e-Petition to ask the CAA to re-think their latest announcements.

Maybe MP’s need to be reminded that many of their voters are employed in aviation,the extra income generated by visitors to the areas will be lost .Nothing hurts an MP more than the loss of money and votes.

May I suggest that it is not only the charges it is also many other factors that will now change the face of UK airshows. Flying Display Directors shall now basically have to prove that an airshow is 100% safe before it can be deemed to proceed. Take for example Old Sarum last year. There were about 1500 people on the fort and a lesser number in the adjacent farmers field. Now the FDD will have to take measures to ensure that they are all ‘safe’ for any prospect of accident or injury. Same applies to all those on roadways and railways that abut display airfields. I am guessing that all the local authorities and their H & S will have a significant input to the FDD’s life now making it much more difficult to just get all his/her ducks lined up. Not only will the CAA fees rise, then there will be insurance cost rises etc. The root cause of the current rush to bathe everyone in cotton wool and create just another lobe to the Nanny State is the elephant in the room that no-one wishes to comment on. Airshows are an easy target for MPs, local authorities and the like to have a crack at under the banner of safety puffing out their chests on behalf of their constituents…… ” dreadful, horrible, terrible, we must do something about this…..” Where was the same political outrage at the British Airways B777 ‘glider’ ? Just tell me how there is a nexus between airshow charges and safety? Its easy to hide behind the banner of safety while at the same time trying to protect your own backside and the leather seat it sits in. Certainly there should be an investigation into the cause of the Shoreham incident and from that recommendations as to how improvements can be made but lets put a little bit of sober reality into this and not just the knee jerk that was expected and thusfar seems to have happened

CAA statement today:

Safety is our first priority and we believe these additional measures are necessary to further improve the safety of air displays.

The charges levied are completely disproportionate ‘to further improve the safely of air displays’. What are they planning to do that costs that much….close off all roads within 2 miles of the boundary and divert traffic???

Because at the end of the consultation period (in just over 2 weeks) the petition will be redundant.

Far better to encourage people to respond to the CAA directly using the line form at http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/modalapplication.aspx?appid=58 and to write to their MP than forlornly pin their hopes on an online petition.

Why not?

Another 5 1/2 months?

Posting to keep the thread on page 1

Mods, could this thread be turned into a ‘sticky’ for the duration of the petition?

Not unexpected. The CAA is accountable to no-one and sets prices in a non-competitive vacuum, so little wonder they laughed-off the petition and carried on regardless.

Give that they made a profit of £5.5 million last year, and that disposing of a couple of Board members would free-up another £0.5 million, they’re not exactly short of cash but apparently see this as a good opportunity to swell the coffers.

CAA statement today:

Home Our Work News
CAA statement on air show charges consultation
Our current charges consultation for air displays is based on two factors; that the regulation of air shows has historically been subsidised by other aviation industry charge payers and ultimately their passengers, and that the charges reflect the increased costs of implementing the additional safety activities outlined in the recent air display action report. Safety is our first priority and we believe these additional measures are necessary to further improve the safety of air displays.

The CAA has its own view:

http://www.caa.co.uk/News/CAA-statement-on-air-show-charges-consultation/

I’ve just heard from my MP, who after talking to his transport researcher, suggests contacting the CAA direct as the CAA is separate from Government. So on we go.

In some ways not surprising, in the context of Old Buckenham experiencing a fatal accident at their pre-airshow press event last year.

Old Buckenham and Seething have commented in support of the proposed changes….
http://www.wymondhamandattleboroughmercury.co.uk/news/airfields_in_norfolk_back_possible_changes_to_air_display_costs_in_wake_of_shoreham_disaster_1_4410272

Be interesting to hear what other airfields / airshow organisers feel about the new charges, especially the larger ones. Air shows at Duxford will certainly be hit hard in their current format.

Rob

At the safety proposals yes, at the price probably not.

