ASKARIthat is interesting but too simplistic and would need to cover ALL the accidents in similar types of the period.
The point is as
Feather #3 points out
Umm......you balance the argument very well with the vintage motor racing scene. OTOH, if operated sensibly within their envelope, the vintage racers work just fine. So, I'd suggest do vintage aircraft.
The importance of HARS, to the community at large, having a legitimate and secure home can not be underestimated.
I guess when it is all washed up, if the airstrip was permanently upgraded to 60t, and I suspect that hangs on the willingness of the Council to compete for HARS business on proper and economic terms, there would not be a problem. Why was this not negotiated in the first place.
Index shmindex, I understand that it is possible to construct a safe path for the aircraft PI 0, 1, 2 or 3 to which they must strictly comply.
If that is not reasonably possible then they must go elsewhere.
Whatever process is used it is clear "potentially contentious issues" nowadays whether it is done totally in good faith or not the "old boys club", "nod and a wink" and the "mates" club" does not work anymore and causes the form of angst seen here.
I suspect that if a full briefing and open discussion with the community including those on the airport during the whole transfer process was not applied, then I'm not surprised at the angst.
My experience in other areas dealing with enthusiasts suggests that the temptation to try and "get in under the radar" for fear of "kicking a sleeping dog" always backfires.
This is a perfectly understandable and natural reaction for any group of enthusiasts, who have difficulty understanding why others don't share their peculiar enthusiasm, "anoraks" and "train spotters " spring to mind. That comparison might start a bit of harumphing in the HARS ranks. It was not meant to demean their organisation or the "anoraks", but point out that both are equally entitled to their individual passions. Why else would "anoraks" enter an international airport through the drainage system at great risk to themselves to get that "perfect shot".
I don't recall seeing
Statements about mis-leading our flying visitors and Society members are highly specious.
but if there are then they are clearly misinformed, as you know it's a legal requirement. Having said that I would be briefing my members not to make any comment or representation that could have the effect ot minimising or mitigating the intent of message in the placard, it is there for a reason. "Shallow end no diving" isn't an invitation to say "well it is a bit, but if you dive in a certain way it'll be OK."
Equally, I think I could safely say that the Society members are also offended in the extreme by comments about illegality and danger in our operations.
with respect, disdain simply inflames negative responses, calm, factual, rational education and responses do not. Again with the greatest respect, it is HARS or any other similar organisations responsibility to show their fellow community they can and will be good community citizens not the other way around.
Go HARS but if you can't make it work with the owners of ShellHarbour Airport and the community you have to go somewhere else, if you are not to be limited and are going to achieve your long term success. Is it safe to assume that Connie wont be the last biggish aircraft in the planning stage and it is likely that it will not be possible for them to achieve the PI O that appears to be possible with Connies unique background effort and pedigree.