Reds not doing full display at Farnborough - Flypasts only.

[Scudpilot]

Seems like the CAA are not allowing it:

http://aerosociety.com/News/Insight-Blo ... 16-Preview

[bizfreeq]

I suggest you read the article properly, it clearly states they will be there but no aerobatics will be performed, so likely to be flypasts only. There is to be a statement in the coming days to clarify. Nowhere does it state the CAA have said anything let alone that they aren't allowing their display, just that it is amid safety fears and that it is the RAF decision.
This is a very misleading post and also rather accusatory in what little wording you have used.

[welshandy]

Another paragraph further down about the F35's

However, while five F-35s (two F-35Bs and three F-35As) are set to travel to the UK for July, only the F-35Bs will appear in the air show. The USAF F-35As which will be at RIAT are set to miss Farnborough as, reportedly due to an arcane rule, they are only authorised to fly as part of a ‘heritage’ flight. Expect to hear a few jokes at the USAF’s expense around the chalets. - See more at: http://aerosociety.com/News/Insight-Blo ... wJI0c.dpuf

I thought the RAF were bringing a F35B as well or is it the case of the plastic airfix kit out making a repeat appearance

[POL]

Other than the OP, no-one is saying the Red Arrows won't be at Farnborough. The linked article, and a number of others, state

they will be there but no aerobatics will be performed, so likely to be flypasts only.

[Scudpilot]

OK, perhaps I worded it badly, but, my point was, they will not be carrying out their usual display.
"Insiders now confirm that the Red Arrows traditional aerobatic display at Farnborough has been dropped due to safety fears from RAF top brass."

I have tweeted the Farnborough Airshow Twitter Feed, and in the absence of any response (which I would suspect they would be swift to issue a denial if they could), it would seem to be correct.

[page_verify]

Whether it's a desirable outcome or not, it's good to see that there's an internal review process and that someone is prepared to veto what they consider to now be a potentially operationally or politically dangerous display.

[Mike]

OK, perhaps I worded it badly, but, my point was, they will not be carrying out their usual display.

Why not edit the thread title to something that is more apt?

[Scudpilot]

OK, perhaps I worded it badly, but, my point was, they will not be carrying out their usual display.

Why not edit the thread title to something that is more apt?

Until I saw your post, I was not aware that you could.

[peasus911]

Vey sad day.

[Scudpilot]

Andy Hill should be feck shot (if it turns out he was in the wrong)

[ChrisCwmbran]

Andy Hill should be feck shot (if it turns out he was in the wrong)

Not the most intelligent post.

[Nighthawke]

Andy Hill should be feck shot (if it turns out he was in the wrong)

Why - because of the tragic loss of life or because you don't get to see the Red Arrows' full display at Farnborough?

A very harsh and unhelpful comment IMHO.

Stepping outside the box for a bit and looking at this with some logic, where is the sense in 9 jets tearing around the sky at all levels, speeds and angles over a built-up area? Just because it has been going on for years does not necessarily mean it is "right". Eventually something is likely to go wrong - it has before and could again. Last week proved the case - some luck but some tragedy too.

Maybe it is time to just be glad to see aircraft flying and not just on the ground at public displays, or possibly nothing at all.

[page_verify]

I agree Nighthawke. I'm fed up of people who suggest that years of event-free displays over questionable venues is justification for continuing to do it. We're a race that learns by its mistakes, not one that celebrates its continued success at avoiding disasters. The Shoreham crash was a clear turning point in how the risk of leisure flying is perceived and as a race our instinct is to learn from that. As someone, like others on here I'm sure, who regularly makes decisions that could end me up in court or even prison if they're wrong (HSE/duty of care/corporate manslaughter etc.) I'd suggest I'd be a very poor decision maker if I didn't consider past worst cases when making decisions. I often use the analogy of aircraft crime to help people understand how to manage even the smallest of risks. On average, less than 1 passenger per airliner has ever been a hijacker so are they happy for one passenger per flight to bypass security before they board?

[Scudpilot]

Andy Hill should be feck shot (if it turns out he was in the wrong)

Why - because of the tragic loss of life or because you don't get to see the Red Arrows' full display at Farnborough?

A very harsh and unhelpful comment IMHO..

Maybe it was harsh, and it was said in the heat of the moment, if I caused offence to anyone I apologise.
However, the facts remain.
As it stands, my understanding is this. Nothing was found to be wrong with the aircraft, and the pilot appeared to carry out the manouver too low.
End result, 11 people lost their lives (this is by far the most important factor)
If Shoreham had not happened, would the the CAA have looked at the regulations? Possibly, but I doubt it, what reason would they have had to do so?
There is now talk that Farnborough Airshow may be re-located to another airfield due to it's proximity to houses.
Airshows look as thought they could be "dumbed down" in the future, meaning lower attendance, less money raised for charity, and unltimatley, could result in less people being employed, and costing jobs.
All of which, most likely would not have happened, were it not for Shoreham.
He apparently had done it before too:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/aviatio ... rlier.html

[PR9]

Very sad day when a team that are the cream of the crop and total professionals can have their wings clipped by "elf n safety."

[Blackcat1]

Awful, what if the F35 has trouble and loses control and crashes?

[ColintheCaterpillar]

Has anyone actually taken a look at the Farnborough display site? Unless you move the datum to the southern end of the airfield 50% of the Reds display would be over residential and retail areas.

Here's a different angle as food for thought: maybe as a venue for a large trade fair Farnborough has it merits, but as an airshow venue, Farnborough itself is probably no longer fit for purpose? Looking at the flying area, even the new biz jet terminal on the west side is out of bounds. The place is now just too hemmed in.

[slogen51]

I cannot agree with page-verify above.

We are a race that leans from mistakes and make improvements, we don't just give up otherwise aviation would have been abandoned at its outset.

In my opinion the focus should be on the qualification of the individual pilots and maintenance certification. So there shouldn't be a problem with professional display teams such as the Red sparrows.

Perhaps warbirds do need to be looked at more closely? As much as I enjoy warbirds I don't need to see a loop or inverted rolls .

But we are where we are , a tragic accident occurred at Shoreham and it assumed it could happen again which is true but everything involves some risk. Most people enjoy a airshow because it is daring otherwise you can go to Heathrow and watch big jets take off every few minutes.

[C24]

OK, perhaps I worded it badly, but, my point was, they will not be carrying out their usual display.

Why not edit the thread title to something that is more apt?

Until I saw your post, I was not aware that you could.

But as yet you have not edited the title

Just as I posted the above comment, it all changed. What a wonderful World, full of magic

[plmc135]

Personally I think the decision regarding the Red Arrows is the correct one. I used to live in Sandhurst in a residential area and I was standing in my front garden watching a Red's display at Farnborough several years ago.

When they performed the bomb burst manoeuvre at least one aircraft ended up over our house at a very low altitude, like their display or not, there were very few feet to spare from potential disaster. As has been stated the area around Farnborough airfield is very built up, indeed a new housing estate was built almost at the end of the runway. It is not the ideal venue for aerobatic manoeuvres, perhaps it is time to find an alternative site if companies wish to display their aircraft to the full.

I am frankly surprised that it has needed the awful events of Shoreham to change how things are conducted at Farnborough, how far away from a potential disaster was the Breguet Atlantic that went down behind the black sheds.

Paul