Duxford to ban aerobatics???

Why has nobody mentioned insurance yet?

If I was asked to provide insurance cover for an air display the televised images of display aircraft crashing – as seen after Legends – would make my blood run cold.
I, of course, no nothing about how displays are insured but it must be the same as all other public events now – have a think back at firework displays from your youth and then think how many there are now (ok, in my area there used to be dozens – the Lions club, the Scouts, Sea Cadets, the local factory’s family display that we used to creep through the hedge to view and steal their hot dogs, the Bonfire Boys, the local football and rugby clubs, etc, but now there is just one that last year charged £5 for entry and lasted not quite 10 mins.) – even the combined churches group had to get insurance cover to perform their passion play in town at Easter (I suppose the god-bothering cross-carrier could have gone postal and clobbered people with his crucifix!). How very different can an air show be?
The obvious thought running through the money men’s minds will not be ‘there has not been a spectator accident in Britain since 1952’ but ‘Lets hope we are not covering an event the next time a spectator is killed’, whilst remembering Ramstein or that Russian one (In the Ukraine? Last year, year before? Time flies when…). For some people the fact that it appears on TV will make it real to them – it won’t matter that it happened a thousand miles away, it will flash straight back to them when the appropriate key word/phrase is mentioned. This will apply to insurance persons, the police, the media and the anti flying/ban fun brigade.
I am thinking that the insurance companies have started to make demands before they will cover another show – maybe. Who knows.

On a different tack does anybody find aerobatics boring – or is it just me?
I am talking attending air shows and oh, there’s an F16, and another F16, and there’s a Tornado and what is that? Small, white, got some writing on the side and across the wings but I can’t read it coz it merges with the clouds. Let’s go and join the queue for ice creams, burger, book/models/fluffy toy stalls, etc instead. Yes, I am referring to proper aerobatic displays using proper aerobatic aeroplanes. Unless you have powerful bino’s or lens then you might as well watch the kiddies accidentally released balloons floating away!
I remember SBAC Farnborough having some sort of competition a decade or so ago and nobody was interested – I was able to get a position right up against the fence in a good spot, set me up for the rest of the afternoon, no problem!
Not knocking the skills of these pilots of course – one of my all time memories is of watching a Pitts practise run through its display routine – with smoke – at least a couple of times late one fine summers evening on a Sunday after the ATC had closed at Goodwood, several years ago. Yes I do believe that the guy was too low but the display, to around eight people watching from the spectator compound, was as good as any I have paid to see and made all the better by the setting sun giving the pilot a beautiful red canvas on which to paint. Every other display has been ruined for me since then.

Ah. It is just me. Ok!

Flood.

Sean – the changes inplemented in the light of the crash at Farnborough certainly implemented a ‘safety zone’ which should
keep the crowd a safe distance from the crowd. However much as I would like the ability to predict the future I can say that some manouvers carried out at low level if unsuccesful can leave a pilot with little or no influence in where the aircraft is going.
The public safety is paramount – but this is not to say
that the pilot doesn’t enter the consideration. The public doesn’t wish to visit airshows to people die and equally the pilots want to climb out of the machines after a successful display.
If you carry out an examination of the statistic relating to, survival rates from aerobatic maouvers in comparison to other factor acccidents i.e engine failure you will find that the aerobatic manouvers are by far and away the greater cause of fatality. My point is that we should aim to display a machine in pretty much the way it would have fought. We cannot of course have weaponry but also would loops and barrel rolls be a part of
their role – I think not.

David Burke – of course you’re right, the safety of the paying public is the paramount consideration at an air show. But I’m not sure it’s the relevant consideration here. Maybe it’s time to wheel out once again the often quoted fact that no paying spectator has been killed at a British air show since John Derry and his observer Anthony Richards crashed in their DH-110 at Farnborough in September 1952. 26 spectators died then, and 65 were injured. But that was almost 51 years ago.

This extraordinary achievement becomes even more significant when you consider last year’s survey by the Air Display Association Europe, which showed that 6.8 million people went to air shows in Britain in the 2002 season. That figure is substantially the same as the last time the survey was carried out 7 years previously – and it continues to make air shows the second most popular outdoor spectator activity in the country, second only to football (soccer). (The main change between the 2002 and 1995 surveys was that rugby is now much closer to the air show figure than it was in 1995.)

