Interesting viewpoint on the new display reg`s from Hangar 11 Facebook page

I watched the Spitfire display on the Sunday from near the hangars and the perspective made it seem just as close as ever although on the crowdline it did appear a little further away.
Both displays were beautiful and flowing.

I think the key will be location/restrictions ofadisplay site as to the visual impact

Yes indeed.

I watched Brian Smith in the OFMC Spit also at Bicester, and thought if you did not know of the recent airshow trauma, as a spectator, it looked pretty much the same as we have been used to, ie beautiful.

All is not lost.

Mr. T’s display at Bicester yesterday in his P-51 was a joy – nice big open airfield.

The CAA has hugely increased the number of staff assigned to administering air displays and performers.

They have held ‘consultations’ where the message, not implied but stated is ‘ this is what is going to happen, whether you like it or not’.

Often the staff in key roles have almost no background in air displays, some have no background in aviaition, including one recently transferred from the NHS.

Within the CAA, the fear that the organisation/personnel may be found negligent/ responsible for the disaster is having a paralyzing effect, such that much ongoing work in other areas has been shelved. This will not be properly resolved until Public Inquiry and inquests ( and insurance payouts) have run their course.

Commom sense & the CAA in the same sentence is as much of a joke as it is in the workplace. H&S is in the same line as the CAA, just aload of bureaucratic A-holes wanting to do as much as they can, to make things as impossible to complete as they possibly can with a view to it not being possible to do.

It baffles me why it is not possible these days to just admit that nearly everything we do has some level of risk and some times accidents just happen. The chances of getting killed at, or near, an airshow are still pitifully small compared to a thousand other things we do on a routine basis.

The problem is that in these days of litigation no one seems to have to take any responsibility for their own safety. Ever since I attended my first airshow in my teens I have always been aware that there is a certain amount of risk in attending an airshow. When I have photographed aircraft from outside the boundary of any airfield (not on airshow days I might add) I have always been careful to position myself so that I am unlikely to become involved in someones landing accident. Equally I have photographed rally cars in the heyday of Group B (Metro 6R4, Ford RS200 etc) but I made sure I had a big tree to jump behind and space to try to run away if something went wrong.
In short I carried out my own risk assessment and made the best provision I could for my own safety.
The trend seems to be that anyone can stand anywhere and if they get hurt it isn’t their fault and having got hurt they will sue the behind off anyone and everyone to compensate them even if they have been a victim of their own stupidity.
As far as I am aware the Galloping Ghost accident was caused by a combination of poor workmanship and poor design. The shoreham Hunter crash appears to have been caused by pilot error. Both were tragic events and no one wants to see them repeated but you can change the rules as much as you like and you will never be able to avoid all accidents.
The way the modern press sensationalise every incident/accident must have put pressure on the CAA to do something but introducing rules which restrict a pilots options in the event of them getting a little out of position and force them to pull more G which must increase maintenance costs is counter productive.
We need a common sense approach which will allow pilots a little freedom whilst disciplining those who deliberately overstep the mark and charges which make it viable for airshows to continue and at the moment we seem to almost have the worst of all worlds.

Reminds me a bit of the rules changes at Reno after the “Ghalloping Ghost” disaster. From what I have read it seems most pilots racing at Reno would agree that all the new rules and regulations on the course have only served to reduce safety and increase risk. It baffles me why it is not possible these days to just admit that nearly everything we do has some level of risk and some times accidents just happen. The chances of getting killed at, or near, an airshow are still pitifully small compared to a thousand other things we do on a routine basis.

the person signing himself MOG is age 68 and has had many years of display flying, that he chooses to step down is no surprise ,I do not think this applies to many and also i do not see the regulations being set in stone and they will be reviewed.Indeed some already have gained exemptions.

Yes, more than ever before, we need to try to somehow take a positive view on the future of air displays in the UK.

I hope we are not just whistling in the dark. If this season is incident free, we may be a step closer to a workable compromise.

the person signing himself MOG is age 68 and has had many years of display flying, that he chooses to step down is no surprise ,I do not think this applies to many and also i do not see the regulations being set in stone and they will be reviewed.Indeed some already have gained exemptions.

Aeronut………. It’s already happening.

I can foresee pilots asking the airshow organiser “Who is your CAA chap?” and the replying “Sorry I can’t work with him.”

My dear Peter,

I think you have said it all! After 43 years of great satisfaction displaying many types of aircraft, from Wessex – through Sea Harriers and big pistons – to vintage bi-planes, I will not be renewing my DA at the end of the season. The new requirements and increased insurance burdens have made it uneconomic to provide aircraft for many air displays and very many small venues have, quite reasonably, decided against aerial participation.

I will continue to perform aerobatics above 500′, outside controlled airspace, for my own pleasure – and that of my selected friends. I will continue to utilise the (free) NOTAM notification scheme to protect these activities but I will no longer be paying the CAA’s exorbitant clearance fees.

It is a great shame that things have come to this pass.

Mog

http://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/574055-death-airshow-6.html

OK, so.. the CAA decide on the rules as they go along for each display? I guess they always could, but it seems it was applied sensibly before.

So now we end up with pilot being told “no aerobatic manoeuvres outside the airfield boundary” at Biggin Hill.. which on a non-airshow day they CAN do? Hang on, am I missing something here.. AWAY from the display, the aircraft cannot perform aerobatic manoeuvres that are allowed next to a crowd of thousands? And if there wasn’t an airshow happening somewhere else the aircraft could perform the same manoeuvres in the same airspace? I can see how this is a knee-jerk to the Shoreham accident, but it ain’t too logical.

Surely changing the rules as they go along for each display is going to lead to all kinds of problems as pilots have to squeeze and further adapt routines continually throughout the season? And then there is the restriction on space meaning MORE physical stress on both airframes and pilots, in ways that are unpredictable where the goalposts keep moving.

There surely has to be a review of this situation.

Basic flight safety is to fly the aircraft. I cannot see how distracting the aircrew before the flight with endless planning and niff naff (i.e. Disrupting the bubble) and then imposing tight restrictions is safer than before. A proper risk based analysis would decide what is necessary making things better and what has little or even negative value. There is a safety/risk term, ALARP – as low as reasonably practical. It may have been taken too far.

I wonder if we will see a time when the pilots will just decide enough is enough-i bet the CAA hope so

It would seem the new rules not ease the problems of display flying but are compounding them, cant fly here dont fly there means that higher G maneuvers being pulled which in turn puts more stress on the Ac and it pilot who actually is making decisions as he goes along as to pull tighter or not, when he can let the sick off a bit which to me is a safer bet but what do I know?
Peter has said it and explained it from the pilots view, we mere mortals on the ground must yet again take our hats off to these guys and a big thank you to one and all for sticking with it.