I know of several who self insure, they just cannot afford the premiums so put aside an amount each month into a fund whic then is used for maintenance.
They accept the risk instead of saying good bye to the premiums.

How does that work then ? :confused:

They accept all liability? Hope they aren’t anywhere near a school when there’s a “to-do” and they need to make good and support the scuffed and broken school kids for the rest of their lives. Or hospital or puppy farm or MOD establishment. Or me for that matter.

You can just imagine it in court
Judge: Youve broken this kid, how are you going to sort it out?
your mate: It doesnt matter cos I accepted the risk and I havent got a bean anyway.
Judge: That OK then.

Its against EU law anyway.

at what point does a bang on the nose following landing stop being a bang an start being a crash?

:confused:

crash
verb
to have an accident, especially one which damages a vehicle:

crash
noun
an accident, especially one which damages a vehicle

:rolleyes:

JDK
Should we not be angling for the ideal world ?
It certainly wont happen if an avoidable accident is just considered “C’est la vie”, any any proposal to learn and act upon its causes is considered empty & meaningless and discarded with contempt.

It seems you misunderstood what I meant by “offenders” . I meant offenders such as those already put forward –
– dont do aeros near the ground.
– dont run out of fuel.
– make sure the runway is long enough.
I did think that in the context of the general discussion & sentence I used it in that it would be apparant, my mistake. I wont list examples anymore, they are well known and it will only spark more debate.

Yes, my proposal is already in place, so why do these things keep happening?

Malcom – please, not to be confused with Malcolm.

JDK

The point is not to spin or enter an incipient spin;

This is the whole point. Why the need to get in that position? (Barton, Biggin Hill)

Please, where did

Your hope rather than action is a fine example of a rosy view

come from?

Blindly accepting accidents will happen and nothing more can be done is a very rosy viewpoint indeed. Accidents do not happen, they are caused, and I want to see & hear these machines flying for many years to come, but not at any cost to life. The machines can be rebuilt, and many have had to be!

What, exactly, is a real, actual change that can be made to reduce or prevent airshow accidents in the UK?

Learn and act upon the lessons of history. There is no place for repeat offenders in society, why ok in aviation?

As before, I look forward to an incident free 2009. It is entirely possible with the rules & regulations already in place.

MALCOM

A very poor understanding of accident and safety theory. Firstly those that have ‘learnt’ the lessons don’t have the accidents, so you don’t know about it because it didn’t happen. If we measure human achievement by error and accident alone, it’s a poor story.

:confused::confused::confused:

or, did you mean that your first sentance summarises the second? :):confused::eek:
The third sentance refers to mankind in general anyway.

I still maintain the lessons are not acted upon sufficiently to deem them learnt, and more planes and crew will be lost untill they are.

So, what lessons have there been from the past 5/10/20/30/100 years ?
Some of the usual suspects:
– dont do aeros near the ground.
– dont run out of fuel.
– make sure the runway is long enough.

which of these has not happened since that dreadful day, at an airshow or flying in general?

Everything else said is spot-on, but more need doing. Where should the risk assessment draw the line?

QI: Did you know the US military would not allow deliberate spinning of a F4U below 13000′? They learnt that one the hard way.

Modern safety rules have undoubtedly cut down the risk of accidents by creating a framework of acceptable behaviour and standards of competence for pilots and there has been a corresponding decrease in accidents.

Is that so? P38, Firefly, Vampire, P63, Mosquito ,Blenheim – and thats just a few from the UK. The list is still growing, and we will keep losing pilots & planes until flying is banned altogether. Is the risk acceptable?

No, but while others take it and fly on, I’ll still watch them display. I’d rather see a boring flypast than some thing akin to the above examples.

The CAA make changes designed to protect the public, and yet we still lose pilots and planes to the same old reasons.

The ground is still harder and less forgiving than metal or flesh, the engine still wont run without fuel, the embankment at one end of the runway and the hedge at the other end still collect victims – either individually or together.

These age old issues have NOT been learnt, nor will they be unfortunately.