A very important reason for this commendable sfety record is the gradual development of flying display regulation in Britain by everyone concerned, including, of course, the CAA. The British flying display regulations were actually thought to be such a good model that the European Joint Airworthiness Authority (JAA) adopted them without much change, so that the many European nations that use the JAA now have, or at least have access to, similar flying display regulations.

This is not, of course, to say that a displaying aircraft could never crash into the crowd – but that is made significantly less likely by properly thought out and established regulation.

But what we are considering in this thread is how to lessen the likelihood of the accidents happening at all – for quite obvious reasons. But do bear in mind that none of the tragic and deeply saddening accidents at Duxford has involved a spectator.

David couldn’t agree more. I have seen displays that have made me cringe because they were marginal, and I would rather see a flat flypast than see dangerous on edge manoeuvres. The public do defiantly deserve a safe show.

Loops are an obvious area to look at as there have been a number of incidents involving them, but if you look at the actual accidents stats I think that more accident happen due to a combination of factors maybe set off by a mechanical defect, and don’t involve actual aerobatics.

I hate seeing things banned without the professionals looking at the circumstances and coming to proper conclusions. Inevitably knee jerk reactions produce the wrong results.

I don’t believe that banning aerobatics is the answer, but a further tightening of pilot proficiency would I am sure go down well. Lots more Harvard’s to keep pilots hours up maybe?? But that’s jumping the gun

Tempest – there is no truth that ‘things go wrong -its’ human nature’ . People certainly make mistakes but you can minimise
the effects of this in how you carry out the procedures.
A prime example of this would be the implementation of H&S
legislation which occured in the 1970’s. The prime aim was to reduce accidents in the workplace by identifying procedure’s
which needed revising or abandonment for a safer method.
The facts are that if you identify a problem you can work out a
way of doing something more safely. If for example an aircraft enters a loop at too low a height it’s simple to work out what the end result will be. Now if this means that the CAA acts to alter the height at which looping manouvers can be entered i.e raises
it that should have the effect of giving a higher margin for variations that might occur in entry speed.
Simply put the ground doesn’t move up and that has been
a factor of a number of crashes in the last ten years – whatever pilots wish to do with their machines is up to them.
However as the paying public we have the right to have the event conducted in a way that both safeguards the public against
unnecessary risk and gives the pilots a margin for error .

Comparing aircraft accident statistics with car safety has to be apples for apples, Boeing 747 to Chrysler Voyager, A320 to Ford Mondeo. All car accidents to all revenue earning passenger flights, or perhaps our wonderful railway system.

Warbirds now let me see???????? Formula1 cars seems to fit the bill.

And oh one more point, don’t make the same mistake as politicians always make, that of assuming the public does not understand the subject. as it tends to get you into trouble as demonstrated continuously by our leaders

The Battle of Britain Memorial Flight are the custodians of a part our National Heritage, it would be irresponsible of them to fly these aircraft in a manner that would shorten their life or increase the risk of flying them. Steven Grey, Ray Hanna, and others own their aircraft, they love what they do, know the risks, and can do what they like with their aircraft. We are very fortunate and privileged that they agree to entertain us with displays of these aircraft. Things will go wrong, its human nature, and what’s more and frustrating is that several lessons will have to be re-learnt over and over again.

I for one love a well flown display that gets the heart betting a little faster. I don’t mean seeing something getting close to the edge, but displays such as the Breitling Fighters are just wonderful. Long may they continue, and for those that don’t like it, please stay at home, but try and avoid spoiling our fun.

As an aside I thought that the 3 Griffon Spits display was the best display at Legions this year. It demonstrated the speed and power of the aircraft superbly, and made the heart beat faster. It had that feeling catch me if you can. Just think what it would be like if they were able to open the engines to 25lb boost and do it, oh the sound and the smell of that 150 pn fuel
😎 😎

Originally posted by Bruce

RS712 is not having wings remade in New Zealand or anywhere else. I understand there is some delamination, much of this is probably the fabric covering coming loose on the airframe. It has never been recovered, so this is highly likely! Kermit keeps a maximum of eight aircraft licensed at any one time (TomW correct me if I am wrong), and the Mossie is not high on his list of priorities!

