2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's Role

Discuss all things 'aviation' that do not fit into a more appropriate forum
Post Reply
User avatar
Dan O'Hagan
Posts: 2293
Joined: Wed 13 Apr 2016, 6:05 pm

2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's Role

Post by Dan O'Hagan »

Bit of a rallying cry, folks.

As we know this 2016 airshow season will be the most restricted, regulated and scrutinised in history. Displays, we know, will be higher, further and tamer than ever before. Great venues will be neutered, many have already given up, and some iconic aircraft types will and have left our skies forever. We, as a community, need to stand our ground and defend not just our hobby, but an industry which has, ever since Shoreham, stood up for itself in a manner which has been far too passive and meek.

While we MUST support airshows, we must not support them blindly. If an airshow is reduced to watching aeroplanes 1,000ft up two miles from the crowd-line, that to my mind is no longer an airshow worthy of the name. We must speak out. We know what is and isn't safe. We know that Shoreham was a tragic accident, nothing more than that, and that the existing rules had served us well, and protected the public flawlessly since 1952.

We should all be, as I am, very proud of the way UKAR has been at times a lone and independent voice in defence of air displays, at a time when BADA frankly let themselves down badly, waffling inanely in public about the benefits of seaside shows while ignoring the fact that the UK's safety record was, and still is, something to take immense pride in.

What I would call on us all to do is to take in these early shows of the 2016 season, and if they are as pared-back and as sterlile as some of the warnings would indicate, make your feelings known. Fight for your hobby. Fight for the industry. Make the CAA finally see common sense and accept that airshows did not become wildly dangerous over the space of a few minutes in Sussex last August.

To stand meekly by and say nothing, or even champion dismal, distant pale shadows of previous shows will ensure nothing changes, and you will then be condemned to a future of airshows which offer nothing but a tepid experience to those inside, while making standing in adjacent fields under the pushed-back display lines even more appealing.

Enjoy the shows you attend - but do not be afraid to be vocal if you do not. WE have a massive role to play this season - if we don't, the shows we love are absolutely doomed.

strangelookingalien
Posts: 848
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 7:39 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by strangelookingalien »

I absolutely agree with this post.

The trouble is - the truth is unacceptable to some people; that is - that airshows, by their nature, include an infinitesimal risk of something catastrophic happening and that is a risk that is worth taking given the pleasure they give.

These risks seem acceptable in sport, and even daily life (driving etc) but for some reason any risk is deemed unacceptable for airshows, and this is something i can't understand. Safety should be considered always, but if safety is somebody's number 1 priority - they ought never to leave their house.

User avatar
Wes_Howes
Posts: 3801
Joined: Wed 03 Sep 2008, 7:39 am
Contact:

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by Wes_Howes »

Dan O'Hagan wrote: Fight for your hobby. Fight for the industry. Make the CAA finally see common sense

Don't have any arguments with your post Dan, I don't think anyone on here will BUT how do we go about making our voices/opinions heard? The CAA weren't listening during their consultation period, why should they listen now? :dunno:

User avatar
LN Strike Eagle
UKAR Staff
Posts: 10622
Joined: Mon 21 Jul 2008, 3:29 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by LN Strike Eagle »

Wes_Howes wrote:
Dan O'Hagan wrote: Fight for your hobby. Fight for the industry. Make the CAA finally see common sense

Don't have any arguments with your post Dan, I don't think anyone on here will BUT how do we go about making our voices/opinions heard? The CAA weren't listening during their consultation period, why should they listen now? :dunno:

This forum has a big reach. Comments on here go far and wide, and you could send your feedback to the venues directly too.

If they have a documented correspondence from their audience, and can show a knock-on effect (especially if there's a drop in gate for shows that host more than one show a year), then their voices should be heard if the CAA seriously wants to keep the industry alive as they say they do.
"You really are an oafish philistine at times!"

