Future airshows - An enthusiast's question

Future airshows - An enthusiast's question

Postby Wes_Howes on Fri 29 May 2015, 12:09 pm

This, I'm afraid PeterR, is mainly directed at you and your team.

This year's show has got to be one of the most, highly anticipated airshows of 2015 and certainly the most, in recent memory, for Cosford (2001 may be close) and well done to you and the team. :clap:

I feel that saying it's because Waddington isn't on, would be doing yourselves a terrible injustice but obviously it is a factor, being the only OFFICIAL RAF show this year.

Anyway on to my question. Given the popularity of this year's event and indeed the questions asked about arrivals/PDs/station platform etc. If such popularity and quite amazing line ups, be continued in the future, could there be a possibilty of opening up a dedicated P+V style enclosure on Friday and Saturday of the show?

I realise that this is not on your list of priorities right now or indeed, maybe not even your department but perhaps a nice little money spinner for the show and/or maybe an opportunity for the MAA to increase their funding, through donations or as part of the cost of admission.
User avatar
Wes_Howes

Re: Future airshows - An enthusiast's question

Postby CJS on Mon 01 Jun 2015, 8:31 pm

I'm not PeterR (clearly) but I would imagine that having any kind of p&v would be tricky for a couple of reasons.

1. There is a museum right next to the airfield which would mean visitors to that would get the p&v for free anyway. RIAT and Waddington to name 2 don't have public access ordinarily so a p&v works for them (although I don't actually know if Waddington do/did one anyway).

2. As I understand it (but may be wrong) the space at Cosford restricts what can operate from the airfield to smaller types. Larger types and jets operate from RAF Shawbury.

Thus, a p&v at Cosford might be tricky and at Shawbury might be impractical. But as I say I'm merely speculating :-)
Chris
"Forewarned is forearmed"
How do you know I didn't?
User avatar
CJS

Re: Future airshows - An enthusiast's question

Postby TouchDown on Mon 01 Jun 2015, 9:02 pm

The P & V is/was a real problem area for Waddington.

We initially put the PAVE (Park and View Enclosure) in place to try and get people off the A15 and away from the undershoot. There was a small fee but the aim of that was to keep people in the area once they had entered, we did not want people parking in the PAVE and the walking into the undershoot. The problem then comes when you have to validate display assets as the rules say this cannot be done in front of the public. The whole idea of validating is to ensure they are safe for the public - defeats the object if the validation is done in front of the public. We wrote a safety case (24 pages if you are having difficulty sleeping - before anyone asks the document is not for general release) to show we were using a pragmatic apporach to the problem with the aim to make it as safe as possible for the public. However the MAA disagreed with this approach as their veiw was still the public should not be present during validations, so seeing it as a means of getting additional funding for the MAA will probably not work. Had there been a Waddington 2015 show the PAVE would one again have been a problem area. It's a difficult call in these days of the internet when keeping aircraft movment details to a very limited distribution is just about impossible, how do you validate a display without the public being present and ensure that people who do turn up are safe (Waddington closes the WAVE for the safety reason as it is on the 450m line)? It may happen one day a display assets pitches up but cannot be validated as the public keep arriving to see the event and so the aircraft becomes an addition to the static display line!
TouchDown

Re: Future airshows - An enthusiast's question

Postby capercaillie on Mon 01 Jun 2015, 9:30 pm

TouchDown wrote:The P & V is/was a real problem area for Waddington.

We initially put the PAVE (Park and View Enclosure) in place to try and get people off the A15 and away from the undershoot. There was a small fee but the aim of that was to keep people in the area once they had entered, we did not want people parking in the PAVE and the walking into the undershoot. The problem then comes when you have to validate display assets as the rules say this cannot be done in front of the public. The whole idea of validating is to ensure they are safe for the public - defeats the object if the validation is done in front of the public. We wrote a safety case (24 pages if you are having difficulty sleeping - before anyone asks the document is not for general release) to show we were using a pragmatic apporach to the problem with the aim to make it as safe as possible for the public. However the MAA disagreed with this approach as their veiw was still the public should not be present during validations, so seeing it as a means of getting additional funding for the MAA will probably not work. Had there been a Waddington 2015 show the PAVE would one again have been a problem area. It's a difficult call in these days of the internet when keeping aircraft movment details to a very limited distribution is just about impossible, how do you validate a display without the public being present and ensure that people who do turn up are safe (Waddington closes the WAVE for the safety reason as it is on the 450m line)? It may happen one day a display assets pitches up but cannot be validated as the public keep arriving to see the event and so the aircraft becomes an addition to the static display line!


So basically we are arriving at the absolutely ridiculous scenario of H&S gnomes ruling and ultimately ruining the hobby enjoyed by thousands for the last four decades?

"Stay away people, aircraft practising airshow routines, nothing to see here."

Maybe we could turn up, photograph the aircraft destined for the static parks as they arrive and all promise to close our eyes when a practice happens. :biggrin:
"The surrogate voice of st24"
User avatar
capercaillie

Re: Future airshows - An enthusiast's question

Postby TouchDown on Mon 01 Jun 2015, 9:48 pm

aircraft practising airshow routines


No a display practice is ok, it's only a problem when a validation is required. :-).
TouchDown

Re: Future airshows - An enthusiast's question

Postby boff180 on Tue 02 Jun 2015, 6:35 am

Clause 10 of RA2335 States...

