Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3664 times:
The U.S. probably has more airshows than anywhere in the world, and they have not had a single airshow spectator fatality in 50 years. Why? Because rules were put in place a long time ago, regulating how and where the planes can make their maneuvers. Europe has implemented the same kind of rules recently, but the ex-Soviet states have not - hence the deaths.
No need to ban airshows, just implement the rules that have been proven elsewhere to significantly enhance security.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13497 posts, RR: 76
Reply 5, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3640 times:
Unsafe shows should be banned yes, as pointed out the US has an excellent safety record due to regulation, the last crowd fatality at a UK show was at Farnborough, in 1952.
We've had airshow crashes since, though never anywhere near the crowd, because the shows, and the display pilots, are properly mangaged.
Did we ban Ocean Liners after the Titanic? No, but safety was increased.
Go to a properly managed show, the biggest risk by far is from a road accident getting to, and leaving the show.
So we now ban cars?
Bravo45 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 2165 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3595 times:
Ofcourse air shows shouldn''t be banned. Had the security measures been better, we would not have had this tragedy. But banning the airshows is not going to help. Increased security that includes safe shows may be avoiding flying over the spectators and of this ort would help. Air shows are the promoters of aviation. Almost all new aircrafts (except the secret military ones) are launced in airshows. They are a very important part of aviation industry. Nothing is perfect and this was one tragic loss that revealed a hole in the security. We should fill that hole and take measures of any other potential holes that appear dangerous to us and we shouldkeep flying in those limits.
Leezyjet From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 4049 posts, RR: 52
Reply 8, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 3526 times:
"Nothing is perfect and this was one tragic loss that revealed a hole in the security"
Don't think security had anything to do with it, more the rules and regulations the country had in place and the organisation of the event itself and where the crowd line was in relation to the display area.
I'm sure the security was fine. Lots of soliders with guns to protect the a/c etc. They ain't going to stop an accident like that, and would have just been following the rules that had been put in place by the organisers with regard to where the crowd were.
"She Rolls, 45 knots, 90, 135, nose comes up to 20 degrees, she's airborne - She flies, Concorde Flies"
Silverstreak From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 281 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 3512 times:
I live in San Francisco and every year we have a "Navy Day". It is great to have the ships in and the accompanying airshow, but I have to say the airshow is risky stuff. I have enjoyed watching all types of aircraft all my life. The only time I dread watching them is when the Blue Angels are in town. The Blue Angels are great and I really do admire the skill of the pilots. I also have no doubt in mind that these pilots have safety on their minds at all times. All that being said the Blue Angels shouldn't fly over San Francisco - one of the most densely populated cities in the U.S. The chances of these guys crashing are very remote, but with tens of thousands of people living under their flight paths, I just feel it is not worth the risk.
Aviasian From Singapore, joined Jan 2001, 1490 posts, RR: 13
Reply 13, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3425 times:
By Captjetblast's logic, ban cars from the road . . . you know how many get killed on the road each year?
Ban food, because many people choke to death eating a simple meal at home and in restaurants.
Airshow organisers should relook their safety guidelines and become better acquainted with the constraints of the airshow location and the aircraft's performance before approving a show routine . . . let the show go on, please.
Aviatsiya.ru From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 3387 times:
Europe has implemented the same kind of rules recently, but the ex-Soviet states have not - hence the deaths.
Actually, the Soviet states do have rules.
The Su-27 crash is now a criminal investigation....
As Ukrainians prayed for the dead on a national day of mourning, Prosecutor-General Svyatoslav Pyskun said the pilots had been given a "wrong task" by their chiefs, who had flouted safety rules by allowing them to fly over the crowd. He said four top military officials, including the ex-Soviet state's air force commander, were in detention cells awaiting a court decision on whether to continue to hold them during an investigation into their "serious errors". "It was negligence, military negligence...it was a crime committed by the military," he told a news conference, adding it was so far unknown why the plane had crashed. "There are also signs that there were criminal acts committed by the pilots," he said. Most analysts have said spectators should not have been allowed to sit or stand under the flight path of planes taking part in the air show. They say the twin-engined jet that crashed was flying too low to complete a rolling turn.
If rules are broken, you can't say that rules aren't there, but that those breaking the rules are responsible. Can happen anywhere; America, Europe or CIS
Trident From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 484 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3382 times:
The UK has probably the strictest airshow safety regulations in the world. The John Derry DH110 accident at Farnborough in 1952 was a turning point regarding British airshows. It is not true that flying at or over the crowd is banned. However, displays are pre-vetted by an "Airshow Committee" who examine all aspects of the intended routine. What is important are factors such as trajectories and minimum heights for the various manouevers. I attended Farnborough on Sunday and on many occasions aircraft were pointing directly at the crowd but their trajectories would always take them away from the crowd in the event of serious failure or loss of control. Different aircraft are set different parameters depending on their speeds and weights. For example, the Eurofighter's limits would have been very different to those of the Sukhoi Su26 aerobatic 'plane.