User avatar
The Baron
Posts: 1370
Joined: Tue 01 Dec 2009, 8:23 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by The Baron »

Wes_Howes wrote:
Dan O'Hagan wrote: Fight for your hobby. Fight for the industry. Make the CAA finally see common sense

Don't have any arguments with your post Dan, I don't think anyone on here will BUT how do we go about making our voices/opinions heard? The CAA weren't listening during their consultation period, why should they listen now? :dunno:


I agree with what you're saying Dan, but as Wes says, and I've mentioned elsewhere, how are we going to make our voices known?
If we complain to the event organizers and stop attending that's a long drawn out approach that still won't necessarily involve the CAA.
People should have been more vocal when they had the chance but with the CAA seemingly hell-bent on forcing their way, what exactly can we do now?
Loafer for Mr. Da Vinci.

User avatar
st24
Posts: 7988
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 9:31 am
Location: Sexville

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by st24 »

Dan O'Hagan wrote:Bit of a rallying cry, folks.

As we know this 2016 airshow season will be the most restricted, regulated and scrutinised in history. Displays, we know, will be higher, further and tamer than ever before. Great venues will be neutered, many have already given up, and some iconic aircraft types will and have left our skies forever. We, as a community, need to stand our ground and defend not just our hobby, but an industry which has, ever since Shoreham, stood up for itself in a manner which has been far too passive and meek.

While we MUST support airshows, we must not support them blindly. If an airshow is reduced to watching aeroplanes 1,000ft up two miles from the crowd-line, that to my mind is no longer an airshow worthy of the name. We must speak out. We know what is and isn't safe. We know that Shoreham was a tragic accident, nothing more than that, and that the existing rules had served us well, and protected the public flawlessly since 1952.

We should all be, as I am, very proud of the way UKAR has been at times a lone and independent voice in defence of air displays, at a time when BADA frankly let themselves down badly, waffling inanely in public about the benefits of seaside shows while ignoring the fact that the UK's safety record was, and still is, something to take immense pride in.

What I would call on us all to do is to take in these early shows of the 2016 season, and if they are as pared-back and as sterlile as some of the warnings would indicate, make your feelings known. Fight for your hobby. Fight for the industry. Make the CAA finally see common sense and accept that airshows did not become wildly dangerous over the space of a few minutes in Sussex last August.

To stand meekly by and say nothing, or even champion dismal, distant pale shadows of previous shows will ensure nothing changes, and you will then be condemned to a future of airshows which offer nothing but a tepid experience to those inside, while making standing in adjacent fields under the pushed-back display lines even more appealing.

Enjoy the shows you attend - but do not be afraid to be vocal if you do not. WE have a massive role to play this season - if we don't, the shows we love are absolutely doomed.


So Dan, will you be M11 end or tank bank end for the 3 Duxford shows??
You caaan't trust the system... Maaan!

User avatar
Dan O'Hagan
Posts: 2293
Joined: Wed 13 Apr 2016, 6:05 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by Dan O'Hagan »

I think with Duxford, common sense would dictate holding off buying tickets until the display and crowd lines are known. As I say, spending money to watch stuff 1,000ft over Grange Road two miles away just for the sake of it does no-one any favours.

Support the shows. But not blindly. Voicing discontent will be the catalyst for change.

Flare Path
Posts: 3058
Joined: Wed 07 Dec 2011, 8:53 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by Flare Path »

The CAA want absolutely nothing to do with airshows and BADA had the opportunity to take on a more responsible role, they declined. Consequently, the much loved UK scene is in rapid decline - nobody wants any part of it.

If shows become watered down, expect people to be pissed off paying to view inside - you needed a pair of binoculars for the Abingdon event.