10. ►Validation of Display Items. Validation of display items, when required, should be carried out by the FDD with the assistance of the FCC, and should not take place during the Flying Display or Special Event.◄


Clause 20 defines a Flying Display as....
Where the event is open to the general public, paying or not, or the event is advertised with an expectation that the public will gather to witness the event, it will be considered a Flying Display11. Where any doubt exists in categorization, the MAA may be consulted for advice


Clause 21 defines a Special Event as....
Flying events not open to the general public, but which are attended by dependants or specifically invited personnel, will normally be categorized as Special Events. For example; Families Days, Ship Displays and minor events for Service publicity and recruiting, such as helicopter visits to schools, Military Ceremonial Events and civil events not regulated by the ANO. ►In such cases◄, the HoE and/or the participants’ Aviation Duty Holder or AM(MF) must stipulate the applicability of the display regulations, ►including any requirement for display executives and a FCC,◄ and the safety criteria to be used for such events. If it is predicted that the general public will gather, as aviation enthusiasts, in off-site viewing areas, the EO will include such gatherings in his risk assessment.


The definitions contained in Clauses 20 and 21 are the issue...
A combination of Clauses 10 and 20 are the main issue... I believe last year the team at DBH validated as many foreign acts as possible at other events abroad to help limit the impact.

However who knows how long arrivals days will last at RIAT? It's a question I would like to ask them.

As far as I am aware the definition of Clause 21 is specifically why RIAT is in the process of moving to a 3 day show format due to the Special Event that took place on the Friday.

I know I've gone off at a RIAT tangent but it helps explain the situation organisers are in and how it's cocking things up for us.

Andy
User avatar
boff180
UKAR Staff

Re: Future airshows - An enthusiast's question

Postby Adamwilliams132 on Tue 02 Jun 2015, 9:20 am

Good info thanks for that Andy, I know someone who owns a naughty field overlooking cosford from opposite where the crowd line is up by the cricket club if you know it, I'm sure he would be willing to make an extra few quid on the Friday and Saturday next year, where there's a will there's a way, also not shooting into the sun all day!
Adamwilliams132

Re: Future airshows - An enthusiast's question

Postby Wes_Howes on Tue 02 Jun 2015, 9:29 am

Thanks TouchDow and Andy for your input. With those rules it make me wonder how and why the P+Vs still return every year... :question:

I wouldn't go shouting about naughty fields, otherwise we're going end up with discussions like they get on the Duxford threads :sleepy:
User avatar
Wes_Howes

Re: Future airshows - An enthusiast's question

Postby Adamwilliams132 on Tue 02 Jun 2015, 11:15 am

Isn't it better that people are in a field away from traffic etc than hundreds trying to cram onto the train station or the service roads around the base ? I know naughty fields are naughty but in this instance I can't see an alternative.
Adamwilliams132

Re: Future airshows - An enthusiast's question

Postby TouchDown on Tue 02 Jun 2015, 6:06 pm

Isn't it better that people are in a field away from traffic


I would say yes 'in a field away from traffic' but not underneath the displaying aircraft, the crowd and display lines are there for a reason. I think it would only take one incident when people in a 'naughty field' area are injured or worse killed to see the end of airshows as we know them. Like it or not risk and who is responsible for accepting risk is now a way of life, if as an organiser you will be held liable for people outside an area that you have authority or influence over would you take that risk?
TouchDown

Re: Future airshows - An enthusiast's question

Postby WG655 on Tue 02 Jun 2015, 8:33 pm

boff180 wrote:
A combination of Clauses 10 and 20 are the main issue... I believe last year the team at DBH validated as many foreign acts as possible at other events abroad to help limit the impact.

Surely this is a bizzare and to some degree counter-productive system? My understanding was that the actual PDA being granted at the start of the season was evidence enough that as a display was safe, and that validations at individual venues were simply to double check this with individual FCCs and prove the display can be safely performed in those particular airspace boundaries. The fact committees are having to validate abroad due to the present system is ludicrous!

What's the difference between this, and going and standing under the display line for a BBMF/Typhoon rehearsal at Coningsby? (i.e. why is one seen in a completely different way to the other?)
User avatar
WG655
UKAR Staff

Re: Future airshows - An enthusiast's question

Postby TouchDown on Tue 02 Jun 2015, 9:48 pm

Validations are only required for foreign militray crews (not all, the MAA decide after crew display details are sent to them), military UK crews with a PDA are not required to validate. This is because it is not always known what risk assessments or display work-ups, etc have been completed overseas and the foreign crews may be working to rules different to UK rules. When validating overseas it is usually not airspace boundaries you are looking for more if any of the manoeuvres do not comply with UK regulations. From personal experience that information is not always obvious from ribbon diagrams or information sent by the crews.

What's the difference between this, and going and standing under the display line for a BBMF/Typhoon rehearsal at Coningsby? (i.e. why is one seen in a completely different way to the other?)


Numbers, an advertised public event, not really sure. Does the team at Coningsby take into account in their risk assessments the fact that people will be under the display area?
TouchDown

Re: Future airshows - An enthusiast's question

Postby G-AMPY on Thu 04 Jun 2015, 6:33 pm

I guess the rules about advertising validations/practices is why peter hasn't commented on any of the threads about times? :dunno: Or maybe hes just not posting so only he gets the photos of the aircraft arriving? :lol: :tongue:
G-AMPY


Return to RAF Cosford Air Show

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests