Military Air Displays

[turbroprop]

Will future military air displays also be restricted? It must be a brave man who signs off a display because although extremely remote the chances of another Shoreham can not be completely eliminated.

[Finningley Boy]

If that's the case one would imagine that they'd impose restrictions immediately on a similar footing to those for Vintage Jets over land, but they haven't.

FB

[Admin_Guru]

RAF Cosford airshow:

I am told that there are residents in Albrighton expressing discontent about the proximity of the RAF Cosford airshow as the flying display operating box is south of the airfield i.e. immediately adjacent to the town away from the fee paying public that are north of the runway. I say 'fee paying' because several naughty fields are also within the the operating box including the cricket pitch, which is always packed. The case for the opposition at Cosford is difficult to counter balance given the new legislation being imposed by the CAA.

[camelspyyder]

Military Flying displays are already restricted, and very closely regulated. You only need to glance through RA2000 or any Group Orders to see that a huge section of military flying rules are just about display flying - not only for the conduct of displays, but all other aspects, selection of pilots, training , supervision, authorisation etc. Much of this was prompted by the loss of XV239 (although clearly that was not the only accident that happened under the flexible rules of the time).

These days UK Military Aviation is, rightly, a somewhat risk-averse business in my view. If the relevant Duty Holders decide there is too much risk in current displays, then they will be modified.

[Martin the Martian]

The RAF is currently conducting this much-mentioned review into future airshow participation etc (which seems to have been ongoing ever since the Wrights got airborne at Kitty Hawk) but I have a feeling that Shoreham will have a big influence on the conclusions, whenever it is published.

My own thoughts are that in future the RAF will feature only the Reds, the BBMF and the Falcons as airborne participants, with no solo displays. Waddington will remain as the only RAF-organised show at best, or the 'RAF village' at RIAT will be expanded upon as the RAF's only big airshow presence at worst.

As for the Navy, perhaps it may be felt that Yeovilton is sufficiently isolated but Culdrose is too close to Helston, maybe.

[Pontius Navigator]

MtM, there is also the question of foreign participation.

One of Waddos displays, around 1994, included a pair of FAF Mirage detached on ACMI. One pilot said they were display qualified and they performed an immaculate pairs display, all the more so compared with the single Tornado, left-right fast, right-left slow, and repeat.

I guess that would not be allowed today.

[camelspyyder]

I'm not certain there is an appetite at Waddington to re-start the show. The base is now extremely operationally focussed, and so much of it really is too sensitive to have 100,000 random visitors inside the wire. It might re-locate of course, but where to?

[Fluffy Bunny]

There's a similar size airfield just up the A15 with not a lot happening on it...

[camelspyyder]

Or the one near Oxford...

First airshow cancelled as a result of last weeks tragedy - Durham Tees Valley - postponed to Spring Bank Holiday next year.

[Pontius Navigator]

Fluffy, small problem with Hemswell etc, a noticeable lack of manpower. Only one nearby source and that is Waddo

How about the college of knowledge? To the south is a very busy road but at some inconvenience traffic could be diverted behind the display line for a couple of hours. Other than that the area is pretty clear.

Plenty of willing volunteers there too :).

Actually quite a few positives really. There was a huge show, closed to the public, in 1965.

[Fluffy Bunny]

Doesn't take that long to get from Waddo to Scampton. The Reds won't need rates! Plus the A15 is a little further away from the threshold or could be diverted round the other end of the airfied up to Caenby Corner.

[camelspyyder]

Who mentioned Scampton?

With all those civvies living in the patch, I bet the protest group have their flyers printed already :)

Added to which it takes an hour a lot of the time, let alone if there was an airshow on!

[Pittsextra]

Thing about this is where do you draw a line? For instance this weekend will see a display at the MotoGP at Silverstone and there are displays at all kinds of sporting events with roads and spectators and sometimes no real obvious crowd line. What about events like the RedBull Air race?

The point is this shouldn't be about trying to achieve no flying over roads because there will always be some sequence of events that ends badly [take the Citation biz jet that ended in a housing estate having had a problem climbing out from Biggin Hill a decade ago as example]. Some have suggested do everything over the sea, except that hasn't thought about the very poor horizon that gives.

