RIAT 2017 (Discussion & Participation Thread)

[ShutterPlane]

Does anyone yet know what's flying on the Friday? I think Friday is the only day I can attend.

[Red Dragon]

Well the Polish MiG-29 has been announced for Sanicole, so I wonder if all it European display dates have been confirmed? It (along with any other display assets) might show up on the RIAT page tomorrow?

It has been a fantastic few days, and hats off to Tom and the staff, as for me the Wedgetail, B1 and B52 are the stars. Yes it is a shame they are not flying but we cannot have everything, we should enjoy them as who knows when their next RIAT appearance will be?

[CJS]

I must admit that there's a small part of me that's rather embarrassed that RIAT felt the need to issue a statement explaining and justifying the B-1B and B-52H being static and not in the air.

Ofc in an ideal world we'd love some static machines, and some in the flying display! But man alive, I'm hust happy to see them pencilled again.

Presumably the above opinion is a minority one, in which case the tin hat is duly donned.

It makes sense for DBH to put the statement out I think. Before I joined this forum I don't think I'd have had a clue how these things work and yes, I'd probably have wanted to know why they weren't in the flying display. Which is exactly what my dad asked me last night when I told him of the updates (he's making a rare appearance this year - in fact as rare as a static B-1b!).

Hopefully it'll stop some of the failbook nonsense in its tracks.

Let's also remember that if the only update today is the RJF and Breitling Jet team, that's 2 more expertly flown displays to be added. And one from an airtattoo stalwart that we all know we'd miss if they didn't come.

[rdchawk]

It looks like the Wingwalkers might not be at RIAT this year, the current schedule for them doesn't have RIAT on it.

[Brevet Cable]

As was posted in the 'Exciting Aircraft' topic a couple of days ago ( post #8 )

[Luke28]

I must admit that there's a small part of me that's rather embarrassed that RIAT felt the need to issue a statement explaining and justifying the B-1B and B-52H being static and not in the air.

Ofc in an ideal world we'd love some static machines, and some in the flying display! But man alive, I'm hust happy to see them pencilled again.

Presumably the above opinion is a minority one, in which case the tin hat is duly donned.

It makes sense for DBH to put the statement out I think. Before I joined this forum I don't think I'd have had a clue how these things work and yes, I'd probably have wanted to know why they weren't in the flying display. Which is exactly what my dad asked me last night when I told him of the updates (he's making a rare appearance this year - in fact as rare as a static B-1b!).

Hopefully it'll stop some of the failbook nonsense in its tracks.

Unfortunately it didn't, even after DBH had put the statement up there were still multiple idiots questioning why they weren't flying.

[Gripenjetphotos]

RJF confirmed for flying plus C-130 in static

[Brevet Cable]

Best update ever....since the last 'best update ever', and until the next 'best update ever', that is....

[AARDVARK]

I must admit that there's a small part of me that's rather embarrassed that RIAT felt the need to issue a statement explaining and justifying the B-1B and B-52H being static and not in the air.

Ofc in an ideal world we'd love some static machines, and some in the flying display! But man alive, I'm hust happy to see them pencilled again.

Presumably the above opinion is a minority one, in which case the tin hat is duly donned.

It makes sense for DBH to put the statement out I think. Before I joined this forum I don't think I'd have had a clue how these things work and yes, I'd probably have wanted to know why they weren't in the flying display. Which is exactly what my dad asked me last night when I told him of the updates (he's making a rare appearance this year - in fact as rare as a static B-1b!).

Hopefully it'll stop some of the failbook nonsense in its tracks.

Unfortunately it didn't, even after DBH had put the statement up there were still multiple idiots questioning why they weren't flying.

I do love the fact that people get so defensive that other people (or idiots as you deem them)aren't allowed to question!!
What I stated was if the organisers have a wish list of certain aircraft, surely it wouldn't be beyond the relm of imagination to ask if it's possible or plausible for said aircraft to be in the flying display ,and it's then down to the Air arm to then say yay or nay to that request ,if you don't ask you would never know !!

[pbeardmore]

the debate re flying/static is an interesting one, I assume for some forum members, Sanicole is a "no-go" due to the lack of static?

my trip 2 years ago was just fantastic and I never missed the static, just goes to show that even within our group, our motivations for attending airshows varies wiidely.

