Paul FNatural selection?
Re 20
Charlie, think it thru’. There is no way that my taking a dive thru’ the windscreen of my car in any way diminishes or enhances the protection of the majority.
John, I agree that education would be better than criminalisation, and I undertand what you are saying in that there may be no direct effect on others should you choose to take the risk of being smeared across your own windscreen, but you are wrong ont he latter – there may well be knock-on effects on lives of others if you are unlucky enough to take a trip into or through yur windscreen…. as has been said earlier, in a society with a finite ambulance and A&E resource, treatment of your injury may be utilising finite resources such as ambulance service, surgeon, care staff etc (and/or assciated funds) that cannot therefore go to the aid of someone else at the same time. So, while you are being wiped up off your car bonnet/dashboard, someone else may be in need of those same resouces for another reason.
Perhaps an option is to remove the enforcement law, and to require all drivers wishing to drive without belts to purchase a compulsory “seat belt exemption bond” to the value of the likely extra costs involved in any accident (i.e. costs for longer attendance by emergency services, costs of medical equipmnet used, costs of staff involved in treating a major head trauma rather than a badly bruised chest/abdomen, cost of head trauma hospitalisation and rehab, etc etc etc?
The income from “seat belt exemption” bonds could then be used by the government/state etc to acquire additional emergency and medical services, thus ensuring extra resources were available to treta the increased number of more serious injuries without detracting from level of service available to those in society who are prepared to wear seatbelts.
If/when the bond holder has an accident that sees them suffer injuries that a seat belt would have prevented, they then have to purchase another bond if/when they return to driving (unless of course their experience leads them to see the sense of wearing a seatbelt thereafter).
The value of the bond could be returned once a driver surrenders his licence at the end of his driving career.
Anyone caught driving without a belt and without holding a bond would be prosecuted, with penalty being points on licence and a fine to the value of a bond, with loss of licence if unable to pay.
Make it clear that vehicle drivers are 100% responsible for his/her passengers wearing seatbelts too. If my pax don’t want to wear seatbelts then I tell them to get out and walk or call a cab, as I will not drive them. So far no-one in my car has ever refused to belt up…
Nanny state – yes, perhaps, but based on common sense and statistics. A State has to do the best for the majority of its population, and taking action to reduce demand on emergency services (and on post trauma hospital care etc) has to be to the benefit of the majority.
Statistics in UK clearly show that wearing seatbelts reduces severity of injury far more often than it “traps” people in a crashed car. Thanks to TV and Hollywood far too many people think cars “flip” into raging rivers, and/or burst into flames, at the slightest shunt than is the case.
Still, “natural selection” usually ensures the “best” equipped survive within a species, so if some portions of the populace wish to chance removing themselves from the gene pool early (via impact with a laminated windscreen) then why should I worry, it will remove those least able to assess risk :dev2:
Paul FCan anyone enlighten me as to how these are carried out?
Will the paint wash off in the rain?
Will the paint underneath be damaged?
Are the markings painted or stuck on?
Hi Robert,
I believe some of the “overall” scehmes are applied using a special type of paint that can applied as normal but is susceptible to changes in pH (i.e. acidity or alkalinity), and so is fairly robust againt rain erosion, but can be washed/scrubbed off if a slightly alkaline solution is used.
The change in pH needed to disslve/soften the temporary paint is not sufficent to attack the underlying permanent paint (or airframe) beneath, so the underlying paint/markings etc are unaffected.
(I have worked in the pharmaceutical industry, and they too use this type of technology to apply thin “paint-like” water-based polymer coatings to tablets so as to ensure they resist the acidic conditions in the stomach which would destroy the drug, but then break up rapidly in the more alkaline environment further down the digestve system so the drug can be absorbed.).
Paul F
Paul FA day with changeable wind direction and variable wind speed, an aircraft with an engine that requires consderable “management” at crucial points in a flight, and an airframe that is very susceptible to changes in wind speed/direction by virtue of it’s low “density” in flight, and with taildragger properties on the ground, all added to a final approach over a decidely solid obstacle.
