What's the future of the Red Arrows?
 

With points raised in the recent SI, what's the way forward for the operation of the Red Arrows?

• Business as usual?
• A safety stand-down until things are in order?
• Other options?

If, as someone suggested on the thread regarding the death of Flt Lt Cunningham, charges may be considered against personnel falsifying records, would it be feasible for those concerned to continue flying with the team (if aircrew, of course) while the pressure of a Court Martial was hanging over them?

The Blue Angels had a safety stand-down in 2011 (for very different reasons) and they have since resumed normal operations and put it behind them. Should the Reds do this, it would certainly have an impact on their repututaion but this has recently been tarnished anyway, so would it make anything worse?

Not their finest hour - or in their terms, perhaps 1.5 hours.

Here we go again...

The Arrows will just get on with it and put the tragic events of last season behind them, inc the stupid headline grabbing publicity surrounding 2 team members who fell in love.

If no-one bothers to fuel the speculation of their future, the Reds will continue to sell GB and its industry world-wide.

Long live the Red Arrows, special ambassadors for the UK...

FJJP

Safety stand-downs are usually called after an accident. What is the relevance of calling a safety stand-down 2 1/2 years after the event?

It would also be naïve to assume that the evidence of improper seat maintenance procedures only emerged during the inquest. Problems revealed during the inquest will have been addressed as soon as they were discovered, had that not been the case do you imagine the Reds would have flown 2 season since?

Regardless of the inquest, how many of the 2011 team are still with the Reds in 2014, or even still in the RAF?

Any sensible question surrounding the future of the Red Arrows must surely be based on how much longer the RAF will continue to operate the Hawk T1, and what will happen to the Reds when these are finally retired, i.e. will replacement aircraft be purchased purely for a display team - rather than on the recent events the OP refers to.

Biggus ... Shush don't tell anyone ...

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/...Red_Arrows.jpg

Well a 5g display should wow the crowds :E:E:E:E:E

Given the SI report perhaps the real question is why do they still exist?

It must have been very tempting for whoever is signing off on their risk to shut the organisation down completely in 2012.

As I cannot see any economic 'boom' in the forseeable and slowly but surely human longevity v pensions and the NHS is coming home to roost, I reckon the Reds are already on borrowed time and will probably survive until the Centenary in 2018. After which they will either require investing in by way of new aircraft or monetary input to keep the tired T1 flying or they will be axed. Whats that MP doing with a sharpening stone??

I am no fan of this as a suggestion, but the old cliche of British Industry etc etc does not wash anymore. Take the rose tinted ones off people and get your photographs whilst you still can.

The Red Arrows bashing has started early this year!

Hawk wont be replaced?
 

Can't see a feasible replacement aircraft? if there is what, what is it?
Only way forward is major sponsorship? Big Tesco, Shell logos? Like Formula 1 cars perhaps?

Random Reds Bashing
 

A very sad, ill informed and mindless piece of Reds bashing with a thinly disguised attempt at reputational tarnishing - in whose eyes, the sensationalist tabloids? If you cannot devise a constructive critical argument don't 'bash' out of spite OR jealousy.

The Red Arrows cost £9m a year to run.

What do YOU think they bring in income..? I'm interested to know why you question their existence Daysleeper..?

Because I have read the latest Service Inquiry report. If you haven't then I suggest you do.

By the way does that £9 million a year cost include the 2 killed, 1 serious injury, 2 minor injuries and 4 aircraft destroyed in 3 years?

Daysleeper
Then to widen your understanding of the case perhaps you would also like to read the posts giving the other side of the story before you pass judgement. I take it from your profile that you are not military?

Do other Air Force aerobatic teams have to put up with all this negative support I wonder, or is it just a few RAFAT knockers on PPRuNe?

Can't imagine it happening to 'The Blue Angels', 'Thunderbirds' or "Patrouille de France"

I think the red arrows give a 'Feel good' factor to the nation, quite apart from trade etc.


I first saw them at Filton airfield when they were flying Gnats & a few months later, I had my first flight in a Chipmunk from the same airfield.


Everything costs money, including 'Deal or no deal & Eastenders' but the red arrows are a British institution now. Beware of public reaction if anyone tries to get rid of them.

I see lots of heads buried deep in sand here.

I'm pretty certain the issues listed in the MAAIB report may be of concern to the CAA as they allow RAFAT to fly over the public's heads. Surely, if there is a safety culture concern, the CAA could stop them flying in UK air shows and probably the EU ones too?

"Can't see a feasible replacement aircraft? if there is what, what is it?"

There is only one, the Folland Gnat.

No disrespect to any of the pilots, but the Hawk simply cannot provide the same sort of display.

Riggs
I think it is your own head that is buried deep in the sand.
The SI report is of an incident that happened two and a half years ago. Much of its findings in respect of "culture" are based on theory, without supporting fact, and have been refuted. Since the incident nearly all personnel on the RAFAT, pilots and supporting personnel have changed. The team has a new chain of command and updated procedures. They have been inspected umpteen times and received glowing reports. They have had two excellent display seasons and several foreign display tours. The RAF clearly believes that they are fit for purpose.
So on what grounds do you think the CAA should now intervene to stop them displaying?

If they'd been addressed as soon as they were discovered the accident probably wouldn't have happened. As soon as "reluctantly acknowledged by MoD" might be more accurate.