Time will tell the causes of the most recent events however given some of the people caught up in this have no or little interest in things aviation those with an interest in these things would be done a great service if (for example) elements of recommendation in this AAIB report were made clear at the earliest opportunity - which they could quite easily do. That way we would be showing the world the level of professionalism that is involved in these events.

https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/media/5423034540f0b61346000c79/6-2009_G-HURR.pdf

[Avtur]

I wonder if Home Insurance companies will jump on the band waggon of recent events to hike premiums for those living under the airspace footprint of an air display venue? Just a thought.

[Tiger_mate]

The naughty fields are a big problem at all airshows as Joe Public has no regard for his/her own safety or understanding that safety areas are in place for a purpose.

The seaside events are not immune either despite Maritime Orders similar to a Notamn telling private craft owners to do one. Red Arrows v yacht mast anyone.

What we are seeing is a Ramstein style political knee jerk in which the system (CAA/MAA) has got to be seen to be taking positive steps towards minimising the ever present risk even further. If Ramstein is the model being followed; then airshows as we know it will soon be a thing of history.
The upper echelons of the RAF (RAF AFB) have no appetite for the risk associated with such events; nor the costs involved. There is virtually no need to promote recruitment as the ATC/CCF/UAS already do that sufficiently well.

Shoreham has been headline news for a week - and that is not about to change anytime soon. The whole affair is a tragedy and I feel much sympathy for the family and friends who have experience loss; especially those that were going about their business without association of the event. RIP

[Hangarshuffle]

Is it a political knee-jerk reaction? Its actually not that easy to find any politicians making anti display statements (unusually few I thought).
Think its more a case of good practice by authorities to review in the light of two fatal crashes of vintage jet aircraft.
Really, its bad/very negative for the military because they are dragged into an affair that really is not of their making.
As I've pointed out before, and been viciously attacked for on here for daring to go against the herd, the many crashes generally involve old/ex/former/used military aircraft and former military aircrew that simply aren't operating/flying to the very high standard required.
The future for the military to host "air days" will be fly-in static-only display open days. Much safer, far lower risk.
People will still come, in fact if the military could get its act together properly and gather many, or all even types of current UK mil craft, with their crews to actually meet the public, then I think they would be on for record cash-generating crowds.
But yes, in the current form its the sad end of an era.


For Martin the Martian, at least two aircraft crashed either onto or directly adjacent to main roads around RNAS Yeovilton in recent times but not on air days. In 1985 a twin seat (T4?)Harrier crash and double fatality right next to the A37 just to the north of the field (think it went through the hedge at the roadside, used to be a gap there). Also a Hunter in 1988, pilot ejected over the A303 after staying with the aircraft, the aircraft then hit a cow field on the north side of the A303 and then travelled (intact) right across the B3151 scraping the tarmac, smashing through the hedges and coming to final rest in a large pile of manure. Think both spots were within the MATZ.

[Saintsman]

Perhaps we should also put restrictions on dustbin lorries driving through city centres as they could go out of control and crash into innocent pedestrians? :hmm:

By all means review the safety criteria, but it is a fact of life that no matter how careful someone is, there will always be accidents. We do not live in an accident free world. A knee-jerk ban will only satisfy self centred do-gooders.

[Alber Ratman]

A certain military aerobatic team flew into NWI prior to displaying over the east coast this morning. Into circuit in big break and all frames broke to the right as they flew down to the 09 end. I thought "Well that is not normal into here". Suspected that the team were avoiding split breaking over Old Catton. Post display, a nice flypast in Big Vixen.. then the normal Big Vixen in to circuit break in both directions with smoke.. Good to see.

[Finningley Boy]

By all means review the safety criteria, but it is a fact of life that no matter how careful someone is, there will always be accidents. We do not live in an accident free world. A knee-jerk ban will only satisfy self centred do-gooders.

One or two seem to be posting on this thread,

I can't agree with some of the draconian predictions for the future being made here, I wouldn't say it wouldn't or couldn't happen, but Idon't think things are looking that way necessarily. Bearing in mind what has been said before about how posts on pprune are taken to any degree seriously by outside onlookers, I'd say that unless people here do honestly want to see the end of military display flying, they'd do themselves more of a favour by refraining from so eagerly predicting the end.

Just a thought!