User avatar
Dan O'Hagan
Posts: 2293
Joined: Wed 13 Apr 2016, 6:05 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by Dan O'Hagan »

BADA's lack of fight, at least in public, has been pitiful. It has been effectively left to groups like UKAR to be at the vanguard of defending airshows.

john001
Posts: 1306
Joined: Sun 30 May 2010, 7:25 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by john001 »

I know some ways to alienate these you are seeking to influence (i.e. the CAA) and make them think your opinion is worthless and not worth listening to:

make statements like ' If an airshow is reduced to watching aeroplanes 1,000ft up two miles from the crowd-line' and 'many have already given up'

or how about

The CAA weren't listening during their consultation period, (which consultation are you talking about? )

or

The trouble is - the truth is unacceptable to some people; that is - that airshows, by their nature, include an infinitesimal risk of something catastrophic happening and that is a risk that is worth taking given the pleasure they give. (for those inside maybe but those outside have a right to safety - the vast majority of the changes to documents this year have been tightening up of oversight of FDO and risk mitigation both of which it seems to me that if they had been followed to the letter in the rules as they were we may not be in this situation now)

While I agree it is absolutely right to stand up for your hobby and for it to be the way you want it - you will do that more effectively and people will listen and discuss, if you do it in a considered factual way rather than ranting like a Sun headline and spouting non facts.

john001
Posts: 1306
Joined: Sun 30 May 2010, 7:25 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by john001 »

Dan O'Hagan wrote:BADA's lack of fight, at least in public, has been pitiful. It has been effectively left to groups like UKAR to be at the vanguard of defending airshows.


1. Why does BADA have to have a public fight? 2. Seems to me the organisation was honest enough to decline regulating airshows as it did not have the resources or expertise.

User avatar
Skyflash
UKAR Staff
Posts: 2140
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 7:51 pm
Location: Musselburgh, nr Edinburgh

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by Skyflash »

One thing which the (otherwise splendid) OP fails to address is that many of us already travel abroad regularly for airshows, and will simply increase that aspect of the hobby (money permitting, of course) if the UK shows do indeed become a pale shadow of their former selves. Thus exacerbating the problem.
Posting comments on an aviation-related chatroom, are ya? Looks like it an' all...

User avatar
Dan O'Hagan
Posts: 2293
Joined: Wed 13 Apr 2016, 6:05 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by Dan O'Hagan »

john001 wrote:
Dan O'Hagan wrote:BADA's lack of fight, at least in public, has been pitiful. It has been effectively left to groups like UKAR to be at the vanguard of defending airshows.


1. Why does BADA have to have a public fight? 2. Seems to me the organisation was honest enough to decline regulating airshows as it did not have the resources or expertise.


Because at a time when the media was hysterical, and telling downright lies about airshows and aircraft (the "flameout" that was a lens flare etc), BADA should have been shouting from the rooftops about the industry's safety record.

Instead it put out the message that airshows over the sea were safe and probably the way forward, thereby implying that airshows over land were inherently too risky.

Without BADA, what other group was there to speak for the industry?

User avatar
Wes_Howes
Posts: 3801
Joined: Wed 03 Sep 2008, 7:39 am
Contact:

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by Wes_Howes »

Ok John, seeing as you've quoted me I'll respond.

I know some ways to alienate these you are seeking to influence (i.e. the CAA) and make them think your opinion is worthless and not worth listening to:


Firstly, this was not my attempt at a response to the CAA. I was merely asking DanO a question, my feelings clearly shone though in the next quote though.

The CAA weren't listening during their consultation period, (which consultation are you talking about? )


The consultation period during which the CAA approached airshow organisers, BADA, display pilots and other organisations for input on the new CAP regs.

If or indeed when, I have visited an airshow, namely Duxford at the end of the month, if I feel that the show has been neutered by these new regulations then I shall make a more formal, reasoned complaint and address it where I feel it would be best heard. I'd like to think I have a bit more restraint than simply effing and blinding in a long winded, ranting email that will be laughed all the way to the deleted items folder. From your response, I get the feeling you assume that's what most people are going to do.
Last edited by Wes_Howes on Fri 06 May 2016, 4:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

john001
Posts: 1306
Joined: Sun 30 May 2010, 7:25 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by john001 »

I have pointed this out once before but will do so again:

What tightening of regulation you have seen so far will be nothing in comparison to the potential changes that could result from the scientific study being carried out for the MAA on the potential for 'collateral damage in the event of something going wrong' (this is not the title I don't have time to look it up but it is in effect what it will show') that I think is due to be received in 2017.

