Farnborough Airshow public weekend axed -BBC

[Asturias56]

Farnborough Airshow public weekend axed



The Farnborough International Airshow will no longer host a public weekend after "negative and vitriolic" feedback for displays, it has been announced.

Organisers said the Shoreham air crash had "expedited" the decision, which comes amid a "dwindling number" of spectators. A spokeswoman said organisers could "no longer provide an airshow the public want".

The event will focus on its five-day trade show. The Farnborough Airshow will still include trade flying displays when the biennial event takes place in July 2020. In a statement, organisers said the exhibition halls would be open to the public on the Friday of the airshow, while it would "focus on inspiring the next generation and showcasing the technologies driving new products and manufacturing processes".

Spokeswoman Mary Kearney said the airshow appreciated the affection plane lovers had for the public weekend, but it received "very negative and vitriolic feedback from 2018". She added the effects that the Shoreham air crash had on air displays "certainly had an impact" and "expedited this decision". At the 2015 Shoreham Airshow in West Sussex a Hunter Hawker jet flown by pilot Andy Hill (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-46905436?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cq8r53p1rpgt/shoreham-airshow-crash-trial&link_location=live-reporting-story) crashed in a loop manoeuvre on the A27, killing 11 people. As a result of the fatal crash, safety measures for airshows were enhanced by the Civil Aviation Authority. Ex-military jets are restricted to flypasts over land.

Ms Kearney said the public expected "fast aerobatic displays as part of the weekend", but teams like the RAF Red Arrows could no longer perform aerobatic stunts at shows like Farnborough.

Farnborough International chief executive Gareth Rogers said: "Removing the public weekend will disappoint some, but for our exhibitors and trade visitors the focus is on business and accessing the talent they need to sustain global competitiveness."

Last year the trade show saw £145.7bn ($192bn) worth of deals, with more than 1,500 exhibitors and 80,000 visitors from 112 countries.

[Hotel Tango]

Disappointing to see that once again, as is so often the case these days, idiocy prevails!

[DaveReidUK]

Having attended more Farnborough shows than I care to remember, both as a member of the public and an exhibitor, I can vouch for the fact that the latter consider the public days a PITA.

[Running Ridges]

'Negative and vitriolic feedback' from who?

[PAXboy]

Should save them a fair amount of money. Whatever the takings, it's a lot of outgoings.

[davews]

A little surprised at this announcement. I was at Farnborough last year on the Saturday (and many years ago at an earlier one). It was certainly well attended by the public and I saw no signs of negatives or vitriolic comments. Was puzzled and slightly annoyed that the Red Arrows could only do fly pasts - then went off to the Olympic park where presumably they did a full show. But we had the Red Bulls who did some remarkably spectacular displays which were probably just as much an accident risk. I expect and hope they will change their decision, although I guess I must now remove the date from next year's diary.

[parabellum]

'Negative and vitriolic feedback' from who?

Quite a bit here on PPRuNe at the time, I seem to remember.

[Less Hair]

I have been at Farnborough many times but only on trade days. As they seem to have built houses all around the place there should be no surprise that noise complaints go up.
Glad I did see the Vulcan fly there.

[Alsacienne]

Well at least I have happy memories from my misspent youth. Shame. Hope the BBC will cover the trade days and present highlights of the flying and the exhibits for those now unable to attend ... and those who would have liked to but are in the air elsewhere at the time.

[barry lloyd]

Having attended more Farnborough shows than I care to remember, both as a member of the public and an exhibitor, I can vouch for the fact that the latter consider the public days a PITA.

Likewise, and I totally agree. Personally, I think it's the thin end of a wedge to eventually close down all air shows.

[Less Hair]

If no more PR work towards the public is done aviation will be even less accepted in the future. It's not the single high tech industry it used to be. From the world's Googles to biotech companies a lot more industries are looking for young talent.

Better bring back the fascination of flying until it becomes a pure drone exhibition anyway.

[DB6]

Lawyers and Health and Safety, if unrestrained, will eventually shut down society. Hopefully the backlash will begin before then.

[DaveReidUK]

Negative and vitriolic feedback' from who? Quite a bit here on PPRuNe at the time, I seem to remember.
Surely not. :O

PPRuNe: Anybody else think Farnborough's Cr*p? (https://www.pprune.org/spectators-balcony-spotters-corner/611345-anybody-else-think-farnborough-s-cr-p.html)

[601]

Hope the BBC will cover

and that it makes downunder.

[Jump Complete]

Is a pilots licence still an entrance qualification for a trade day?

[bnt]

Is a pilots licence still an entrance qualification for a trade day?
Was it ever? The people who fly planes tend to not be the people who pay for them. :}

[Jump Complete]

Was it ever? The people who fly planes tend to not be the people who pay for them. :}

i meant that, in the past at least, to go to a non-public day at Farmborough, one could apply to attend without a trade invite if you had a pilot’s licence. I attended once years ago when I still had a PPL.

