Revival air display

[GOATever]

It’s a shame Ray Hanna’s no longer with us, and the ‘elf n safety laws are so different now.

[9.3]

And the new minimalist air displays are all about 8.30am.... a tad different to the old days.

[GOATever]

9.3 said:

And the new minimalist air displays are all about 8.30am.... a tad different to the old days.

That said, I caught one of the open top busses from the station at Chi, to the circuit, and we had a very nice low flyover by a couple of spits and Hurricanes on the way. We got to see the lovely elliptical profile of the spit’s wings in silhouette against a dark looking sky, which was a nice start to the morning.

[MrB.]

Back from our day at The Revival, and as usual, a great day.

However......

One of the major things that gets MrsB. a bit choked is the air display. Last year, we took my sister and brother in law (a massive aircraft fan and an ACT) and he said that 2018 should be spectacular given its the 100th year of the RAF, and so we had high expectations today. Nothing. Not even a display on the infield like last year. What was that all about? Why no display?

[aeropilot]

MrB. said:

Back from our day at The Revival, and as usual, a great day.

However......

One of the major things that gets MrsB. a bit choked is the air display. Last year, we took my sister and brother in law (a massive aircraft fan and an ACT) and he said that 2018 should be spectacular given its the 100th year of the RAF, and so we had high expectations today. Nothing. Not even a display on the infield like last year. What was that all about? Why no display?

See previous posts in this thread....

Regulations changes as a result of the Shoreham Airshow crash 3 years ago.

[72twink]

MrB. said:

Back from our day at The Revival, and as usual, a great day.

However......

One of the major things that gets MrsB. a bit choked is the air display. Last year, we took my sister and brother in law (a massive aircraft fan and an ACT) and he said that 2018 should be spectacular given its the 100th year of the RAF, and so we had high expectations today. Nothing. Not even a display on the infield like last year. What was that all about? Why no display?

If you mean flying display it was every day at 8:30 - 3 x Spitfires and a Hurricane, then as usual on Saturday evening a 2 plane display at 7pm, 2 x Spitfires (mk9 and PR11). No midday display due to stricter rules on flight line distance and Goodwood having a circular crowd line, hence early and late displays where half of the circuit could be sterilised.

If you mean a static display how did you miss it? Usual place behind the new flying club building consisting of only RFC/RAF aircraft.

[ecsrobin]

The infield display had some rare treats like the Bristol Blenheim, the freshly restored lysdander (which only flew again last week) the Be2 and some great gliders. There was also a jet engine that I believe was fired up each day.

[NDA]

[Trophybloo]

MrB. said:

Back from our day at The Revival, and as usual, a great day.

However......

One of the major things that gets MrsB. a bit choked is the air display. Last year, we took my sister and brother in law (a massive aircraft fan and an ACT) and he said that 2018 should be spectacular given its the 100th year of the RAF, and so we had high expectations today. Nothing. Not even a display on the infield like last year. What was that all about? Why no display?

Feel your pain - but there are things called 'air displays' (many along the South Coast) where safe viewing can be assured. The problem is that (as another poster offered) 'elf and safety law hasn't changed - it's just that the law has been flouted for years and Shoreham was the chickens coming home to roost. We are fortunate that an air accident has never involved a packed Revival crowd.
I for one really appreciated the non stop access around the circuit to concentrate on maximising the enjoyment of the racing and many other attractions.
The in-field display was more subdued compared to the past 5 years, but the Spits and Mustang were still wonderful to get up close and personal.

[aeropilot]

Trophybloo said:

Feel your pain - but there are things called 'air displays' (many along the South Coast) where safe viewing can be assured. The problem is that (as another poster offered) 'elf and safety law hasn't changed - it's just that the law has been flouted for years and Shoreham was the chickens coming home to roost.

Not true, past Revivals have operated to the regulations in place at the time.

CAA display regulations have changed post Shoreham.

[Trophybloo]

aeropilot said:

Not true, past Revivals have operated to the regulations in place at the time.

CAA display regulations have changed post Shoreham.

