Truro Model Builder Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Reasoned, sensible article here: http://www.globalaviationresource.com/v2/2016/02/04/caa-airshow-charges-consultation-2016-cause-effect-in-overview/ And a very good 'how to' guide here: http://forums.airshows.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=71342 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truro Model Builder Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Reasoned, sensible article here: http://www.globalavi...ct-in-overview/ And a very good 'how to' guide here: http://forums.airsho...php?f=2&t=71342 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4u Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 There is a petition about these charges please sign and try and help the UK Airshows and display pilots. https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/120628 Guy 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4u Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 There is a petition about the new charges please sign to try and help UK airshows and display pilots. https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/120628 Guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Already done. Something about Golden Eggs? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truro Model Builder Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Mods- as we have two threads about this subject running, could we merge them please? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedbird Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Done it... Not that it will make any difference. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raguk Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 There is a petition about these charges please sign and try and help the UK Airshows and display pilots. https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/120628 Guy Done 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nheather Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 There is a petition about these charges please sign and try and help the UK Airshows and display pilots. https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/120628 Guy Done - if we don't do this there will only be two airshows that can afford to continue - Fairford and Farnborough. Cheers, Nigel 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raptormodeller Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Nothing is 100% safe, even sanding your beloved Airfix Spitfire has some 'risk'. Those VERY unlucky people died because they were at the wrong place at the wrong time. Aviation has never been without its risks. So why bring in these restrictions, since the Hunter crashed on a road and not on a grand-stand. Yes, deaths will always scare people and give them a kick up the a*se when it comes to safety, but are they necessary? I think not. There will always be hick ups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4u Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 An aircraft can come down on the M25 coming in or out of Heathrow or the M23 at Gatwick or any road or town for that matter ! Anything aviation has its risk as has been said above. So airshows have to be assessed to reduce the risk to the public I agree but lets make a sensible and rational decisions. The British Airshow Association will have its seminar next week so I think there will be a heated discussion on the matter of safety and the charges. Guy 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nheather Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 (edited) What they should be doing is stopping veteren aircraft doing aerobatics. At the height of my airshow visiting days 1990s when I would tour the country seeing as many that I could, the veteren aircraft used to do flat circuits and fly pasts. The aerobatics were left to the modern aircraft, particlarly those specifically designed and trained to do aerobatics. An as enthusiasts we were happy and respected that. In recent years a more diverse audience has been calling for more interesting displays. I have listened to interested by non-entusiasts at airshows saying "this is boring" when watching a hunter or vampire. Over recent years we have lost a lot of irreplaceable aircraft (fortunately most without human loss) because in my opinion the pilots were pushing the aircraft to do stuff they shouldn't be doing. Unfortunately the Shoreham tragedy was an accident waiting to happen. Cheers, Nigel Edited February 6, 2016 by nheather 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SleeperService Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 An aircraft can come down on the M25 coming in or out of Heathrow or the M23 at Gatwick or any road or town for that matter ! Anything aviation has its risk as has been said above. So airshows have to be assessed to reduce the risk to the public I agree but lets make a sensible and rational decisions. The British Airshow Association will have its seminar next week so I think there will be a heated discussion on the matter of safety and the charges. Guy In fact one did land on the M1 about three miles from where I sit back in January 1989. Since then M1 has been widened, A50 built and EMA activity up. Shows a certain inconsistency?? