boff180 wrote:Wanting special treatment for not attending the airshow is the same as someone wanting to pay to stand outside a rock concert so that they can “just listen”. It’s ludicrous.
Conversely the RIAT organisers want 'special treatment' by closing a footpath for a week. Why would a council close a public thoroughfare for the benefit of a revenue event? Ludicrous.
Imagine instead if the road was closed for vehicles and onlookers could set-up their chairs on the road. No risk of people-traffic collisions, nice and safe. Now that'd raise a stink. Pedestrians can be told where to go without a concern but car-people don't like being the victims. "I had to drive ten minutes in my air-conditioned luxury to reach another entrance. Diabolical!"
You understand that the primary purpose for the closure is to assist in stopping secondary crowds forming under the display area, and not to stop ‘freeloaders’ don’t you?
boff180 wrote:Wanting special treatment for not attending the airshow is the same as someone wanting to pay to stand outside a rock concert so that they can “just listen”. It’s ludicrous.
Conversely the RIAT organisers want 'special treatment' by closing a footpath for a week. Why would a council close a public thoroughfare for the benefit of a revenue event? Ludicrous.
Imagine instead if the road was closed for vehicles and onlookers could set-up their chairs on the road. No risk of people-traffic collisions, nice and safe. Now that'd raise a stink. Pedestrians can be told where to go without a concern but car-people don't like being the victims. "I had to drive ten minutes in my air-conditioned luxury to reach another entrance. Diabolical!"
I think the clue is in the word 'thoroughfare', in the past it hasn't been a thoroughfare during RIAT, as people have setup chairs and ladders blocking the path and road for local people (many of whom I'm sure would like to see RIAT end altogether). I guess the area is now deemed an unacceptable risk, maybe FAA rules are being brought more into line with CAA rules with regards to sterile areas?
No point bleating about it though, times change as do regulations (not always for the better), take it up with the powers that be....
IATthenRIAT wrote:To a large enough proportion of people £55 is too much money for them, that would feed a couple for a week, also many people (even if they could afford the ticket price) may not be able to plan in advance, as thier life may go from day today. This makes it akward as if they were able to travel a distance to visit the show and take the chance they could get a ticket at the entrance, what are they to do if they can not get in - suffer? what if they have traveled by train then bused or even walked to the show - then to be turned away with no where to go - not very nice for them. Whilst it may seem harsh, if you cannot afford the ticket price you cannot go in. It is not your right to attend the show. I am a biker I can not plan in advance I get about 1 days notice to be able to plan a day out, I would need to bike it down and see if I could get in with my noisy harley, I sometimes like to leave the bike and car share for some company, but its not always possible I am also a biker and I have no idea why that would mean you can't plan in advance. Sounds like complete nonsense if you ask me.
Brevet Cable wrote:You do realise that the vast majority of those killed at Shoreham were eff-all to do with spectating freeloaders -- they were merely driving down the road en-route to somewhere else.
Yes, but my point still stands. People have been dying on the A27 for years and will probably continue to do so. The vast majority were killed by car accidents. Personally I feel driving on the A27 is risky, but it's a risk I would take.
Brevet Cable wrote:You do realise that the vast majority of those killed at Shoreham were eff-all to do with spectating freeloaders -- they were merely driving down the road en-route to somewhere else.
Yes, but my point still stands. People have been dying on the A27 for years and will probably continue to do so. The vast majority were killed by car accidents. Personally I feel driving on the A27 is risky, but it's a risk I would take.
Great, but you’re not the insurance company are you... People may have been killed on that road for years but 11 in a single day is a far higher density than any other accident on there
Well, no - and that's a fair point. But it doesn't mean i'm wrong about the whole Shoreham tragedy being blown so far out of proportion that people seriously refer to it on an aviation forum as something other than a freak accident.
Brevet Cable wrote:You do realise that the vast majority of those killed at Shoreham were eff-all to do with spectating freeloaders -- they were merely driving down the road en-route to somewhere else.
Yes, but my point still stands. People have been dying on the A27 for years and will probably continue to do so. The vast majority were killed by car accidents. Personally I feel driving on the A27 is risky, but it's a risk I would take.
