Curse me for saying it but perhaps one too many Spitfires. For once the Saturday show was better then the Sunday. The closing act with MH434 was as good as ever and is a fitting tribute to Ray Hannah as much as the aircraft.

The Vulcan was good to see on Saturday but obviously far more restrained then it was in a former life. But thats economics.

When I first saw that photograph I wondered where it was parked up, but having just been up to the ‘Bump’ I now realise it is just south of the control tower. I can only assume they’ve kept it out of the public eye this weekend to allow the crew some rest.

We have a bit of a parking space problem on the bump these day. So the grass south of the tower was a good long term spot. Also it enables a higher level of security to be provided which is becoming increasingly important to our ‘country cousins’.

Liberty Belle now parked at Biggin near the control tower. Rumoured to be staying until Monday.

Quote “What I fail to understand is why, in his eagerness to develop a new style of aircraft, he feels the need to ‘diss’ all the existing technologies in such an exaggerated fashion. It weakens his case, rather than strengthening it.”

The whole debate got off on the wrong foot because of it. The responses were defending old technology rather than answering the question. A classic case of diplomatic failure, perhaps it is due to spending too much time in the outback.:rolleyes:

Back to the question…..

Old technology was as good as we could get it at the time and if handled within its limitations is still perfectly safe. Yes GA is slow at moving forwards partly because of the dominence certain engine and airframe manufacturers have historically had. Newcomers such as Cirrus are starting to break the mold and innovations are coming forward quite rapidly in this century when compared to the 1960’s, 70’s and 80’s. But as many have rsponded here there are problems with cost, weight, and customer demand. The customer demand probably being the biggest hold up IMHO. Many people fly for fun and are quite happy with minimal technology, others prefer aviation nostalgia and fly the ‘oldies’, many just want to fly something commonplace like a Cessna and there is nothing wrong in that.

But how big is the potential market for high price glass cockpit Cirrus or high performance Columbia?

Everyones entitled to their opinion.

In your motorbike analogy it could be said that making fast bikes at all is not a step forward in technology and safety. A fast bike in the wrong hands is a death trap no matter how modern the gizmos. It could also be said that by employing modern ‘safety’ toys you actually tempt riders to overcook things and trust technology to save them resulting in a step backwards. I suppose we could make bikes with a low top speed thus improving safety but who would buy one? Your original bike despite its ancient technology is perfectly safe provided it is ridden sympathetically and in accordance with traffic and road conditions at the time.

I fly a Yak52 which although built in 1983 uses much technology dating back decades. It is tried and tested technology which has been de-bugged over a long time and I feel a darn more safe in that than a more modern Cessna or Piper.

If advancing technology is so great why are we still suffering death and injury? We should have designed it out of daily life by now!

Cool where about’s are you based? My dream is too own a Yak 52 one day and base it at Headcorn and hope to have some colours like this http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5659221 or like a YAK 50 at headcorn which is in RAF colours 😀

James

We are operating out of Biggin Hill. 😎