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzby061 Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 The existing regulations should be more than adequate, this is borne out by the fact that Shoreham was the first air show in the UK to suffer a civilian fatality since the Farnborough crash in 1952. A knee-jerk reaction like this will result in higher prices to all concerned, will kill off smaller shows & will not prevent a repetition of the Shoreham tragedy. There is just no logic behind this that would stand up to serious scrutiny. Petition signed & CAA form sent. Pete 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 What they should be doing is stopping veteran aircraft doing aerobatics. The aerobatics were left to the modern aircraft, particularly those specifically designed and trained to do aerobatics. Sorry but I have to take issue here. A Hunter was designed for combat, and fully capable of all the aerobatic manoeuvres that entails. In fact it is the only swept wing jet a/c cleared for inverted spin. If the airframe is cleared for safe flight, it is safe for aerobatics. You can also take many of the 'restored' Spitfires, which are in effect new builds with an old data plate. Is it 'veteran'? should it not loop and roll? If the manoeurvres are within it's cleared flight envelope, there is no reason why it should not perform them. The Vulcan and the Lancaster could and did both loop and roll, both acceptable in combat, but restricted for the fatigue index in normal use. Just because a Pitts is stressed to +/- 12g doesn't make it immune to structural failure or crashing, and it first flew in 1944! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head in the clouds. Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Totally agree with Bentwaters on the previous point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4u Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Sorry but I have to take issue here. A Hunter was designed for combat, and fully capable of all the aerobatic manoeuvres that entails. In fact it is the only swept wing jet a/c cleared for inverted spin. If the airframe is cleared for safe flight, it is safe for aerobatics. You can also take many of the 'restored' Spitfires, which are in effect new builds with an old data plate. Is it 'veteran'? should it not loop and roll? If the manoeurvres are within it's cleared flight envelope, there is no reason why it should not perform them. The Vulcan and the Lancaster could and did both loop and roll, both acceptable in combat, but restricted for the fatigue index in normal use. Just because a Pitts is stressed to +/- 12g doesn't make it immune to structural failure or crashing, and it first flew in 1944! Exactly correct and as long as the pilot is experienced enough and has a display authorization to preform aerobatics, totally agree about the Pitts and what about Tiger Moths , Bucker Jungmann , Stampe ect all pre-ww2. Guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raptormodeller Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Sorry but I have to take issue here. A Hunter was designed for combat, and fully capable of all the aerobatic manoeuvres that entails. In fact it is the only swept wing jet a/c cleared for inverted spin. If the airframe is cleared for safe flight, it is safe for aerobatics. You can also take many of the 'restored' Spitfires, which are in effect new builds with an old data plate. Is it 'veteran'? should it not loop and roll? If the manoeurvres are within it's cleared flight envelope, there is no reason why it should not perform them. The Vulcan and the Lancaster could and did both loop and roll, both acceptable in combat, but restricted for the fatigue index in normal use. Just because a Pitts is stressed to +/- 12g doesn't make it immune to structural failure or crashing, and it first flew in 1944! But then again you have to take into account fatigue index. That's a big factor when it comes to clearing any type of aircraft to do aerobatics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4u Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Didn't the Swiss Airforce aerobatic team use the Hunter ? ( Patrouille de Swiss). So the aircraft was more than capable ! Is the fatigue index linked to how many G's is the aircraft is put through and for how long ? I'm not an expert by no means but just interested. Guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Indeed the Swiss did, and excellent they were too, as did the Black Arrows, and the Blue Herons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4u Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Black Arrows was that the team that did the 21 ship loop ? Forgot about the Blue Herons ! I think the Hunter was a and still is a beautiful and capable aircraft one I have yet to do as a model but hope to soon. Guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 22. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FalkeEins Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Over recent years we have lost a lot of irreplaceable aircraft (fortunately most without human loss) because in my opinion the pilots were pushing the aircraft to do stuff they shouldn't be doing. I must admit I don't get this knee-jerk CAA reaction either; especially as its looking more likely that Shoreham was a case of the pilot doing stuff he shouldn't have been doing, not the aircraft ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raptormodeller Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 I must admit I don't get this knee-jerk CAA reaction either; especially as its looking more likely that Shoreham was a case of the pilot doing stuff he shouldn't have been doing, not the aircraft ? That's probably what happened... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
85sqn Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Folks if you wish to air your concerns to the CAA can I urge you to fill out the petition but also use this page to comment on the proposed charges: http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/modalapplication.aspx?appid=58 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now