A quick tally shows that UK League football attendance last season (excluding non-league, the Scottish lower divisions and Northern Ireland) was over 33 million. That means the total, when all attendances at games from pub leagues up to Internationals is added in probably tops 50 million.

The difference is that figures for the number of tickets sold for football will include a great many to people who will attend a number of matches over the course of the season – there are a lot who will attend every match of their favourite club, so there will be a lot less than 50 million people involved . Whilst there are a small core of aviation enthusiasts who will attend several airshows each year, I would suggest that the vast majority of airshow spectators will only visit one, so the number of tickets sold will be much closer to the actual number of individuals who attend an airshow.

Whilst it is 18 months since the last Waddington, their last few shows sold out to maximum permitted capacity, and the last one had to be pre-purchased ticket only. Other shows are similarly attended to capacity (or near to capacity). Other shows have seen similar levels of attendance.

I think the popularity of airshows amongst the general non-aviation nut public is sufficient that most airshows (certainly the larger ones) could withstand a fairly significant increase in entry charges to cover the increased costs – the current charges are pretty small when compared with the entry fees for other popular events such as music concerts (£50+ per ticket is not unusual, and you probably only get a couple of hours entertainment if you’re lucky), and major sporting events (football included). Even at £30+ a ticket, airshows can still make a relatively cheap family day out and would still compare favourably with some alternative attractions (for example, a pre-booked ticket for a family of four going to Alton Towers for a day out will set them back over £130, and that would cost about £175 at the gate if not pre-booked).

It only seems to be a small core of ‘aviation enthusiasts’ who moan and whinge about the ticket prices 😉

My own view is that much of the CAA proposals are designed to give an impression of activity whilst keeping it all within sustainable boundaries which the airshow industry can absorb. By tightening up training and certification (which was probably necessary irrespective of the unfortunate events last summer), the extra costs involved and extra charges imposed should be within a proportion which efficiently run events should be able to absorb or cover with a fairly small increase in entry fees. The CAA have almost certainly factored in some leeway to allow themselves to appear to be backing down in response to the protestations of the airshow community (which they will have expected).

I think some event organisers and aeroplane operators will use the changes as a convenient excuse for packing up their involvement, but I would hazard a guess that there will probably be other more significant reasons for the disappearance of some airshows (and aircraft operators) which will have more to do with the way their enterprises are run (we’ve seen two prominent organisations come to the end of their time recently, and it was pretty obvious that their problems were principally self-inflicted).

I think we will perhaps look back on 2015/16 in years to come, and wonder what all the fuss was about?

Out of interest, what kind of maintenance has been done to XH558 since retirement? Has she been started or taxied?

Certainly been out of the hangar at least once for an engine run, and according to the latest newsletter, the engineering team will be carrying out a minor service over the next few weeks: to quote from said newsletter –

“Although no longer permitted to be flown, we will be keeping her in the best possible condition.
One of the first jobs will be to disarm the cockpit canopy gun and crew ejector seats, as these serve no useful function on a ground-running aircraft, but present a significant safety hazard. The new service regime will focus on XH558’s structure, systems and engines, ensuring that they remain safe and don’t deteriorate”

Think about it at the start of WW2 Airfield’s sprang up all over the country almost over night.

I daresay they they were built mostly on farmland and not built over built up areas,these empty[ish] expanses of countryside are now going to be high density housing which the surrounding infrastructure just cannot cope with

In the case of the airfields that ‘sprang up’ during WW2, most were built on farmland that was compulsorily acquired from the landowner (or acquired under a threat of compulsion). Such land will therefore fall under the umbrella of what are known as the ‘Crichel Down Rules’ which apply to Government land acquired by threat of compulsory purchase between 1935 and 1992. Under these rules the former landowner, their successor, or the current landowner have to be offered the opportunity to repurchase the land. A great many of those offered such land so far have taken up the offer, and in the main have returned those former airfields to agricultural use.

Presumably the airfields in question here were not built on compulsory purchase land between 1935 and 1992, and the Crichel Down rules don’t apply?, or the former landowner/successors did not wish to buy the land back and the Government/MOD is free to dispose of the land as they wish?

I’m looking forward to buying limited edition XH558 aluminium saucepans and G-VLCN razorblades. When does scrapping commence?

Unlikely to happen in your lifetime 😉

I think perhaps some people are (once again!) (deliberately?) misunderstanding the aims and intentions of the ETNA project that VTTS are embarking on. From the 3rd November VTTS newsletter:

The team that put Vulcan XH558 back into the skies and operated her successfully within one of the world’s most demanding safety regimes is now available to help other heritage aviation projects happen. As one of the four pillars of the ETNA Programme we are building, the Heritage Aviation Restoration & Operation activity will pull together those skills that have allowed us to deliver the world’s most challenging return-to-flight programme; so that we can help others achieve their historic aviation goals………………..

….We are already embarking on a consultation process with other aircraft owners and restoration projects and the response has been enthusiastic; we hope to be able to make announcements in coming months on some important projects. It’s worth making the point that we are not aiming to take over activities. We can lead, manage, restore, operate or simply advise. And of course, we may be tempted by a new project ourselves, if the right opportunity arises.

Note the sentence I have highlighted 😉 The specifics of VTTS involvement with TPM are still being discussed, so we don’t yet know how far their input will go, and the above certainly indicates them possibly being involved with more than one project in some capacity.

PlanesTV have now put up an edited youtube vid of the main highlights of the flight (including the missed approach and the ‘roller’:

Final touchdown moment wasn’t out of sight behind the hanger – it was in full view of the press and others watching from the pan. The issue with the PlanesTV youtube video was that the stream broke down just before 558 touched down. The missing section has been added to the end of the video, but needs editing back into its proper sequence to make sense.

Tell that to the non engineering folk whom just want to profit from photographs and live close to Brunty.

And what about the ones who don’t??

If it is a question of making money; Bruntingthorpe and Finningley are only about 90 miles apart which I would not regard as any meaningful distance. The truth is that the income from a few aviation photograhy enthusiasts a couple of times a year isn’t going to provide the funds to keep 558 in existence (let alone maintained in good running condition). As with the last 8 years, most of that money will have to be sourced by other means.

Fact is – Bruntihgthorpe doesn’t offer a long term future for 558, and it would be unlikely that the long term educational commitment that was an integral part of the contract for the lottery grant would be able to be fulfilled.

I don’t think it matters ajot what happens to 558 or where it resides; the same voices will continue to vociferously denounce and deride anything to do with any aspect of the future for XH558 regardless, with the same old tired arguments. I have no doubt they will continue to do so until their dying day.