Anyway, my two pennorth – A well flown flat display is often more impressive than aerobatics. A good pilot can keep an aeroplane in view of the crowd at all times without having to enter into aerobatic manouevres. One of the finest displays I ever saw was Charlie Brown flying a flat display in BM597 at Salisbury Hall – very, very good.

Bruce

Hi Bruce, as far as I can gather Kermit has shown interest in bringing the Mossie back from Wisconsin but as of yet has nowhere to put it what with all the new hangars going up etc, once all the building work is completed I’d say that more of the aircraft will get some much needed TLC. The Mossie itself has, so I’ve been informed, got some de-lamination problems with woodwork and not just the fabric covering, the Florida climate isn’t the greatest place on the planet for wooden a/c 🙁 a bit like the trouble with Mossies in the Far East I assume. A well flown ‘flat’ display is much more applicable to a vintage type (unless it’s a vintage aerobatic type, Zlin etc) than an aero routine in my book, after speaking to a few ‘old boys’ I know who flew them during wartime and their responses to what they’ve seen during the routines is that even with their hundreds of hours on the type they wouldn’t think about doing such manoeuvers at low altitudes if they wanted to stay alive, low and fast was about as far as they’d go but even the greats made mistakes durig such passes, remember the pictures of Don Gentile’s Shangri La after the display for the press? Shuttleworth and The BBMF have it about right as how many types, and more to the point pilots, have they lost to display causes? There will be changes made this I’m sure of but I, like everyone else, am waiting to see just what will be changed.

Tom.

Hi Adam,

About twelve I think.

Cannot pass comment on how Duxford runs, but have flown with Denny Dobson and Mark Jefferies and worked in the aviation business for several years.

Patb – I talk to my son about the days when Spitfires and Hurricanes were used to defend the country and bomb and strafe
the axis forces – cannot imagine how I could explain to him
that they were infact designed for aerobatic displays !

Banning Aerobatics in Warbirds

I don’t think that Duxford should ban aerobatics in Warbirds. What they should do is ban crashing whilst performing aerobatics in warbirds. Better still, ban crashing completely!

UK based P51 cockpits vary quite a bit, some being stock ww2 but with different radios etc, others being very different. It tends to depend upon when it was rebuilt and the level of authenticity applied to the rebuild. To a certain extent this happens on other types as well.
Familiarity with cockpit layout is one thing, but being aware of the type characteristics is something different, currently the P51’s we have flying are all D models and the characteristics are very similar from one aircraft to another. Spitfires however have a variety of different marks with different engines, weights etc so therefore different flying characteristics.

How ‘standard’ are warbird cockpits ? Has each P-51 owner/operator had their aircraft restored to different levels ie radio and other non ww2 equipement added. I would guess that familarity on type would not help if the ‘layout’ of equipment varies.

DOUGHNUT

Originally posted by Steve Bond
warbirduk. Excellent and very valid point – the areas of conversion training and currency are certainly of concern among the regulators. I hasten to add of course, that there are many owners / operators who do not fall into this category, but it is a worry.

It would be very interesting to see the currency on type over the last 30 days for many of these pilots, this is NOT a dig at the pilots, this is for their benifit more than anyone elses when flying different types lots of numbers go around in your head, do they come out in the right order on the correct type? Ask to see Dan Griffiths bag of check sheets, he needs a small van! & I’m sure he is not alone in that but It may come a time when you jump out of a mk5 into a mk9 with the wrong check list………….. (to jump out of a mk5 into a mk9, I wish!!):D
It all adds up to a very high work load.
Picture this,
You have an afternoon display slot, say 16.45 so you decide on a 16.25 start up as there is a fair way to taxy to the live runway, so you ask for ground power to be at your aircraft at 16.20, ground power is late, bless em, when are they ever early? start up at 16.30, warm up, get the t’s & p’s (temps & pressures) start taxy, hot day no airflow through the rads on the ground engine is getting warm, so is the cockpit! eventualy get to the entrance to the runway, carry out power checks, engine by now is getting near the max temp, held while someone lands, It is now 16.42 luckily the show is 10min behind so your display slot is now 16.55 You take off, climb out reduce RPM & cool the motor then go to the hold & stooge around untill you are called in to display…………….
So, as you can see, there is a fair work load on the pilot & not much time to do it in, maybe he is on his third display of the day at the same airshow in a different aircraft, It doesn’t take much for something to alter the smallest item to throw the whole chain of events out of the window & the pilot must be constantly up dating & evaluating the situation by the second not just by the minute! I hope this helps to give you an idea what goes on.:)

Steve… I stand corrected.. I was trying to get my head round the whole situation.