I am sure the pilot concerned never took off with the intention of bending the thing, nor of perhaps misjudging his rate of descent in combination with the unpredictable wind either. Maybe he could have kept a little more height in hand on approach, but thats easy to say with the benefit of hindsight. Another few feet of height, or a less marked change in wind speed at some point on approach and people might have been praising him for a well judged landing, rather implying the opposite.
Mistakes happen, and aviation can be a very unforgiving environment in which to make them, specially when there is a crowd of “experts” looking on who would, of course, have done so much better faced with the same situation in the same aeroplane themselves.
I am sure the pilot has gone over the events time and again to work out what he might have done differently, and I am sure he has learnt from the experience, so why not cut him a little slack…
Paul FWishing everyone a safe trip home.
Thank you to all that have made this happen, from Thwaites to the BBMF and not least the CWHM without whom, none of this could have been possible.
..
TonyT, I sent CWH a very similar email earlier today. What an epic summer they, BBMF, and Thwaites have given us all!
Well done to everyone involved on both sides of the Atlantic in arranging, crewing, hosting, and supporting/funding V*RA’s visit, and all the special flights etc, and please accept my heartfelt thanks.
Here’s to a safe and smooth return flight so that V*RA and all at CWH can record ” (Epic) Mission completed “
Paul F
Paul FMike Oakey gave an excellent talk on his career in aviation publishing to the Shoreham Airport Society last evening, and intimated a couple of times that there were imminent major changes afoot at a well known journal he used to edit, but he wouldn’t give any details…
Interesting to hear about Aeroplane (Monthly) during his time there, and the subsequent sale to IPC etc.
If you get the chance to hear Mike give the same talk again I’d recommend it – plenty of anecdotes involving names and ‘planes from the past, with some of his own excellent photos from the time to illustrate the subject.
Paul FEcho what Elliot has said.
Ditto what Mark (and Elliot) have said.
I would question the comment that Duxford has a poor road network – it sits within 100yds of a Motorway – short of being surrounded on all four sides by eight lane motorways how could it possibly be better connected? Maybe if the A505 was a dual carriageway then that would help smooth entry and exit over the last mile or so, but if the vast majority of a crowd of 24,000 try to leave a small area over a very short period of time it will always cause traffic queues. Queues on arrival are not helped by the need to merge south-bound and northbound queues via a roundabout.
Maybe traffic should not be allowed to approach Dux from the southbound M11 carriageway – could it be routed in via a long detour from A14 down through Royston, and then on to A505 eastbound, to be parked South of A505 at LWH end, whilst traffic from Northbound M11 would be parked on northern site at the Superhangar end, with traffic from each car park having no choice but to leave back the way it had arrived…. probably not practicable I guess unless A505 was actually closed to non-airshow through traffic for the weekend between Royston and M11 junction.
And anyway, as has been said, for the one or two shows every five or six years where there is a real traffic snarl up, I think Duxford do as well as can be expected, given they have no reall issue for the majority of their events.
At least at Dux you have the chance to wander around a large number of hangars full of static aircraft etc, and thus delay your departure until the rush has started to ease, unlike many shows where all you have to wander around once flying stops is a few closing burger-vans or retailler stalls, and a funfair….
Even if Dux had it’s own railway or bus station and most people came by train or bus, all that would happen after the show is that instead of queuing cars there would be queues of homeward-bound passengers awaiting the next train or bus….
For any event that is likely to attract mega-crowds (e.g. Dux BofB anniversary show next year perhaps?), then maybe making it a pre-booked ticket only event, and capping tickets at say max 20000 spectators per day might help (though it would also limit/reduce IWM revenue), but it would have to be widely publicised that there were no “on the gate” tickets, otherwise people would probably still pitch up hoping to get in – and of course a great many people might not want to commit early (due to the unpredictable nature of British weather), so closing pre-booking too early would also rule out a lot of “last minute decision” attendance, possibly further reducing revenue.
I think all involved did as well as can reasonably be expected under truly exceptional circumstances – well done to all at IWM last weekend.
Paul F
Paul FI thought since then Fairford was under care and maintenance?
Adrian
Hi Adrian,
B52s and B2s deployed to Fairford earlier this summer, so it’s still very much alive and kicking as a “short stay” base, and as a stopover when US-based aircraft are heading further east, and my son who works in Swindon says he has seen U2s in the area this year too.