IMHO This will find that a lump of metal has the potential to travel and hit people in the crowd a lot further away than the current display lines allow. Right now there is little scientific evidence that specifically looks at this. Once this report is out there will be. If there was an accident and people were injured the regulator (CAA or MAA) will be open to court action in ignoring proven scientific evidence that the crowd were in danger should things go wrong if things do not change in light of the report. IMHO the regulators hardly have a leg to stand on. IF they don't make changes they are open to litigation if things go wrong and I can't see them running that risk. This, IMHO, will be the death of the airshow not what has gone on now. We should welcome the new rules and improved safety not fight it because again IMHO there is a bigger battle ahead. What again IMHO is needed is not a symbolic campaign now but a constructive well planned and thought out dialogue with the CAA, organisers and airshow regulars represented by people like UKAR to prempt this potential issue. If this is worked on now there is less likelihood of perhaps understandable knee jerk reactions in the future and the ranting and raving will follow which gets us nowhere.

Of course I hope i am completely wrong but in today's world of health and safety and litigation I fear I may not.

john001
Posts: 1306
Joined: Sun 30 May 2010, 7:25 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by john001 »

Wes_Howes wrote:
john001 wrote:I know some ways to alienate these you are seeking to influence (i.e. the CAA) and make them think your opinion is worthless and not worth listening to:

make statements like ' If an airshow is reduced to watching aeroplanes 1,000ft up two miles from the crowd-line' and 'many have already given up'

or how about



or

The trouble is - the truth is unacceptable to some people; that is - that airshows, by their nature, include an infinitesimal risk of something catastrophic happening and that is a risk that is worth taking given the pleasure they give. (for those inside maybe but those outside have a right to safety - the vast majority of the changes to documents this year have been tightening up of oversight of FDO and risk mitigation both of which it seems to me that if they had been followed to the letter in the rules as they were we may not be in this situation now)

While I agree it is absolutely right to stand up for your hobby and for it to be the way you want it - you will do that more effectively and people will listen and discuss, if you do it in a considered factual way rather than ranting like a Sun headline and spouting non facts.


Ok John, seeing as you've quoted me I'll respond.

I know some ways to alienate these you are seeking to influence (i.e. the CAA) and make them think your opinion is worthless and not worth listening to:


Firstly, this was not my attempt at a response to the CAA. I was merely asking DanO a question, my feelings clearly shone though in the next quote though.

The CAA weren't listening during their consultation period, (which consultation are you talking about? )


The consultation period during which the CAA approached airshow organisers, BADA, display pilots and other organisations for input on the new CAP regs.

If or indeed when, I have visited an airshow, namely Duxford at the end of the month, if I feel that the show has been neutered by these new regulations then I shall make a more formal, reasoned complaint and address it where I feel it would be best heard. I'd like to think I have a bit more restraint than simply effing and blinding in a long winded, ranting email that will be laughed all the way to the deleted items folder. From your response, I get the feeling you assume that's what most people are going to do.



Wes - the first line was not aimed at you (but I accept it may appear it was).

I hope you don't have to write as you indicate but if you do you are quite right.

Finally, you are right again, when Dan winds people up in the way he does I am afraid that people are going to go down the 'ranting route' and not the constructive one which does the enthusiast community no favours at all.

User avatar
RRconway
Posts: 2358
Joined: Sat 04 Jul 2009, 4:09 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by RRconway »

strangelookingalien wrote:infinitesimal risk of something catastrophic happening and that is a risk that is worth taking given the pleasure they give.

