Interesting discussion.
No one owning up to having an L-29?
n5151ts wrote:
Mike wrote:
n5151ts wrote:
At Reno this year I started paying closer attention to them. They seem to have some pretty good and stable flight characteristics.
Then you must have been watching a different race from many of the rest of us!
rwdfresno wrote:
My dad just sold his L-29 to Pete Taylor. They are re-engining it to fly it at Reno.
Does anyone seriously believe that we'll ever see the jets racing at Reno again?
we have lost several WWII aircraft over the years and at least one very complex purpose bilt UNLIMITED and yet we still do it.
Like it or not jets are all some of the folks come to see, and as far as that goes its all they know about. They are typically the younger group and they have no knowledge of what their grandfather did in WW II.... That being said, MANY of them come to see the jets but then also get exposed to the "big Iron" and get excited enough to start learning history. Some of them might even start respecting their elders a bit more and realize that the world is the way it is because their then 19 year old grandpa did indeed fly a B-17 into harms way.
</climbs down off of soap boX>
Excellent post. It's easy to forget most of us roll up to our first airshow for a quick thrill. (Well, you know...) From the first occasions, we tend to broaden or deepen our interests in particular areas. (Or decide the opposite gender's interest
is obtainable.
)
I've had numerous conversations with people who think the <insert brand here> jet fighter is the greatest thing ever and way cool/awesome/made them dribble whatever. Some move on; other are lucky enough to be next to a veteran chatting to an owner, and that's a major way of getting a crash-course in history and bravery.
I was interested in the aircraft as a kid, learned about them, and as I got older my respect for the men (and women) who flew and maintained these aircraft developed. Today I'm interested in the forgotten types, and the veterans who have to explain the type they flew to an essentially ignorant world. And a Merlin-powered flyby or a Dak grumbling over is nice too.
Bill Greenwood wrote:
Quote, "racing is dangerous". Sure, whether it is Reno or Indy. Maybe even the tiger act in the casino. But the danger should be for the participants, not the public who did not agree to risk their life. The planes should stay on the course, the cars on the track, and the tigers stay out of the crowd. We have had a great record of spectator safety over 45 years at airshows. If you do not care about the public, then maybe you care about the future of the races. If a jet goes into the crowd, I don't think the public or the feds are going to have a callous or blase attitude about public safety. There won't be any more races like that.
We are always one major crowd-side accident away from the vintage aviation business getting seriously cramped; yes, even in America.
Mom, pop and the kids might turn up to see an "awsome airplane crash" (and we forget that
is sadly one of the attractions for
some) but they don't expect to be part of the act when they pay for their tix. Most air forces realise this, and any airshow act needs to know it too. Part of the public-showman deal is you aren't allowed to trash the audience.
n5151ts wrote:
Quote:
They still make the Airbuss don't they?
I cant begin to imagine what it will be like when the first one of those big honkers goes down...and it WILL happen
Lots of people dead.
The key word is momentum. Whatever happens, the airline business isn't going to get shut down because of an accident. It's too big and it's got too much momentum. It might become very unprofitable because of a downturn as the result of an accident, which is the main reason the airlines care some for your safety - that's their profit margin. I think we've seen a big case study about how robust the business is though.
The same doesn't apply to vintage aviation anywhere. It's too small, and if someone gets their warbird's momentum wrong and dumps it in the crowd, there's no
need to keep airshows. Places in Europe have lost the airshow business because of this scenario; and the UK is well aware that's an unacceptable risk. America might be different - but it's not one to test, and even if you want to, killing your audience is dumb. Don't kid yourself the Prez will let you continue to play with those 'ex-military killing machines' if the public's decided 'you're dangerous'. "We're sorry about the fiery crash that looks more impressive than X-Box on TV"* isn't a strong lobby position.
Fly safe and don't mash the crowd now, or you'll be flying in such a tight box (if at all) that it won't be fun for
anyone.
Just, of course, my opinion.
n5151ts wrote:
I will meet you on the green, pistols or sabres the choice is yours!
CAC, Canadair or the vanilla North American Sabre?
Regards,
* (And, please, note the quotes - not MY views, just a mild version of how it plays on CNN.)
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
By the way, it's kinda nice wandering the streets unarmed, with a full drink.