Paul F
Paul FI’m trying to work out whether the weekends fiasco was to do with over hyping or just a case of two crowd pleasers (2Lancs and The Red Arrows)being on the one traditional busier day.
I saw the 2 Lancs at the Combined Ops at Headcorn and there wasn’t any overcrowding despite the event being well publicised well in advance.
Hi The Bump,
I suspect V*RAs absence from Bournemouth and Shoreham lead to a number of enthusiasts heading for Duxford, given it was our last chance to catch her in the south(ish) before she leaves UK later this month.
Had she attended Eastbourne (on the Sunday), or Shoreham (either day) I wouldn’t have gone to Duxford – but once I “missed” her at Shoreham then Dux was pretty much a “no brainer” decision, so I pre-booked before web bookings closed.
Given the size of the disappointed crowds at Shoreham (and I suspect at Bournemouth too), and the relatively easy trip up to Dux from South Coast compared to the few other remaining venues where both Lancs were to display (rather than just fly past), I wonder how many extra vistors the “lost” weekend on the South coast added to Sundays crowd.
As Mike Currill says, the entry fee, plus half a tank of diesel and a horrendously early Sunday alarm, were worth it just to see the two Lancasters – the other Dux “acts” were a bonus so far as I was concerned.
Had V*RA made Shoreham and Bournemouth that earlier weekend as planned I suspect crowd numbers at Dux may have been noticeably lower on Sunday?
Paul FProblem one solves problem two, no?
Aye, that it might, and that in turn might also reduce Scottish Healthcare and welfare costs as illnesses and absences due to obesity would thus drop too – maybe Mr Salmond isn’t as stupid as he appears…………:highly_amused:
Heard earlier today that the powers that be reckon final outcome of the vote will be known when final counts are declared around 7am Friday……
I just hope there is sufficient turnout to rule out any argument that the (no doubt very close) result might not be valid. For example if results are very close, as little as <5% of the eligible voters might swing the result either way, so if overall turnout is less than say 95% then it would leave room for the losing side to argue that it is not a valid vote, as the non-voters might have swung the result their way…..Is there a minimum % turnout criteria for Thusday’s vote to be accepted by all parties, or could (theoretically) a very small turnout still decide the future of Scotland?
Another thought struck me, I heard somewhere that there is an 18month transition period ( to full Independence I assume?) if the vote is “Yes”. Given UK Parliamentary and legislative processes takes an age to decide anything, and there are so many fine details to be sorted to seperate two “conjoined” States and their equally conjoined economies, is 18 months a realistic timescale to cut all the ties and for the Scots to set up all the necessary administrative infrastructure to be truly Independent? I suspect they may have little choice but to farm many admin functions back to English Agencies for a lnger period than 18months until they can set up their own regulatory bodies, agencies, and procedures..?
Paul FSo what will we do with all the scottish foreign nationals we will have living over here if they get independance, surely they won’t be able to vote?
Surely not, and likewise, I presume we’ll have no MPs from north of the border sitting in Westminster either, as they will have no right to directly affect English/Welsh/NI Parliamentary decisions.
Of course, that also means they’ll have no say in how England decides to set policy with regard to any cross-border matters/relationships going forward…. whatever decisions current Parliaments may make during any “disengagement” process might perhaps be overturned later by the new-shape English/Welsh/NI Parliament ?
Paul FWhat about IT and comms infrastructure?
I assume (possibly wrongly) that there are more feet (or metres) of telephone line/IT network “per head” north of the border than there are per head south, so the costs of maintaining the Scottish network will be higher per head, meaning higher call costs and/or higher standing charges….?
And assuming the mobile networks all set up Scottish entities, then English, Welsh and NI subscribers in Scotland, or Scots in England/Wales/NI will see mobile calls subject to a roaming (or maybe a “roamin’ in the gloamin’“) surcharge?
Likewise for old fashioned snail-mail….Royal Mail will no longer need to cover deliveries to the Highlands and Islands, so postage costs may fall south of the border as, but “Scot-Mail” (or whatever the Scottish Mail delivery entity becomes) will probably have to put charges up, and/or drastically cut back delivery schedules to remote areas and islands….