Unless of course you are the one whose life is forever changed when things do go wrong, either inside the show as a spectator, or outside as a member of the public.

Safety should be considered always, but if safety is somebody's number 1 priority - they ought never to leave their house.

I'm sure all the professional pilots and aircraft engineers on this forum will be delighted to hear you belittle their professional philosophy in that way.

The two comments above, alone, prove that very few people on this forum are suitably qualified or have the experience enough in this field (myself included) to actually express an opinion that is valid or indeed can make a difference.
I seldom agree with Dan on here but I do understand his passion for our hobby, however what we are asking or what we are lobbying for is that guidelines put in place to protect people be changed, to allow us to carry on enjoying our hobby, at the risk of the lives of others, and that is both blatantly unacceptable and absurd.

Aside from the more gentle display which I can understand making things safer, moving the aircraft further away will make no difference it just means that in the event of an incident the aircraft will fall further from the airfield however the end result might still be the same if it lands in a populated area.

I don't know what the answer is, but ask yourself this, if we were successful in lobbying and removing the restrictions that might be employed and something did happen would you really be able to stand in front of the families of any people who died and say to them that it was okay because we got a good show and the risk was really small?

Either way, I do not believe we have the right to try and influence just because it will dumb down our hobby, that is not a valid reason.
Aside from Shoreham we had the tragic accident at car fest and a few years ago the Mustang at Duxford, it was only luck that prevented casualties on the ground, we keep talking about Shoreham as if it is the only accident in recent years, what it actually is, is the only accident that ended with fatalities on the ground.

It never ceases to amaze me at work when we have a delay because of a technical reason how annoyed people get that they've been delayed. Sometimes you feel like saying to them okay will let the aircraft go now and when the aircraft gets to the end of the runway and the pilot pulls back on the stick we'll all cross our fingers really hard and see what happens!!!!
A family friend who was a flight engineer on the 747 not long after Lockerbie once had a delay while they try to identify a bag that had been loaded incorrectly and a very angry gentleman confronted him in the cabin asking why British Airways was delaying the flightfor one bag.

I include the two anecdotes above just to show how peoples attitude to risk is until they actually think about what the consequences are.
I know you think you understood what I said, but I'm not sure you realise that what I said is not what I meant.

User avatar
Dan O'Hagan
Posts: 2293
Joined: Wed 13 Apr 2016, 6:05 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by Dan O'Hagan »

RRconway wrote:
strangelookingalien wrote:infinitesimal risk of something catastrophic happening and that is a risk that is worth taking given the pleasure they give.

Unless of course you are the one whose life is forever changed when things do go wrong, either inside the show as a spectator, or outside as a member of the public.

Safety should be considered always, but if safety is somebody's number 1 priority - they ought never to leave their house.

I'm sure all the professional pilots and aircraft engineers on this forum will be delighted to hear you belittle their professional philosophy in that way.

The two comments above, alone, prove that very few people on this forum are suitably qualified or have the experience enough in this field (myself included) to actually express an opinion that is valid or indeed can make a difference.
I seldom agree with Dan on here but I do understand his passion for our hobby, however what we are asking or what we are lobbying for is that guidelines put in place to protect people be changed, to allow us to carry on enjoying our hobby, at the risk of the lives of others, and that is both blatantly unacceptable and absurd.

Aside from the more gentle display which I can understand making things safer, moving the aircraft further away will make no difference it just means that in the event of an incident the aircraft will fall further from the airfield however the end result might still be the same if it lands in a populated area.

I don't know what the answer is, but ask yourself this, if we were successful in lobbying and removing the restrictions that might be employed and something did happen would you really be able to stand in front of the families of any people who died and say to them that it was okay because we got a good show and the risk was really .


Remind me again how moving aeroplanes closer to "secondary crowdlines" and further away from runways and emergency services is connected with "guidelines to protect people"?

