Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Sun Jun 22, 2025 12:46 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
 Post subject: safety
PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 1:52 pm 
Offline
Probationary Member

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 7:53 pm
Posts: 3803
Location: Aspen, CO
You can love a sport or avocation or hobby and still know it is dangerous. I really loved playing football, despite an injury. I really loved ski racing, yet virtually every ski racer has had a knee injury, many have had a broken bone. I'd never tell anyone you can go down a steep hill on icy snow at 70 mph and be perfectly safe. Yet I only know of 3 fatalities in ski racing, whereas in planes I know of dozens if not hundreds. The vital area of airshows and Reno, just like Nascar is crowd safety, We can do whatever we want to ourselves, but not to the public. I watched the jet raceat Reno and speeds are near 500 mph and coming toward the pits with wide turns at the corners. If there was a midair, or stall, loss of control the wreckage could go into the crowd.

_________________
Bill Greenwood
Spitfire N308WK


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 11:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:19 pm
Posts: 67
Location: Aurora, Colorado
I know this only touches the fringe of the topic, but I have wondered for many years why the crowd is on the "outside" of the race course as opposed to the interior of the course. Since a majority of air/ground fatalities have come not from the fact of the aircafts failure but the "developed energy" that an aircraft has produced and its continued flight path beyond the "incident" point, would it seem fair to say that the crowd would be considerably safer within the pylons ?

Am I being much too simplistic about this thinking ?

_________________
Supporter of AirpowerWest
http://www.airport-data.com/photographe ... ittle;423/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jlittle2/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 11:30 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 2:29 pm
Posts: 4527
Location: Dallas, TX
jlittle2 wrote:
I have wondered for many years why the crowd is on the "outside" of the race course as opposed to the interior of the course. Since a majority of air/ground fatalities have come not from the fact of the aircafts failure but the "developed energy" that an aircraft has produced and its continued flight path beyond the "incident" point, would it seem fair to say that the crowd would be considerably safer within the pylons ?

Am I being much too simplistic about this thinking ?


Way to think outside, er, inside the box! Ya know, that kind of makes sense - to me anyway.
But then again, I think the response would be something along the lines of - how many spectators have died at Reno at this point. I think if I remember correctly that there have been either some injuries, near misses of photographers or folks near pylons.
On the other hand - if a set of controls got stuck - say in a left hand turn - which would be TOWARDS the center, then I think that could be an issue. If all of the turns are to the left, and the crowd is outside the course, then only one turn should be towards the crowd, and if it's far enough away, there is probably less danger.

Ryan

_________________
Aerial Photographer with Red Wing Aerial Photography currently based at KRBD and tailwheel CFI.
Websites: Texas Tailwheel Flight Training, DoolittleRaid.com and Lbirds.com.

The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but safety is of the LORD. - Prov. 21:31 - Train, Practice, Trust.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 11:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:19 pm
Posts: 67
Location: Aurora, Colorado
RyanShort1 wrote:
jlittle2 wrote:
I have wondered for many years why the crowd is on the "outside" of the race course as opposed to the interior of the course. Since a majority of air/ground fatalities have come not from the fact of the aircafts failure but the "developed energy" that an aircraft has produced and its continued flight path beyond the "incident" point, would it seem fair to say that the crowd would be considerably safer within the pylons ?

Am I being much too simplistic about this thinking ?


On the other hand - if a set of controls got stuck - say in a left hand turn - which would be TOWARDS the center, then I think that could be an issue. If all of the turns are to the left, and the crowd is outside the course, then only one turn should be towards the crowd, and if it's far enough away, there is probably less danger.

Ryan


That makes as much sense as my thoughts. And I should have qualified the fact that I was talking about not Reno based crowd incursions, but what occures even at many parallel line airshows. Potential energy seems to be the key word, when discussing death and injuries resulting from an aircraft involved incident.