FB

[Nige321]

Reds have just all but cancelled Dartmouth.... :(

MOD link (http://www.raf.mod.uk/reds/news/index.cfm?storyid=62E42933-5056-A318-A834938824887BB9)



Red Arrows at Dartmouth Royal Regatta 2015

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) is undertaking a comprehensive review of civilian air displays in the UK.

As part of this, in the last 48 hours, the CAA has amended the display permissions for the Dartmouth Royal Regatta. This affects all participants including the Royal Air Force Aerobatic Team, the Red Arrows - scheduled to perform at the event tomorrow (Friday, August 28) at 1815.

It has been assessed that the required changes to display heights and positioning would have reduced the visual quality of the display for the public to an unacceptable level and therefore, with regret, the Red Arrows’ will not be conducting a full display at Dartmouth this year.

The Red Arrows recognise many people will have made plans and are looking forward to seeing the team perform. Not wanting to disappoint the public, the team will, instead, conduct two flypasts – not involving aerobatics – at the Dartmouth Royal Regatta, weather-permitting.

The decision does not affect the planned display at Clacton Airshow, scheduled for 1245 tomorrow (August 28).

All aspects of flying by the Royal Air Force Aerobatic Team – wherever the Red Arrows are operating – is carried out subject to rigorous and well-established aviation safety rules.

[smujsmith]

The way it's going, the air show enthusiast community are being railroaded in to becoming "crochet enthusiasts", the sad accident last weekend was not a continuation of a trend, but just another incident that might occur when living human beings take an interest in the beauty of flight. Now we are to see the rabid hand of the senior civil servant all over the piece, ending many years of traditional enjoyment of open days and flying events. Like all posters, I abhor the loss of life in the recent accident, the imposition of regulations that might make air displays a thing of the past though, should not be the result of the tragedy.

Smudge

[salad-dodger]

the sad accident last weekend was not a continuation of a trend, but just another incident that might occur when living human beings take an interest in the beauty of flight. Now we are to see the rabid hand of the senior civil servant all over the piece, ending many years of traditional enjoyment of open days and flying events.

I think there are many peoe who will disagree with the part of your post that I have highlighted smudger. It was not just another incident, and some of those who died were not taking an interest in the beauty of flight, they were just passers by. Those rabid civil servants that you refer to will be seeking to ensure that risks are assessed, eliminated, managed and where sensible, accepted. They will also be seeking to ensure that the risks that the different groups of people are exposed to are proportionate. Innocent passers by who have no interest in air displays will not be accepting of the same level of risk as the pilot enjoying his passion of fast jet aerobatics.

You might want to amend your post.

S-D

[teeteringhead]

Sadly - and I puposely make no comment on the accident or the CAA's reaction - this strengthens my belief that the RAF's 100th Birthday in 2018 will see the last ever Reds display........:(:(:(

[Finningley Boy]

Sadly - and I puposely make no comment on the accident or the CAA's reaction - this strengthens my belief that the RAF's 100th Birthday in 2018 will see the last ever Reds display........:(:(:(


I don't undestand the logic of what you appear to be alluding to? I sense you're suggesting that in light of recent crashes at airshows, not least at Shoreham, that the relevent authorities will deem the Red Arrows, indeed all fast jet aerobatics displays, to be too dangerous, therefore, they will no longer be allowed. But why do you think it will take until after 2018 to arrive at that decision? Surely, if the day that this happens is now in sight as you seem to suggest, then such displays are far more likely to face such restrictions/bans before the 2016 airshow season is upon us, while the emotional and political ramifications are very much alive. Or do you imagine that the form will be to wait until after the RAF's 100th birthday before we stamp on everything, we'll risk all until then!:confused:

FB

[Top West 50]

[QUOTE=Finningley Boy;9098223]I don't undestand the logic of what you appear to be alluding to? I sense you're suggesting that in light of recent crashes at airshows, not least at Shoreham, that the relevent authorities will deem the Red Arrows, indeed all fast jet aerobatics displays, to be too dangerous, therefore, they will no longer be allowed. But why do you think it will take until after 2018 to arrive at that decision? Surely, if the day that this happens is now in sight as you seem to suggest, then such displays are far more likely to face such restrictions/bans before the 2016 airshow season is upon us, while the emotional and political ramifications are very much alive. Or do you imagine that the form will be to wait until after the RAF's 100th birthday before we stamp on everything, we'll risk all until then!:confused:

FB[/QtUOTE]

Assuming the Royal Air Force makes it to April 2018!