User avatar
andygolfer
Posts: 480
Joined: Sat 02 Jan 2010, 5:31 pm
Location: rayne, essex
Contact:

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by andygolfer »

Dan O'Hagan wrote:I think with Duxford, common sense would dictate holding off buying tickets until the display and crowd lines are known. As I say, spending money to watch stuff 1,000ft over Grange Road two miles away just for the sake of it does no-one any favours.

Support the shows. But not blindly. Voicing discontent will be the catalyst for change.


really! we are where we are and without doubt safety will be absolutely paramount this year, no chances taken whatsoever and a group of over-excited enthusiasts will not bear more weight than the need to do everything possible to prevent another accident causing deaths should it (and I hope not) happen. holding off buying tickets won't make any difference and only makes it harder for the show organisers re cashflow. If the shows are a bit more sterile then so be it, I will still support them otherwise there is less chance of them surviving than by choosing your option Dan.
By the way, I don't know where you are thinking of watching from but Grange road is nowhere near two miles away to achieve that you would need to be in Ickleton! I've just measured it on google earth and Grange road is 0.71 miles or 1144 metres from the crowdline, a significant distance but I've yet to see evidence that the centreline of Grange road is the proposed display line, I do expect it will be somewhere between there and the airfield boundary.

Flare Path wrote:The CAA want absolutely nothing to do with airshows and BADA had the opportunity to take on a more responsible role, they declined. Consequently, the much loved UK scene is in rapid decline - nobody wants any part of it.

If shows become watered down, expect people to be pissed off paying to view inside - you needed a pair of binoculars for the Abingdon event.


a pair of binoculars might be an advantage but not a necessity, see MikeyB's post here (sorry Mike, hope you don't mind me posting a link): viewtopic.php?f=8&t=72549
some very good images and some with very low focal lengths, the piston provost was 129mm and the Spitfire & Hurricane 151mm so posts saying that aircraft will be out of camera (or naked eye) range are unnecessarily alarmist. If this set is anything to go by then airshows will still be enjoyable. (and if the subjects are a bit further away then you've more chance of that precious topside shot).

I'm looking forward to the 2016 season despite the new regulations and Vulcan or no Vulcan (that probably stopped flying at just the right time) - first stop Old Warden on Sunday :clap:

andy
andygolfer

http://www.superguppy.co.uk
winner of Air-Britain photo competition 2019

User avatar
aviodromefriend
Posts: 2407
Joined: Sat 26 Jun 2010, 2:22 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by aviodromefriend »

RRconway wrote:moving the aircraft further away will make no difference it just means that in the event of an incident the aircraft will fall further from the airfield however the end result might still be the same if it lands in a populated area.
Interesting view, Have you told this to the CAA during the consultation? It might have been one of the most meaningful replies to their request. Displays taking place within the venue's boundary, isn't that what some (most?) of us want?
A weather forecast is a forecast and just that

Mike Moses, Launch Integration Manager Space Shuttle Program

User avatar
RRconway
Posts: 2358
Joined: Sat 04 Jul 2009, 4:09 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by RRconway »

Dan O'Hagan wrote:
Remind me again how moving aeroplanes closer to "secondary crowdlines" and further away from runways and emergency services is connected with "guidelines to protect people"?


Dan I have no idea. I have not read the recommendations and do not intend to, but from what I read on here the intention is to move the aircraft further away be that in distance, altitude or both.
If that is what you are referring to and you read my post I have already said I can't see it makes any difference other than to move potential incidences to above other areas of people.
The only (again mentioned on here by you) aspect that I think may make a difference is for a more sedate display.
Other than that I do not disagree with what you say about it making it more safe, it won't.
The only other thing we disagree over is wether we can morally use the argument of "it's going to spoil my enjoyment"I don't think we can, and I won't be drawn on that.

I may have over simplified by saying guidelines to protect people, but is that not the intention of the new legislation/procedures/regulation* please choose the word you prefer or supply one of your own.
I know you think you understood what I said, but I'm not sure you realise that what I said is not what I meant.