_________________
Supporter of AirpowerWest
http://www.airport-data.com/photographe ... ittle;423/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jlittle2/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 12:08 am 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 5:42 pm
Posts: 6884
Location: The Goldfields, Victoria, Australia
Thanks, jlittle2. Energy management as a safety factor is something mostly misunderstood when regarding airshows (races are, again, subject to specific different factors also.) For instance aircraft flying over the crowd don't worry me, but when their energy is directed towards the crowd, there's a greater risk, and that flight direction is sometimes unavoidable; therefore removing other risk factors is desirable there - for instance not having jet crossovers arrowing towards the crowd.
JDK wrote:
This is exactly the kind of attitudes I'm trying to find data to address - as we all should - thanks for raising it Muddy.
ZRX61 wrote:
muddyboots wrote:
It's all about perception, and a big engine with a buzz saw attached to it is going to get lots more attention (no matter how true) than a car. Everybody drives cars. They aren't scary, unless a teenager (or maybe Eric) is behind the wheel. We're used to cars. But you don't see a thousand airplanes zipping around all day with very few accidents. However, it seems like almost every time you see an airplane in the news or on TV...it's spiraling into the ground with a bunch of nuns tied to the wings, and there's a busload of challenged children singing "jesus loves me" in its trajectory. I mean, it's all about perspective and perseption, you know?

The last big loss of spectator life at a car race (IIRC) was LeMans in '55(?) when the engine of a car that had just wrecked went thru the crowd at head height with fairly predictable results. Something like 80 deaths & in the video I saw there's a rather gruesome sound not unlike someone smashing cabbages with a large mallet..
Mass fatalities have been more recent at airshows (Rammstein etc)

The last injuries to a spectator at a UK air show was the DH110 accident with John Derry in 1952 - 1952! I know 'no accident' is no news, but that's an enviable safety record, and one that can be matched by taking the same precautions as the UK requirements.

Ramstein also wasn't recent - 1988. Subsequent airshow accidents where the public have been injured have, AFAIK, occurred in countries with a limited airshow array and experience, including on the continent. (EDIT: Ukrane, 81+ killed in 2002, Germany; 1 killed, 2008 - given their relatively low number of air events, it's interesting that having more airshows is therefore literally safer than having a few...)

From the Ramstein and Derry accident, the lessons can (and have, in most places) be learned and minimise the chance to near-zero of them happening again. The airshow environment has also changed utterly since 1952 and 1988 as well - just take a look at the safety features in cars of those eras compared to today as a rough example. I don't know what the US safety record is like, again, the cardinal rule of not killing the public seems to have been held.


Just looking at the info on that 1955 Le Mans crash. The reaction is interesting.

Quote:
After the race, an official inquiry into the accident ruled that Jaguar was not responsible for the crash, and that it was merely a racing incident. The death of the spectators was blamed on inadequate safety standards for track design, leading to a ban on motorsports in France, Switzerland, Germany, and other nations until the tracks could be brought to a higher safety standard. Switzerland's ban allowed for the running of timed motorsports such as hillclimbs, yet banned sport which allowed two cars to compete alongside one another. This forced swiss racing promoters to organize circuit events in foreign countries like France, Italy and Germany. In June 2007 the Swiss government lifted the ban on racing.[1]

After winning also the last major race of the 1955 season, the Targa Florio, Mercedes-Benz announced that they would no longer participate in factory sponsored motorsport in order to concentrate on development of regular cars. The self-imposed ban on circuit racing lasted until the 1980s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1955_Le_Mans_disaster

What, if anything, would prevent airshows being banned in a country in the event of a spectator-killing accident? (IIRC, the Ramstein accident resulted in an airshow ban in Germany).

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 4:03 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:10 pm
Posts: 3246
Location: New York
Apropos of this, I just received some spam from the airshowbuzz forum about the arrival of young Steven Hinton on the air racing scene:

Quote:
This week at Stead Field the two generations come together as Steve Jr. unseats his father as the youngest Reno Air Racer at 21 years of age. The races are mentally and physically exhausting for the pilots, teams and families. The danger is real. Mistakes are often deadly. It is a world few of us get to see, but Steven will take you into the pits for a glimpse of the real life drama as the racing begins.