[LOONRAT]

We lived in Cove just to the north of Farnborough in 1950 and all the aircraft from the airshows would provide a fantastic sight from our back garden. When we moved away we always went to the public days to watch from the crowd line whilst sitting on the the roof of the car. You needed to get in early to get a good spot. Lucky enough to display at Farnborough on 3 occasions but the last one was a flypast only due to change is display rules. The only way to reinstate public days is to relocate the show to a suitable airfield. That will never happen in my opinion as probably too many vested interests in play.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/324x519/farnborough_display_1955_or_56_2f311276b16f4f00b6d5cfe12c83e 9476a4b8d43.jpg

[Asturias56]

My UK colleagues describe it as inevitable - higher and higher prices for less and less

The last one was a parade of identi-kit airliners doing nothing - "a procession of Ford Focuss's" was one comment

And anything interesting disappears after trade days because ,suddenly "we have to maintain the test program" leaving the public with the Battle of Britain Flight, the Red Arrows and the USAF (who have always seemed to take Farnbro' seriously)

I understand it but to me it's another sign that aerospace is now a routine, boring , manufacturing operation and the romance has been squeezed right out.......

I guess RIAT and Duxford are all that's left really......

[fireflybob]

How awfully sad.

[Downwind Lander]

The bottom line is that most accidents happen in the home. Ergo, this statistically unsupportable knee jerk reaction will probably increase the number of accidents.

[TehDehZeh]

The bottom line is that most accidents happen in the home. Ergo, this statistically unsupportable knee jerk reaction will probably increase the number of accidents.
I doubt the hourly fatality rate in the home is higher than at air shows, but feel free to provide data.

[Yaw String]

If this country were really so up there on public safety,before we ban air shows,we should ban trains from passing through any main line station,without stopping...Pure lunacy and a dreadful risk to human life,probably about once every 10 minutes,too.
Not sure how much energy the average train and carriages wield,but,I ask you..being allowed to hurtle within 2metres or less,of unprotected groups of commuters,including children...I'd say one of the most obvious daily dangers to joe public,and,unfortunately for the train drivers,probably just as traumatic...
Ah,but...hang on a minute..the cost of building a barrier!...umm..could be as much as Donald's wall! Crikey!
"Next on the agenda...Airshows!.".(gasps of horror)

[The Bartender]

I doubt the hourly fatality rate in the home is higher than at air shows, but feel free to provide data.

So you want to narrow in the statistics in your end to air show display while keeping the other end wide as any time spent at home?

That's so cute...

[ms08]

Motor racing, particularly rally through the forests?

[whitelighter]

Disappointing to see that once again, as is so often the case these days, idiocy prevails!

If you want to blame someone, start with that total prat (language to covet my real thoughts not permitted) Andrew Hill.

as someone who lives about 1/2 mile north of approach I’m glad wreckless showoffs like him won’t be permitted to have a ‘cognitive lapse’ and fly into my house.

farnbrough is a very built up area with little room for error

[Kerosene Kraut]

The threshold has been moved a while ago. No drama. There are biz jets flying day in and out.

[lpvapproach]

There is a benefit to airshows in inspiring people to work in aviation or to learn. Not sure how you fund the upfront cost of that longer term benefit

Could they not allow people to walk around static exhibits.

[Ridger]

The bottom line is that most accidents happen in the home. Ergo, this statistically unsupportable knee jerk reaction will probably increase the number of accidents.

This might be my favourite forum post of all time! I bursting to know more!

Will the decision increase all accidents? Or just accidents to people landing downwind? Or increase accidents at home because the folk who would've gone to Farnborough are now at home having accidents?

[speedbird9274]

If the concerns about the flying worry our authorities why not move the event.....SHOCK>>>>HORROR...… yes move away from FAB. There must be another large quiet that would host the show without the problems mentioned in the previous posts...…… just saying!! How about Doncaster, I know its in the north but it seems to fit the requirements. Discuss....

[DaveReidUK]

If the concerns about the flying worry our authorities why not move the event.....SHOCK>>>>HORROR...… yes move away from FAB. There must be another large quiet that would host the show without the problems mentioned in the previous posts...…… just saying!! How about Doncaster, I know its in the north but it seems to fit the requirements. Discuss....

It's a trade show. The air display is just a small part.

There has been massive investment in the infrastructure at Farnborough, particularly in recent years, to support the business part of the event. There is no comparable airfield in the UK that could take its place.

[nicolai]

Farnborough is a large exhibition hall complex with a handy runway nearby. The other aerodromes of the UK are just runways, some with passenger terminals. The other exhibition halls of the UK are just halls with car parks.

It's the only place in the UK where you can hold such an event.