But a lot of the people killed on the A27 that day wouldn't have accepted the risk, and some of them probably weren't even aware of the increased risk over a normal day.
I'm sorry, but you can't compare risks from an entertainment event to everyday risks that people face just by going about their normal lives.
Personally I think risks from entertainment events are more valid than risks associated with things that are involved with normal daily life.
My point is that to properly assess the risk of everything one does based on every freak occurrence that could possibly happen would be absurd. There were already regulations in place to prevent the Shoreham accident from occuring and had these been obeyed we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Im a Vet ex para I saw most of our actions falklands, Iraq, Bosnia, Afgan etc - I received a few physical reminders from them but also have PTSD (Post traumatic stress dissorder). This is my reason for not doing the whole show day from inside the event, I can cope with crowds but only for short periods and as long as I can walk away to find space, this is why I go to the camp sites and have only ever walked down for a brief time to get a cupple of general static shots, so I can work out whats visible off my pictures.
IATthenRIAT wrote:I'm a Vet ex para I saw most of our actions falklands, Iraq, Bosnia, Afgan etc - I received a few physical reminders from them but also have PTSD (Post traumatic stress dissorder). This is my reason for not doing the whole show day from inside the event, I can cope with crowds but only for short periods and as long as I can walk away to find space, this is why I go to the camp sites and have only ever walked down for a brief time to get a cupple of general static shots, so I can work out whats visible off my pictures.
WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN !!!
Just looked on google maps and there is a section with no headge row, so there may still be a chance to see something even if walking along the new path to its end point.
Was watching this thread at work yesterday...luckily I had brought some popcorn into work with me !.....haven't posted much this year,but it seems a number of threads on the RIAT page have been playing out like script versions of episodes of The Twilight Zone for the last couple of months.
This particular thread would no doubt be the basis of a script involving parallel universes
IATthenRIAT wrote:Just looked on google maps and there is a section with no headge row, so there may still be a chance to see something even if walking along the new path to its end point.
Google Maps imagery is 9 years old. Also there will be barriers up to prevent you from seeing. If you can’t cope with crowds there are plenty of spaces at the ends of the crowd line where you will find very few people
I don't know what you're all worried about, the wind will change direction and they will all land from the west, so problem solved! The rerouting of the footpath will be a wasted exercise! No doubt this fine weather won't last either, so take your wellies and brollies!
I was chatting to my brothers and sisters (angels) and we are thinking of coming down about 50 of us, we plan to come down camp it out and do a few slow Noisy passes and get a few pics from our bikes. Dont know about Tonka's being noisy - wait till you hear us.
IATthenRIAT wrote:I was chatting to my brothers and sisters (angels) and we are thinking of coming down about 50 of us, we plan to come down camp it out and do a few slow Noisy passes and get a few pics from our bikes. Dont know about Tonka's being noisy - wait till you hear us.
I will be on the airfield so as much as I love bikes (Speedway is my thing) I wont be seeing or hearing you..
You sure you can afford the fuel for a couple of passes though I.t.R.?
I2R is getting more and more like a character from a Ricky Jervais series/ sketch. A 60yo ex Para with PTSD who getting anxious when surrounded by crowds but is a member of the 'Angles', who drives a 'hog' (list price from £6k) but can't afford £50 ticket to RIAT etc etc.
You should get a screenwriter to write a script and submit it to the BBC for when when Citizen Khan and Mrs Browns Boys needs replacing!
After a long week at work it gives everyone a good lol!
G67 wrote:Conversely the RIAT organisers want 'special treatment' by closing a footpath for a week. Why would a council close a public thoroughfare for the benefit of a revenue event? Ludicrous.
It's entirely normal for public roads around concert venues to be closed for up to an hour after an event to allow pedestrians to safely leave the venue. That includes major roads in to large cities, on a weekday
An hour? People in Cardiff would kill for the roads only being closed for an hour!
For a normal event, it'll be something like 4-6 hours minimum. More often, the roads will be closed anywhere from 12-24 hours either side of the event.
For something like the Champions League Final they were closed for anywhere between 3 days and a week. For the NATO Summit, it was anywhere from 3 weeks to around 2 months
