is clearly in decline. No point in people wearing rose tinted glasses and pretending everything is okay because it isnt. I'd suggest though, that the decline of RIAT (as has been mentioned on this forum) is simply a sign of the times. Less types in operation, less numbers and budgets being cut to the bone.

2011 was seen an average display by many, but give it 3 or 4 years, and it may be looked back upon as the last of the proper airshows. I'm really not convinced that there will be any airshows of any substance in the near future.

[Dragon Rapide]

"I'm really not convinced that there will be any airshows of any substance in the near future."

If by that you mean big shows with 100,000 plus spectators and lots of modern hardware, on the ground and in the air, then I would agree. But then I gave up on those shows a while back having had many wonderful years of them. Now a mixture of Duxford, Old Warden, Headcorn, Eastbourne and Southend is very satisfying and is more than enough to keep the appetite whetted throughout the season.