I was surprised, given ASB's relatively informed audience, that it would feel the need to titillate with talk of danger. I am reminded of Hawkeye's answer when asked if he was going to the MASH cockroach races: "Nah, people just go to those things hoping to see a cockroach crash."

August


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 4:19 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:11 pm
Posts: 3160
Location: MQS- Coatesville, PA
k5083 wrote:
Apropos of this, I just received some spam from the airshowbuzz forum about the arrival of young Steven Hinton on the air racing scene:

Quote:
This week at Stead Field the two generations come together as Steve Jr. unseats his father as the youngest Reno Air Racer at 21 years of age. The races are mentally and physically exhausting for the pilots, teams and families. The danger is real. Mistakes are often deadly. It is a world few of us get to see, but Steven will take you into the pits for a glimpse of the real life drama as the racing begins.


I was surprised, given ASB's relatively informed audience, that it would feel the need to titillate with talk of danger. I am reminded of Hawkeye's answer when asked if he was going to the MASH cockroach races: "Nah, people just go to those things hoping to see a cockroach crash."

August

I have worked for Steve and my wife baby sat SteveO and his sister Amanda back in the timeframe of when Young Steve 1st attended the races. So I feel the context of this message was performing the mechanical work where what you do has no margin of error. The vast majority of pilots, mechanics and even the people with a little interest in aviation barely know of Reno. The ASB website is possibly the 1st contact that many have with air racing. That is whom this is probably aimed at as it was sent to many thousands of these uninformed persons with an interest in what flies above them.
Rich

_________________
Rich Palmer

Remember an Injured Youth
benstear.org
#64- Stay Strong and Keep the Faith

BOOM BOOM, ROUND ROUND, PROPELLER GO

Don't Be A Dilbert!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 4:26 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 6:08 pm
Posts: 2595
Location: Mississippi
you're right, of course. But here is the problem:

Quote:
The danger is real. Mistakes are often deadly


when the sport dramitizes how dangerous it is, or in this case overstates the dangers, it's not really doing itself any favors. Auto racing does the same thing, only without telling people taht they may die. And look at how many people go to races?

_________________
"I knew the jig was up when I saw the P-51D-20-NA Mustang blue-nosed bastards from Bodney, and by the way the blue was more of a royal blue than an indigo and the inner landing gear interiors were NOT green, over Berlin."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 7:56 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:10 pm
Posts: 3246
Location: New York
Yes, that was my point. And in context of the email, it was pretty clear that it was talking about mistakes while flying, not fixing, but it hardly matters. If the sport feels that the speed, noise, beautiful machines, and competitive drama aren't alluring enough, and it needs to draw attention to the danger, it is playing with fire.

August


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 8:44 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 6:08 pm
Posts: 2595
Location: Mississippi
Sorry, I missed the jist of what you were saying I was so busy beating myself on the forehead about the email. I think part of the problem is that pilots have always seen themselves as an elite. It IS a dangerous occupation if you're a dumbass. Which is why I am not a pilot :P And so pilots want to brag about how awesome they are, and how awesome their toys are, and you should of seen how this one time, I was in a flat spin and my engines had flamed out and...

It makes it a hard sell when almost ALL of popular literature and film exaggerate this, and when so many pilots seem to point out the complexity of it. While it IS complex, and not everybody need do it, it would help if there were a stronger inclination not to "talk it up"

I'm not saying that I know much about anything, but I've certainly heard more than one pilot talking this way--if only among themselves. Heck, I could point to threads on this site that laugh about it (anyone remember the one about bad landings, the lady who landed on an AF runway to the shock of the ground crews?) That kind of thing just can't be healthy for the whole "sell it to the masses" ideal...

_________________
"I knew the jig was up when I saw the P-51D-20-NA Mustang blue-nosed bastards from Bodney, and by the way the blue was more of a royal blue than an indigo and the inner landing gear interiors were NOT green, over Berlin."


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Xrayist and 62 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group