[Downwind Lander]

I doubt the hourly fatality rate in the home is higher than at air shows, but feel free to provide data.
It's a well enough known phenomenon, but for you, TehDehZeh:

https://www.rospa.com/home-safety/advice/general/facts-and-figures/

It is the basis for contending that it is safer to run public Guy Fawkes events than not.The problem is about blame.

[TehDehZeh]

It's a well enough known phenomenon,
The link does not seem to provide numbers on fatalities per person per hour which is the relevant number here if we assume the air show spectators would instead watch TV on the couch.

Obviously people spend a significant amount of time in their homes, meaning that a very low risk will still amount to lots of deaths.

Or would you suggest that driving a formula one car is safer than flying? After all the fatality rate of the former is lower than one per year..

[Asturias56]

It's a trade show. The air display is just a small part.

There has been massive investment in the infrastructure at Farnborough, particularly in recent years, to support the business part of the event. There is no comparable airfield in the UK that could take its place.

That's true but it's also been the public "face" of the Aerospace industry in the UK for generations

By treating the public badly (and charging a fortune) the business is sending a very negative message to its natural supporters. These are the people with VOTES - if they give up on us then we have only ourselves to blame if and when the politicians ignore or actively act against our interests and concerns.

[Air Snoop]

Should we not close down our hospitals which, although excellent, have a much higher accident rate than world aviation? In fact the Chief Inspector of Air Accidents was moved into the NHS a couple of years back to bring their investigation/prevention of accidents up to the same high standard we have in aviation. Medical students are now being taught the lessons we learnt in aviation back in the 70s and called CRM!
I am in the business and still get more excited when a Lanc drones by than I do when a jetjock struts his stuff, but I concede that the general public probably enjoy the latter more. Magnificent men in their flying machines!

[SamYeager]

That's true but it's also been the public "face" of the Aerospace industry in the UK for generations

By treating the public badly (and charging a fortune) the business is sending a very negative message to its natural supporters. These are the people with VOTES - if they give up on us then we have only ourselves to blame if and when the politicians ignore or actively act against our interests and concerns.

I do have to say the thought had crossed my mind that if Farnborough is effectively giving two fingers to the public they shouldn't be surprised if public support, such as it is, for things like planning permission and demonstration flights not to mention the inevitable noise and traffic disruption dwindles away. Perhaps thinking of the public weekend as a necessary cost of doing business may turn out later to have been the wiser choice?

[msjh]

I do have to say the thought had crossed my mind that if Farnborough is effectively giving two fingers to the public they shouldn't be surprised if public support, such as it is, for things like planning permission and demonstration flights not to mention the inevitable noise and traffic disruption dwindles away. Perhaps thinking of the public weekend as a necessary cost of doing business may turn out later to have been the wiser choice?

I'm afraid this ("Farnborough is effectively giving two fingers to the public") has been my experience for a while now. The flying display has become more and more humdrum with little to excite. As in a post above, it will be Fairford or Duxford in future. Farnborough will become an ever-smaller clique.

[abgd]

Obviously people spend a significant amount of time in their homes, meaning that a very low risk will still amount to lots of deaths.

The other issue is that most people who die falling out of bed were very elderly and frail, already approaching the end of their lives. They're often too frail to go outside and die of something more daring.

When I worked in the home counties I used to observe that the three most dangerous hobbies were mountain biking, trampolining and going to church. A very high proportion of the patients I saw had been injured at church - as you get older you gradually stop driving, then shopping, then you become housebound other than (for many)... going to church. So if you fall over and break something it will either happen at home or church. Churches have steep steps and stone floors.

I once tried to guesstimate how dangerous airshows were compared to driving to airshows and was surprised that despite the rarity of accidents within the UK, my guesstimates were not as much in favour of airshow safety as I expected. Realistically I think most future airshows will end up being over barren heaths or coastlines and I'm not sure that's such a bad thing, so long as they continue.

[JLSF]

I truly think this kind of stuff will one day backfire. I'd like to know how many young people became a pilot (or aviation industry professional) after attending this kind of events. I, while working at BAe Systems, managed to get a free pass. I was 25 years old, and was amazed to see A340s making almost 90 degree turns, among many other perfectly safe "stunts" which gave me a truly "romantic" vision of commercial aviation.

Not surprisingly a few years after, with some money earned, I took my PPL. At the end it became a hobby, but 2 of my colleagues, continued to the ATPL, both are TAP Air Portugal F/Os, one is flying the A340/330.

These decisions contribute nothing to ensure public confidence inn the safety of aviation, nor to gather people wanting to join in for the love of it, instead of economics.

It is sad. One day we shall see COMACs deligthing a crowds at Air Shows in China, while the west watches "Mayday".

[Less Hair]

It's like visitor terraces at airports. Many get closed because it's too expensive with all the security needed. And then there is the surprise that you end up with grumpy airport neighbours that complain and go to court over noise all the time. Nobody grows up experiencing the fascination of flying anymore. For the aviation industry finding young talent gets harder all the time.