I do believe currency is an over riding issue, many pilots at Duxford fly countless hours and are always methodical. I am not saying that any pilots fly without been current, just that maybe more time in the sky above and beyond the legal minimum would be good. Charlie Brown for one is at Duxford nearly every weekend, (a great chap in my opinion) I have lost count of the times I see them pull there V out of the hanagar and go flying at the weekend. Other types on the airfield get flown seldomly and it is a shame the operators can’t afford to put them up more often to train the pilots fully but understand unfortuately it is money that keeps these planes in the sky and lack that puts them on the ground.

dazdaman wrote

“Like I keep telling my manager at work (when referring to movies), you can NEVER have enough explosions! “

If you want fireworks wait until November 5th, the big pyrotechnic shows put on in the US and those that used to be at North Weald are, in my opinion, a distraction that only leads to the appearance of danger. It is not necessary to improve the quality of a flying display.

Regards Aero’s in Warbirds

The Breitlingers do fly too close, Ok I know they are some of the best pilots around but it does not add anymore than seeing four solo’s or maybe a pairs display as sometimes flown be two Spitfires or P-51. With only two aircraft the leader can concentrate on avoiding the ground and the wingman can play ‘follow me leader’, if either aircraft has a problem a simple “break break” over the R/T would end the display.

I sometimes wonder about ‘tail chase’ displays surely as the leader turns to complete his wingover to return to the airfield display line he and his wingmen must loose sight of each other, with more aircraft in the circuit the chances of reducing the safe separation between aircraft, or passing though each others wake turbulence is increased. I remember thinking that at last years Legends show the second from last Spit seemed to always take a slightly different line through the wingover, thus was slowing becoming separated from the rest of the formation, this appeared to be having a detrimental affect on the last Spit as he ‘jinked’ to avoid get too close.

As has been said earlier, when is an Aero not an Aero ? Straight and level, followed by a climb and a wingover or bumbell turn, entering into a max power flat 360″ turn, someone even suggested a barrel role would be OK. As a non pilot what is required is a safe height at which a recovery to level flight and hopefully an emergency landing.

DOUGHNUT

warbirduk. Excellent and very valid point – the areas of conversion training and currency are certainly of concern among the regulators. I hasten to add of course, that there are many owners / operators who do not fall into this category, but it is a worry.

Another point to note, (and please take this the right way without jumping all over me) is pilot currency on type, to be able to leap from one type to another can some times be difficult, I lost a good friend Pete Clark that way some years ago, he was the demo pilot for the Slingsby Firefly & as I recall it he flew his 240hp display routine in an aircraft with a 180hp engine because the larger engine aircraft became un-serviceable! an easy mistake to make but, It cost him his life, and he was one of the most thorough pilots around. So currency on type must be a factor, practice flights have to be paid for, don’t get me wrong I’m not saying that owners reduce flight training but it has to be a factor to look at.
A few weeks ago I was stood next to an owner while a pilot was displaying to renew his DA (display authorisation) when the owner was heard to say, I wish he would hurry up, the fuel for this is costing me £xzy per minute!! The pilot had not flown the aircraft for around 4 months! Surely he should have some time to get acquainted with the aircraft before launching into a full display?

so if landing and take off are the most dangerous areas of flight for warbirds (and indeed all aircraft), if we want to keep them flying, other ways of reducing the accident figures have to be looked at. Stopping aerobatics would seem a logical option, despite a hard one to come to terms with for all of us.

I hate the idea of taking my son to airshows in future and boring him of stories about the good old days when Spitfires did loop the loops.

But can we clarify that we are talking about a possible restriction that would apply to airshows only. Then the issue will be that if private warbird owners are still going to be free in their own time to do aerobatics, there does seem little point in restricting our right to take pleasure in watching them. This them moves the argument on to how more likely bystanders are to be injured by a warbird doing aeros rather than straight and level.

Looks like am am arguing with myself now! brain starting to hurt.

All,
FYI, 3500 people are killed on Britains roads each year.