Thanks for that correction. I didn't mean to imply Goodwood were not in compliance - Just they are the collateral for other parts of the air display community not having had their house in order.

However, was Ray Hannah's famous startline pass in compliance with the then extant regs?

[Eric Mc]

He wasn't taking part in an air display.

[Trophybloo]

Eric Mc said:

He wasn't taking part in an air display.

OK - for the sake of preciseness - Was RH in compliance with the CAA regulations which may have applied at that time for low flying historic aircraft? Or even simpler was the pass legal? Y or N.
I am not grinding an axe here, just want to gauge how attitudes have changed in the last 20 years.

[aeropilot]

Trophybloo said:

However, was Ray Hannah's famous startline pass in compliance with the then extant regs?

Not exactly......he was, to use a motor racing term, 'summoned to the Chief Stewards Office afterwards' to discuss the matter......which is why it never occurred again.

[WJNB]

aeropilot said:

Not exactly......he was, to use a motor racing term, 'summoned to the Chief Stewards Office afterwards' to discuss the matter......which is why it never occurred again.

And rightly so as it was a stupid act of bravado, an ego trip. He had delusions of importance as I was to experienced when I had to interview him for a radio programme at a later Revival where he went out of the way to be awkward & uncooperative.

[DeejRC]

Congratulations- you just defined a pilot!

[Eric Mc]

Trophybloo said:

OK - for the sake of preciseness - Was RH in compliance with the CAA regulations which may have applied at that time for low flying historic aircraft? Or even simpler was the pass legal? Y or N.
I am not grinding an axe here, just want to gauge how attitudes have changed in the last 20 years.

I don't think he contravened any "law" at all.

[Trophybloo]

Eric Mc said:

Trophybloo said:

OK - for the sake of preciseness - Was RH in compliance with the CAA regulations which may have applied at that time for low flying historic aircraft? Or even simpler was the pass legal? Y or N.
I am not grinding an axe here, just want to gauge how attitudes have changed in the last 20 years.

I don't think he contravened any "law" at all.

The CAA procedures covering uncertificated aerodromes (which includes Goodwood) states:

"Rule 5 of the RoAR 2007, amongst other requirements, prohibits flights below 1,000 ft
over 'congested' areas except when aircraft are taking off or landing in accordance
with normal aviation practice. It is an important safety consideration that climb out,
approach and circuit paths at unlicensed aerodromes do not overfly built-up areas, but
see Appendix A also. These Congested Areas are legally defined in Article 255 of the
ANO 2009 as ‘in relation to a city, town, or settlement, any area which is substantially
used for residential, industrial, commercial or recreational purposes;...’".

There are exemptions for military low flying. I believe that this was the situation in 1998 too (happy to be corrected). So as the CAA are the statutory body for applying aviation law it's pretty clear that Hannah did break their rules for 'Safe Operating Practices at Unlicensed Aerodromes' and hence broke the law. I presume there are also exemptions / modifications for flying heights in relation to air displays (Red Arrow passes, Phantom runway passes followed by steep climbs etc.) but as you posted earlier Hannah wasn't taking part in an air display.
All fun and games until someone loses an eye!

[Eric Mc]

The term "Dog with bone" comes to mind.

The CAA has amended its display rules many times over the decades - usually following some accident or other.

The fact that Hanna was not actually performing during a display probably meant that they would not have formally charged him with anything - and they didn't.

The people who had "control" over his behaviour were the organisers of the event -and as been pointed out - he was given a bit of a telling off by them.

Quoting a 2007 piece of legislation in respect of a 1998 event does seem a bit irrelevant, I have to say.

[Trophybloo]

Eric Mc said:

Quoting a 2007 piece of legislation in respect of a 1998 event does seem a bit irrelevant, I have to say.

UK Rules of the Air 1996 were exactly the same regarding the 500 and 1000 ft rules. The event organisers had no legal control over RH, that role is ATC. Yes I am a dog with a bone where ill-founded assertions masquerading as fact get spread around. I didn't know before this thread started but am pretty sure now that too many blind eyes were turned in the past. A bking from Organisers was shrug offable - A formal ATC report wouldn't have been.