All small beer compared to things like the carve-up effect on healthcare/NHS, defence, welfare/pensions and so forth, but all probably likely to add a few more pennies(cents 😉 ) to the household ‘cost of living’ north of the border.
Paul FYesterday 14 Sep P-51 “Ferocious Frankie” was unable to retract one of its u/c legs after take off from Goodwood for its display slot.
Yes landed safely, albeit very low on fuel (I overheard). Crash tender was “stood to” for the landing, but fortunately not required. FF landed gently, ran down runway, then turned off onto grass at walking pace about 3/4 way down, she stopped, gave a quick burst of throttle (to clear plugs?) and then shut down. Tractor and towing arm then despatched to drag her in.
Paul FThey never told me to get there early…
I suspect the problem was all the single occupant vehicles that take the same space up as any other car that is full of people; something they need to address.
So how do you suggest they manage the ‘single occupant’ issue then Stuart?
I drove up from South coast yesterday, on my own. I did offer my free car seats on another forum but had no takers, and given I had booked in advance no-one was likely to hitch a lift in hope of getting a gate ticket, especially given IWM announcements last week that there would be limited on the gate availibility. Indeed, my brother did think of joining me, but when he saw IWMs warnings on their webpages last Friday he (sensibly IMHO) decided not to take the risk of finding himself effectively stranded outside Dux for the day while I enjoyed the show until I was ready to leave.
If they force me to use some sort of off-site park and ride as a “solo occupant” then I won’t bother coming at all as I like to be able to return to my car during the day to drop of purchases rain-gear and/or collect lunch/camping chairs rain-gear etc.
I cannot see any way the number of “single occupant” cars can be reduced easily, short of perhaps charging entrance “per car” regardless of number of occupants – say min £75 per car (i.e. equivalent to say three pre-ordered tickets) – but that would rule me out from any Dux show unless I have a couple of family members, or near neighbours, who are willing to commit a number of weeks ahead of display date, as they are not aviation nutters like me then they probably won’t want to commit until they know weather forecast is reasonable etc.
Maybe a better policy is for attendees to plan ahead and allow for/expect traffic to be heavy, and to check IWM website for warnings?
I arrived at northbound M11 junction at 07:30 Sunday, and was happily parked up in the Advanced Ticket holder car park on North site by 07:50, likewise I left the fence line by Dux control tower at 17:05, and was happily on M11 southbound by 17:15. All it took was a very early start (from South Coast), and a bit of forethought on my part about when to leave the show. (No, I’m not being smug, but thirty years of attending airshows plus a bit of common sense has taught me that the benefit of “getting there very early” is well worth the horribly early alarm clock).
Lack of advance warning – err, nope, sorry, IWM did send out warnings and put them on their website too.
IWM could (should?) perhaps have put more warnings up earlier on their web site about limited ticket availability on the day, especially as they would have known advanced sales were high ten days or more before the event. But I had booked my advance ticket on line, and got an email notification late last week about likely traffic issues etc, and IWM webpage also carried similar warnings last Friday, so info was out in the public domain for those that had the forethought to check – what more can IWM be expected to do Stuart?
Given Dux is right on top of a major trunk route (as was the old Boscombe Down display), and they seem to have traffic flows well organised adjacent to the gates, it’s simply the usual problem of 25000+ people arriving over a few hours, but the vast majority all trying to leave over a much smaller time-frame. Biggin Hill always used to be an exit nightmare, and it took us 60mins to drive 1/2 a mile when trying to get out of Shoreham three weeks ago – its all part of the airshow experience (unfortunately), it can be avoided but often requires you to sacrifice teh last act (or acts). Alternately take the other approach and pack a “post-show” picnic, I/we often sit in an airshow, or Festival of Speed, car park eating a nice relaxed picnic while watching others trying to fight their way out.
Maybe IWM should make major events like that (and Legends etc) “pre-booked tickets only”, with large road signs to that effect on the day (as does Goodwood Festival of Speed etc) at least that would mean there should be few(er) vehicles adding to queues on M11/A505 that don’t have entry tickets, but even so I’m not sure that “non ticket holders” was the major issue, it was simply down to the number of tickets they sold.