For those who enjoy static, I am pleased for you re the B52 and B1 and I obvioulsy appreciate the effort in getting them there but, for me, adds little. Its all about the flying

[AARDVARK]

the debate re flying/static is an interesting one, I assume for some forum members, Sanicole is a "no-go" due to the lack of static?

my trip 2 years ago was just fantastic and I never missed the static, just goes to show that even within our group, our motivations for attending airshows varies wiidely.

For those who enjoy static, I am pleased for you re the B-52 and B1 and I obvioulsy appreciate the effort in getting them there but, for me, adds little. Its all about the flying

My sentiment exactly ...
I applaud the organisers for getting any/every A/C they do, but to me, personally, a B52/B1 holds very little interest on the ground, having seen them in static in Europe/Australia over the last few years...
But I guess it's down to the USAF to make that decision!

[Chopper81]

Anything flying, be that arrivals, display or departures is a bonus!!!

I do RIAT on the cheap and enjoy the arrival days as much as show days, static doesn't do much for me but i enjoy seeing the static turn up!! Cant wait for the next few months of updates as i feel we have some good stuff to be announced!

[jalfrezi]

I'm sure the organisers request a flying display for most items, but if there is no display pilot for the season, or the air arm refuses to have it flying at all, then static is better than nothing.

[Harvo266]

Let's be honest - If it was up to DBH the B-1B & B-52 and other rare items would all be flying daily for as long as possible, but it genuinely is not their choice. If the USAF had a B-1B or B-52 with a display or demo, then you could bet DBH would have secured it but the USAF do not have a demo of the bombers. I understand everyone cannot make it to arrivals/departures but honestly, when else would you be able to talk to crews of such a beast of an aircraft and see the said aircraft?

Trust me, I wish they were flying big time, but I am extremely excited to see two of (in my opinion) some of the world's best aircraft up close and have the opportunity to meet the pilots and crews.

Harvo

[Luke28]

I must admit that there's a small part of me that's rather embarrassed that RIAT felt the need to issue a statement explaining and justifying the B-1B and B-52H being static and not in the air.

Ofc in an ideal world we'd love some static machines, and some in the flying display! But man alive, I'm hust happy to see them pencilled again.

Presumably the above opinion is a minority one, in which case the tin hat is duly donned.

It makes sense for DBH to put the statement out I think. Before I joined this forum I don't think I'd have had a clue how these things work and yes, I'd probably have wanted to know why they weren't in the flying display. Which is exactly what my dad asked me last night when I told him of the updates (he's making a rare appearance this year - in fact as rare as a static B-1b!).

Hopefully it'll stop some of the failbook nonsense in its tracks.

Unfortunately it didn't, even after DBH had put the statement up there were still multiple idiots questioning why they weren't flying.

I do love the fact that people get so defensive that other people (or idiots as you deem them)aren't allowed to question!!
What I stated was if the organisers have a wish list of certain aircraft, surely it wouldn't be beyond the relm of imagination to ask if it's possible or plausible for said aircraft to be in the flying display ,and it's then down to the Air arm to then say yay or nay to that request ,if you don't ask you would never know !!

Which is exactly what they do, if you had read the statement instead of getting 'defensive' over me getting defensive then you would have known that.
Its the people asking why they're not flying, after DBH have explained the very reasons why they're not flying, that makes them idiots.

[Harvo266]

On another note....
Last week or so, a B-1B pilot twitter account namely 'Bone Driver' shared a video of an A400M going through the Mach Loop with a comment something along the lines of; 'If an Atlas can do it, a bone can do it'. And when people commented asking for advance warning, the pilot did inquire about how long it takes people to get up the loop.

I don't know if it was all a tongue in cheek tweet, but is it not worth considering if after RIAT the B-1B may do the unexpected??

[Luke28]

the debate re flying/static is an interesting one, I assume for some forum members, Sanicole is a "no-go" due to the lack of static?

my trip 2 years ago was just fantastic and I never missed the static, just goes to show that even within our group, our motivations for attending airshows varies wiidely.

For those who enjoy static, I am pleased for you re the B-52 and B1 and I obvioulsy appreciate the effort in getting them there but, for me, adds little. Its all about the flying

Not at all, Sanicole is looking like a brilliant flying line up but then again so is RIAT, the fact RIAT also gets rarely seen planes on static is a bonus.

And to be fair RIAT has always been promoted on its flying and static display.

[Skyflash]

the debate re flying/static is an interesting one, I assume for some forum members, Sanicole is a "no-go" due to the lack of static?

my trip 2 years ago was just fantastic and I never missed the static, just goes to show that even within our group, our motivations for attending airshows varies wiidely.