[Clockwork Mouse]

SD
[QUOTE]You might want to amend your post. /QUOTE]
Why would he want to do that?
I find your fixation with different levels of risks of people on the ground in this tragic accident baffling, nay incomprehensible. Do you differentiate between the paying spectator, the non paying spectator in the layby and the passing motorist? If so, why? To what purpose?

[Alber Ratman]

The Vintage Jets and Hunter restrictions have come about due to two fatal crashes while display aerobatic manoeuvres were being performed. The CAA have good reason to suspect that the time has come to prevent any more before the results of the AAIB investigations. They have likely spoken to the AAIB already. The common denominator is two privately owned aircraft did not complete aerobatic displays, ao the CAA restrict operations until proof from the AAIB and review of the procedures. I don't think the CAA have much concern with the Military displays. The guys flying them practice multiple times daily for weeks before the PDA authorisation, currency is not an issue, maintenance of the frames is carried out exactly as the schedules of the OEM dictate, maintenance personnel are all professional and fully trained and there is effective authorisation. I have heard certain vintage jet operators say their frames are better maintained than normal aircraft.. If Normal aircraft are military or type certified civil aircraft, the CAA allow more dispensations for an intermediate complexity PtF jet. Its all written in the CAP. Of course airworthiness is not compromised at all, just not as restrictive as if the OEMs still existed. Personally, if maintenance issues are found by the AAIB as major causes, I will be surprised, but nothing can be ruled out.

[ciderman]

I agree with you Alber. You cannot expect part timers to be as current/proficient/supervised as the boys in blue are. Maintenance is fine. I accept that the airframes are unlikely to be at fault but I do think there is a world of difference between operating a BA jet with pax on board and displaying a T7 Hunter on your day off. This is not to pre-empt the enquiry but I can see the way the CAA are thinking.

[EESDL]

Airfields do exist which are still in the middle of the countryside and easily accessible by public transport.....
Sufficiently far enough South of the A64 and East of the A1M not to pose a risk to travellers going about their business.......
Adjacent minor roads managed by local Traffic plan and a helpful District Council to further reduce risk.....
Unfortunately airfield purchased too late to meet the mil participation deadlines so heavily reliant on vintage jets and less noisier props but envisage a healthy mil attendance in lieu of Waddo next year.
Vulcan 'display' not yet affected and graceful 'displays' by Venoms, Vampires, Spits and Mustangs should still satisfy the most discerning viewer - with the odd world champion aerobatic display from our civilian colleagues.......plus the Dakota, Sea Fury blah blah.
Suffice to say air shows still have a great future in UK - it just might mean that they will not be held within suburbia!

[salad-dodger]

CMouse

SD
[QUOTE]You might want to amend your post. /QUOTE]
Why would he want to do that?

Because many of those killed were not there to enjoy the beauty of flight. Too describe it as just another incident seems particularly insensitive.

I find your fixation with different levels of risks of people on the ground in this tragic accident baffling, nay incomprehensible. Do you differentiate between the paying spectator, the non paying spectator in the layby and the passing motorist? If so, why? To what purpose?

Others on this thread have suggested that those attending the display are accepting of a greater level of risk than those in no way connected, eg the passers by or neighbours. I think someone likened it to the risks accepted by those attending motor racing events. I'm not sure I entirely agree with that and it may be a difficult position to defend should anything go wrong.

But there is a world of difference between what the public (attending or not) should be exposed to and what the display flyer is prepared to take.

Doesn't seem a particularly difficult concept to me.

S-D

[Clockwork Mouse]

[QUOTE]Doesn't seem a particularly difficult concept to me./QUOTE]

That is because you are not paying attention. The question was about the level of risk allocated to those ON THE GROUND, inside and outside the display venue. No one is disputing the greater risk accepted by those actually doing the flying.

[salad-dodger]

Paying attention fella. I mentioned the different groups of people in my post. Try reading it again.

If the question you are asking is related to whether the people choosing to watch the display be accepting of a greater level of risk than the passers by or neighbours, then I don't have the answer. And when I say choosing to watch the display, I mean both inside and outside the fence.

S-D