Paul FHow can anyone vote “Yes” with so little info to go on…?
And, of course, once Scotland is no longer part of UK it will no longer be an EU member. Sure, the EU may simply “rubber stamp” an application to join, but it seems that if they insist on retaining the pound that could be a major barrier to entry. And I doubt EU will accept another new member State unless they are happy to “pay their way” in terms of paying subsidies etc, and of course, Scotland will not necessarily gain any benefit from any EU “concessions” England may negotiate. Has Salmond actually asked the EU what conditions they are likley to set if Scotland wishes to join as an Independent State? Has he publicised the EU’s answers for the electorate to read and consider?
So, not only are there questions over car tax, but any Jocks who travel in EU States (including England, Wales and NI) may find they are no longer entitled to free emergency medical treatment, as their EH1C cards (or whatever they are now) may no longer be valid…
And they may not be able to bring in as much booze and ciggies as they want (for personal consumpton) from EU States, just the usual restricted “International allowance” – unless of course Salmond is happy to see a potential source of import duty revenue lost. Only small things among a myriad of other “disadvantages” in Independence that seem to be as yet unconsidered by many, let alone the fact the are still unanswered, but two small things that may well impact upon the cost of a voter’s holiday “sur la continent” .
Salmond will definitely find his place in history is assured, albeit possibly for reasons he may not have expected – any dream of being seen as some sort of “Braveheart II” seems unlikely to be his long-term epitath.
Voting “No” always leaves room for a another referendum at a later date once more details have been worked out (and/or leaves room for a gradual approach to self-rule via “Devo-Max”), but voting “Yes” really is a “**** or bust” decision, with no option to retract that decision however unpleasent the consequences may start to become.
How could anyone possibly vote “yes” when so much of the consequence is unknown? However much someone might want Independence surely common sense says you don’t vote for something that is so poorly defined. Voting with your “heart” is fine, so long as you undertand it may well hit you hard in the wallet at a later date. It’s all very well believeing a man who says that oil revenue will give you a life of luxury in a land of plentiful milk and honey, but what happens when the oil revenue starts to runs out, where’s the money to fund your life of luxury going to come from then -Westminster won’t be diverting public funds your way in hope of buying your votes at a General Election, as you won’t be sending elected members south of the border…?
Paul FI wish they had relocated all the exhibits to the former RAF Bicester. Aircraft could have been brought out of the hangars for open air days, ……
I have enjoyed my infrequent visits to Hendon, but I feels more like a storage shed than a museum educating people about the RAF and aviation history. Unless you are an aviation enthusiast, I get the feeling that it is quite a dead museum for the general public and that it has out-grown its current site.
Spot on on both counts there V35 (unfortunately 🙁 ).
Moggy, from what I’ve seen in print about Milestones Hall I’m not sure it would worry me if the non-RAF exhibits did go elsewhere if the hall was filled with some of the other airframes that are at Hendon, or in store.
Maybe the aim of Milestones is/was to fire the imagination (and draw in) the “non-enthusist” visitor, but as others have said, all it does really is mimick the Aviation Gallery at the Science Museum which is far closer to Central London. I wonder how many “non-enthusisat” tourists/visitors to Central London bother to make the trip out to Hendon, compare dto thos ewho may just pitch up at the Science Museum if the weather dictates an unexpected “indoor attraction” day? And, if that was the aim, why put the Milestojnes hall at the back of the car-park – why not place it closer to the gate, with large glazed panels to show off the “exciting” content?
Hendon seems to have lost it’s way, is it the RAF Museum (i.e. a museum focussed on the history of the RAF), or is it trying to become a more generalist “Aviation Museum” in hope of attracting a wider audience including those who may not be too keen on matters military? What are RAFM’s medium and long term objectives?
One thing I do hope is that the daft “Beacon” idea (another meaning of beacon is of course, a potential bonfire site that can be seen from some distance away :eek:) is 100% dead, buried, and forgotten. Being clever for cleverness sake (including commissioning an architect who wants to “make a statement” with his design) risked the building becoming more important/prominent in the overall scheme than its’ contents.
Sign In