Old Buckenham and Seething have commented in support of the proposed changes….
http://www.wymondhamandattleboroughmercury.co.uk/news/airfields_in_norfolk_back_possible_changes_to_air_display_costs_in_wake_of_shoreham_disaster_1_4410272

No but I could bang a copy off to him as well, I have tweaked it again 🙂 putting the emphasis on revenue and job losses. 🙂

Sent a copy to all 5 of my MEPs too and asked them to contact him.

added as a rider

Having read with disgust the CAA’s new scheme of charges for air shows and the effect this could have on both employment in the region and nationally and possibly the loss of aviation institutions, I am writing to you to request you raise these concerns with both the CAA and Robert Goodwill MP Minister of State for Transport requesting how he can justify charges rising by over 100%

Tony,

Sound ! Did you ask your MP to send a copy to Robert Goodwill asking him to get an explanation from the CAA ?

Ok I sent this to the CAA, and have forwarded it to my MP

Dear Sir / Madam,

I think these new charges are both wrong and ill-thought-out, it is a blatant attempt to legislate the air show circuit out of existence and will be a detriment to the whole warbird community with the real possibility of a loss of skill sets and employment.
Additionally a lot of shows are by their very nature operated to fund charities such as the Air Ambulance services, the loss of this revenue stream may also significantly effect their abilities to perform this vital service.

One cannot understand how you can justify such significant increases in charges well above the underlying inflation rate at a time when services are being cut back throughout the industry. You state you require additional oversight as a reason, are you in effect saying that you were previously negligent in that oversight?

This will have an effect to the military air shows and possibly even the BBMF’s and Red Arrows survival, if you in effect price a lot of air shows out of existence, where are you going to display the BBMF or the Red Arrows for that matter? once a year at Cosford? You then have problems justifying their military budgets and operating costs as the air show circuit dries up.
Not only do these display teams “fly the flag for Britain” they also are used to generate much needed sales both at home and abroad for the British aviation industries and sustain jobs therein.

It also all has a knock on effect, because without a plethora of air shows and displays to offset the costs of owning and maintaining warbirds, owners will simply not be able to afford the operating costs, possibly resulting in the sale of their aircraft, ( something that is already happening with some of the changes maintenance wise that has been foisted on them of late ) this will then in turn lead to a further demise of air shows as the acts are no longer in place to support them. Let’s face it, the likes of Cosford would then be a pretty short show if you took the civilian side out of it, and who would pay to see that, again to the detriment of all the supported charities and organisations.

You will in effect price the warbird fraternity and air show fraternity out of business, that then will result in you losing the revenues you would have previously received from operators of both the aircraft, maintenance facilities and air show organisers plus the plethora of supporting companies and organisations, which one would imagine far exceeds the recompense you will receive from these increased charges, the term self licking lollipop comes to mind.

So far over the changes we appear to have lost the Air shows at LLandudno, Sywell, Barton, the DH Rally at Woburn and the Reds have cancelled displaying at Torbay after 28 years of closing the show, and that is even before this consultation is completed.

I do implore you to revisit this and look again at what appears to be a totally inappropriate scheme of charges.

Yours

This will have a knock on effect to the military airshows and maybe even the BBMFs survival, think about it, if a lot of airshows are priced out of existence where are you going to display the BBMF or the Reds? Once a year at Cosford? You then have problems justifying their military budgets as the airshow circuit dries up.
.

With the Lancaster due to be out of the air for a while whilst having work done on it ,i wonder if the costs etc could mean that the momentum of keeping her flying disappears ,out of sight out of mind.

Tony – you just wrote your own letter – that’s exactly what you need to put into it. They are looking for a range of views, not a form letter signed 1000 times. Everyone who contributes to this forum demonstrates that they can write. It needs to be your point of view.

Will do

Reds have cancelled Torquay after 28 Years!

http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co.uk/BREAKING-Red-Arrows-Torquay-display-dropped/story-28708393-detail/story.html

Rob Feeley on 6th Feb, 2016 at 17:54 said:

UKAR have just tweeted that only 75 letters have been received by the CAA. Everyone must contact them

From

http://www.peoplesmosquito.org.uk/2016/02/05/potential-effects-of-caa-cap1373b-the-end-of-the-uk-airshow/