For those who enjoy static, I am pleased for you re the B-52 and B1 and I obvioulsy appreciate the effort in getting them there but, for me, adds little. Its all about the flying

I love Sanicole dearly and am hoping to make it across this year again, and I also love seeing a RIAT with a full-to-bursting static park. It's part of what makes RIAT so special and in the years when the static has been thin, I personally have always felt that something is missing.

Ultimately, IMO, RIAT and Sanicole are so different that to attempt any meaningful comparison of the two is bordering on futile.

[JensSr]

the debate re flying/static is an interesting one, I assume for some forum members, Sanicole is a "no-go" due to the lack of static?

my trip 2 years ago was just fantastic and I never missed the static, just goes to show that even within our group, our motivations for attending airshows varies wiidely.

For those who enjoy static, I am pleased for you re the B-52 and B1 and I obvioulsy appreciate the effort in getting them there but, for me, adds little. Its all about the flying

Not at all, Sanicole is looking like a brilliant flying line up but then again so is RIAT, the fact RIAT also gets rarely seen planes on static is a bonus.

And to be fair RIAT has always been promoted on its flying and static display.

The thing with sanicole is all the stuff they confirm is not always coming.. lot of the times demos get cancel.
Same as the rumors about Solo Turk not coming to sanicole is already coming. Alto the organization Confirmed them.

[clearstone]

JenSr - Cancellations happen to any and every airshow. Cancellations can happen at any time, even at the very last minute. I don't think Sanicole are announcing anything they are not expecting to come (at the time of publishing) as with every other airshow.

[Chrisse]

Cancellations always happen; We (Sanicole) have written confirmation of all items announced up to now. There are other items we have been told about but cannot announce until it is confirmed in writing.
If there are rumours about Soloturk, I reckon that may be due to Erdogan laying off something like 100 pilots last week. We have not received news though.

[Ian G]

On another note....
Last week or so, a B-1B pilot twitter account namely 'Bone Driver' shared a video of an A400M going through the Mach Loop with a comment something along the lines of; 'If an Atlas can do it, a bone can do it'. And when people commented asking for advance warning, the pilot did inquire about how long it takes people to get up the loop.

I don't know if it was all a tongue in cheek tweet, but is it not worth considering if after RIAT the B-1B may do the unexpected??

No. End of!

[MC hammer]

the debate re flying/static is an interesting one, I assume for some forum members, Sanicole is a "no-go" due to the lack of static?

my trip 2 years ago was just fantastic and I never missed the static, just goes to show that even within our group, our motivations for attending airshows varies wiidely.

For those who enjoy static, I am pleased for you re the B-52 and B1 and I obvioulsy appreciate the effort in getting them there but, for me, adds little. Its all about the flying

And just to prove your point about an individual's motivation, I been present on the arrivals days and seen flying display fast jets going through their paces during rehearsal, with barely a glance from some people, only for them to get interested again when the gear comes down for landing and the prospect of a landing shot. I've been guilty of this many a time.

You have to look at RIAT as a whole, decide what your priorities are, what your budget is and allocate however many days you can spare to get the most from it. So for me, it's arrivals days, sleeping overnight in the car, which according to CJS's "How do you take your RIAT" poll elsewhere in the RIAT topic, puts me in a tiny minority of just two people, therefore static or flying is not a big deal to me, although of course I would not pass up the chance to see the USAF B bombers rehearsing. Then of course, you have to decide which P&V to go to, and again, it depends on what you want from the day. So I agree, our motivations for attending airshows do vary wildly, as they do throughout the year. I'm sure anybody who has seen me asleep in the car at Mildenhall, while nothing happens for hours on end, will think I'm mad but I like USAF heavies, so for me it's worth it.

The problem with social media is, that having been given a reasoned explanation as to why some aircraft are for static only, those that understand, and who probably did not need the explanation anyway, keep quiet, and those that don't understand, take to their keyboards once more.

[aviodromefriend]

Does anyone yet know what's flying on the Friday? I think Friday is the only day I can attend.

What I've seen: Reds, BBMF and Thunderbirds. Others might be decided if they will be flying on Friday a lot closer to the show.

RJF confirmed for flying plus C-130 in static

And wil they bring the Jordan promotion exhibition again, and if so, will it also be open on Friday this time?

And about the people asking about flying of static participants, if the answer is given already, then asking the question really is making those people look like idiots.

[Airshowhammer]

Would like to see a heavy in the flying that isn't an A400m.