Is it time to to ban vintage air shows?

rather than attempt to hit the airfield, where maybe hundreds may have perished, he made the split second decision to turn away and try to avoid the spectators
If that is the case, he will be seen as a hero because he only killed 11, whereas a motorist who swerves to avoid a 'pile up' and hits a motorcyclist would be a criminal.
 
Sponsored Links
rather than attempt to hit the airfield, where maybe hundreds may have perished, he made the split second decision to turn away and try to avoid the spectators
If that is the case, he will be seen as a hero because he only killed 11, whereas a motorist who swerves to avoid a 'pile up' and hits a motorcyclist would be a criminal.

A motorist is supposed to drive with the proviso that they can stop in ample time, and not doing so could be construed as driving without due care and attention / reckless driving / worse.
Also, swerving to avoid a collision (necessary only because one couldn't stop in time, in the first place) is not acceptable (IIRC, swerving rather than emergency braking is an instant "fail" in one's driving test).
 
Sponsored Links
His name is really Big-Al but you can see what happened there.:rolleyes:
 
If we banned everything when someone dies doing it then we would have to ban everything...
Please differentiate between necessities for modern life and other people's 'fun' causing harm to random people.


Firstly, no need to shout. Secondly, who are you or I to decide what is and is not a necessity or is or is not Fun...different people, different cultures have different ideas and standards. Last time I looked Stalin was dead so we do not have or need the state deciding what is and is not fun and what pastimes should or should not be banned.

However, 29 people died last year attempting to rescue people who got into trouble Rambling, cycling, sailing or mountain climbing...not to mention the approximately 30 people who died doing those past times (not including road accidents involving cyclists).

That is more than have died at air shows in the last decade in the UK...so which is more dangerous...flying a plane or rescuing people?? MMMMM decisions decisions. :)
 
Don't ban them, just rethink where to hold them surely? Over the sea or countryside where risk of accidental death is kept to a minimum is just an idea. At the end of the day, it was an accident, be it the plane, human error, whatever. Little comfort but ****ty things, no matter our best intentions and efforts, just happen.
 
who are you or I to decide what is and is not a necessity or is or is not Fun...different people, different cultures have different ideas and standards.
That's how our society works.

Last time I looked Stalin was dead so we do not have or need the state deciding what is and is not fun and what pastimes should or should not be banned.
Of course we do. That's how it works.

Please, not just you, stop saying because people get killed on their way to work, being killed by any spurious means is acceptable.

However, 29 people died last year attempting to rescue people who got into trouble Rambling, cycling, sailing or mountain climbing...not to mention the approximately 30 people who died doing those past times (not including road accidents involving cyclists).
They chose to do that.

That is more than have died at air shows in the last decade in the UK...so which is more dangerous...flying a plane or rescuing people?? MMMMM decisions decisions. :)
You are doing it again.

Should people choose to take part in dangerous pastimes and get killed that is their choice.
I do not want mine to be harmed by people doing unnecessary things in which they have no part.
 
To drnowt

There is a difference between normal flights which are necessary for the modern world and people having 'fun'.
It is avoidable and in our small cramped country there are very few places where it would be far enough away from the rest of the population.

Of course, I'm aware there is a difference (although what counts as a normal flight, which is necessary for the modern world is debatable, obvious examples aside). I wasn't making a comparison, my point was more about natural reactions to tragic incidents such as this.

Risks to innocent parties will always exist, whether it's in the name of fun, profit, shoddy workmanship or otherwise. I don't believe we can ban our way to a risk free utopia. Regulation is the answer, and aviation enthusiasts will have to accept the inevitable changes ahead.
 
Yes, there will be additional regulations, just as there have been in the past. However, I'm sure it will not mean the end of air displays. No flying below 500' (which I think may already be in place) and careful choice of sites (over the sea or away from main roads, etc) are likely to feature.
The recent tragedy has, understandably, caused a knee-jerk reaction but I think that when people's feelings have cooled good sense will prevail.
 
That's how our society works.

Actually NO, that is not how society works, it only gives that impression, but hey ho

Of course we do. That's how it works..

There you go again, submitting to the notion that this is how it works..well no it doesn't

Please, not just you, stop saying because people get killed on their way to work, being killed by any spurious means is acceptable.

All accidents are spurious and random..that's why they are called ACCIDENTS!!

[
They chose to do that..

And the people on the A27 chose to drive along it. Using your logic it was their fault the accident happened to them.

You are doing it again..

What? You meaning stating the obvious reality of the world we live in? Sorry, it's an annoying habit I have, rather than spouting nonsense because the world is no perfectly how I think it should be.

Should people choose to take part in dangerous pastimes and get killed that is their choice.
I do not want mine to be harmed by people doing unnecessary things in which they have no part.

All accident are random. Using your self imposed and rather dictatorial logic we should ban the following, because they have killed the innocent who were not party to what was going on before.

  • All air travel, because both civilian and military aircraft have randomly crashed onto the ground killing people who were not in the aircraft...how bloody selfish is that!!
  • All Trains, because they have randomly crashed into the innocent who were no passengers...again selfish bloody trains!
  • Cars, they are responsible for the culling of more innocent human life who had no choice than any other form of transport, it is random...and lets not forget, some people have even been killed watching them race..Shock Horror!!
  • Trucks...see the comments about cars
  • Buses and Coaches...See the comment about Trucks and Cars...
  • Fire Works....loads of innocent people have been killed by them over the years...
  • Electricity...Oh yes, lets ban that pesky invisible killer of the innocent...
  • Golf... about 20 innocent people, not playing Golf, have been killed by Golf balls struck outside of the green..
  • Cricket...I know of two instances where a person was killed after being struck by a cricket ball hit outside of a ground
  • Football...Yes, people die at football stadia all the time, heart attacks, crushing and you remember Hillsborough and Bradford City...those people didn't attend to be burned or crushed...
You see, like it or not, all accidents are simply random, that is why we call them accidents. Should we ban everything where an accident occurs and people die...NO, should we look into making it safer, investigate what went wrong dispassionately and make fair and reasonable judgements about how to prevent, as far as is reasonably practicable, such events reoccurring.. of course we should, but simply banning it is not the answer.
 
there is a simple way to make air displays safe for the non participants
take note off the local air show dates and do not drive within 5 miles off the area

or carry on as normal knowing your life is more likely to be shortened by the pointless worrying about nothing
 
Should people choose to take part in dangerous pastimes and get killed that is their choice.
I do not want mine to be harmed by people doing unnecessary things in which they have no part.

I'm sorry to disappoint you but unless you wrap your children in cotton wool for the rest of their lives and refuse to let them go over the doorstep, then they are going to be exposed to all manner of dangerous things in the world.
What are you going to do when they start working for a living? You can't go into a workplace and demand they stop doing things a certain way or change their machines because, even though they may comply fully with health & safety at work regulations, there could be a slim chance that some other employee may, just may, do something stupid and cause your child harm.

We ALL do things which carry risks, yes even you, but we try to minimise those risks for both our own benefit and those around us. But as long as there are humans involved in anything then there is potential for ACCIDENTS to happen. Its called living. Anything less is called existing.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top