User avatar
RRconway
Posts: 2358
Joined: Sat 04 Jul 2009, 4:09 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by RRconway »

aviodromefriend wrote:
RRconway wrote:moving the aircraft further away will make no difference it just means that in the event of an incident the aircraft will fall further from the airfield however the end result might still be the same if it lands in a populated area.
Interesting view, Have you told this to the CAA during the consultation? It might have been one of the most meaningful replies to their request. Displays taking place within the venue's boundary, isn't that what some (most?) of us want?


No I didn't, and don't twist what I say to suggest I'm inferring something else.
I know you think you understood what I said, but I'm not sure you realise that what I said is not what I meant.

john001
Posts: 1306
Joined: Sun 30 May 2010, 7:25 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by john001 »

Dan O'Hagan wrote:
RRconway wrote:
strangelookingalien wrote:infinitesimal risk of something catastrophic happening and that is a risk that is worth taking given the pleasure they give.

Unless of course you are the one whose life is forever changed when things do go wrong, either inside the show as a spectator, or outside as a member of the public.

Safety should be considered always, but if safety is somebody's number 1 priority - they ought never to leave their house.

I'm sure all the professional pilots and aircraft engineers on this forum will be delighted to hear you belittle their professional philosophy in that way.

The two comments above, alone, prove that very few people on this forum are suitably qualified or have the experience enough in this field (myself included) to actually express an opinion that is valid or indeed can make a difference.
I seldom agree with Dan on here but I do understand his passion for our hobby, however what we are asking or what we are lobbying for is that guidelines put in place to protect people be changed, to allow us to carry on enjoying our hobby, at the risk of the lives of others, and that is both blatantly unacceptable and absurd.

Aside from the more gentle display which I can understand making things safer, moving the aircraft further away will make no difference it just means that in the event of an incident the aircraft will fall further from the airfield however the end result might still be the same if it lands in a populated area.

I don't know what the answer is, but ask yourself this, if we were successful in lobbying and removing the restrictions that might be employed and something did happen would you really be able to stand in front of the families of any people who died and say to them that it was okay because we got a good show and the risk was really .


Remind me again how moving aeroplanes closer to "secondary crowdlines" and further away from runways and emergency services is connected with "guidelines to protect people"?


If you look at the revised CAP in full it ask organisers to mitigate the risk of secondary crowds - so the two things should be looked at together. Organisers need to identify where secondary crowds may be and mitigate the risk be it road closures etc etc.

UKTopgun
UKAR Supporter
Posts: 1099
Joined: Sat 19 Dec 2009, 10:16 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by UKTopgun »

Airshows are going to need the full support of each and every person who loves aviation this year. I urge you emphatically not to hold off buying tickets at venues like DX for fear of neutered displays. Because holding off will mean shows die a death full stop. A revised show is better than no show. We all must accept that certain aspects of airshows have irrevocably changed. End of story. Rightly or wrongly the future of UK shows is what it is, so unless we wish to lose them all we must support the few that remain, and make sure we encourage everyone we know to do the same.

User avatar
Dan O'Hagan
Posts: 2293
Joined: Wed 13 Apr 2016, 6:05 pm

Re: 2016: The Biggest Season In History - The Enthusiast's R

Post by Dan O'Hagan »

UKTopgun wrote:Airshows are going to need the full support of each and every person who loves aviation this year. I urge you emphatically not to hold off buying tickets at venues like DX for fear of neutered displays. Because holding off will mean shows die a death full stop. A revised show is better than no show. We all must accept that certain aspects of airshows have irrevocably changed. End of story. Rightly or wrongly the future of UK shows is what it is, so unless we wish to lose them all we must support the few that remain, and make sure we encourage everyone we know to do the same.


So, you'll roll over and take it, will you? £35 to watch a lame pastiche of an airshow? No questions asked?

Exactly the attitude the CAA want to see.

Stand up and fight, man.

Post Reply