Mustang accident

[Madfish]

Seriously, what's with all the static number comparisons. It doesn't matter how many farmers die or people get hit by lightning as their sample size is bigger. You'd have to say how many farmers die per bread or how many people die per lighting strike. It's basic first grader math........

That aside, why can't both sides be a bit more tolerant? It's a fact that reno racing is probably the most dangerous air sport. More dangerous than stunt flying, formation flying and others. Which is ridiculous. You'd also have to wonder why redbull air races are so much safer than reno ones although they are more popular?

So yes, both sides are right. No bans but more safety precautions. I already mentioned a few.
- Autopilots in case of pilot failure and race track area violations
- Parachutes as safety measures (for the planes!)
- Skidding protection for viewers to prevent the plane from slipping into the crowd
- More distance between spectators and the racers
- Better course layouts, coupled with mentioned above security measures this could seriously help
- Recorders for plane functions to make aft-crash diagnosis easier


So although his desire for a ban is a little premature I also question if reno racing has things under control. I also wonder if people in this thread are overlooking a few basics just to validate their point.
Just because something is risky it doesn't mean you should not try to minimize the risks involved!

Both sides are correct in my opinion.

Originally Posted by Madfish

You'd also have to wonder why redbull air races are so much safer than reno ones although they are more popular?

There are several reasons why Red Bull races are safer.

1. Red Bull has terminated the series.
2. only 1 aircraft on the course at a time
3. aircraft are slower
4. aircraft are more reliable

Good luck making the death races safer! I don't see it happening.

[Madfish]

When will this debate find a middle ground? Both standpoints are correct.

Reno races NEED more safety measures, otherwise the series needs to lay out different strategic goals unless it's safe enough for both pilots AND spectators.

The "pro" fraction that always repeats the same childish insults and arguments is a bit annoying though. The spectators knew the risk? Maybe. But did they go there to die? No. All you hear on the videos is "oh my god" and other stuff - not "cool, a plane just crashed and killed a few people."
What you say there is without any respect for the pilots and people.

Also, regarding the "we knew the risk" thing. Yeah, knowing risks is all fine but if the risks are too big then it's called a suicide attempt or an attempted murder. Because, seriously, an air show can't just say: hey, we know the chances of an accident are very high so just get used to eventually ending up dead. That's completely rubbish.

If the reno races association doesn't learn from this then this is seriously BAD. However, just banning the races without evaluating what went wrong and how to avoid it is also bad.


Just agree that you BOTH have a point. Because you do.

Originally Posted by Madfish

Seriously, what's with all the static number comparisons. It doesn't matter how many farmers die or people get hit by lightning as their sample size is bigger. You'd have to say how many farmers die per bread or how many people die per lighting strike. It's basic first grader math........

That aside, why can't both sides be a bit more tolerant? It's a fact that reno racing is probably the most dangerous air sport. More dangerous than stunt flying, formation flying and others. Which is ridiculous. You'd also have to wonder why redbull air races are so much safer than reno ones although they are more popular?

So yes, both sides are right. No bans but more safety precautions. I already mentioned a few.
- Autopilots in case of pilot failure and race track area violations
- Parachutes as safety measures (for the planes!)
- Skidding protection for viewers to prevent the plane from slipping into the crowd
- More distance between spectators and the racers
- Better course layouts, coupled with mentioned above security measures this could seriously help
- Recorders for plane functions to make aft-crash diagnosis easier


So although his desire for a ban is a little premature I also question if reno racing has things under control. I also wonder if people in this thread are overlooking a few basics just to validate their point.
Just because something is risky it doesn't mean you should not try to minimize the risks involved!

Both sides are correct in my opinion.

Seriously

Originally Posted by Madfish

When will this debate find a middle ground? Both standpoints are correct.

Reno races NEED more safety measures, otherwise the series needs to lay out different strategic goals unless it's safe enough for both pilots AND spectators.

There are 3 problems finding middle ground.

1. The Reno people think the event is safe enough.
2. The anti-Reno people believe there is no way to make it safer and maintain anything close to the current format.
3. The Reno people like the current format and think the event is safe enough.

BTW, the Red Bull people stopped that race for safety reasons before there was a single fatality, and Red Bull racing appeared to be a lot safer than Reno. That is the middle ground. They should stop the race.

[Madfish]

You know, I'm trying to defend you here and also trying to defend the victims which surely DIDN'T want this to happen. But you're making it very hard... even for me. Why?

1) stopping the race isn't a middle ground
2) there are ALWAYS ways to improve
3) red bull didn't stop the series - they paused it in 2011 to make room for technological improvements, eventually even some of which I mentioned
4) there is no reno and anti-reno people. It's only you and those other "pro" faction freaks are so crazy about this. The rest of us most definately want to keep air sport alive but also make sure it's safe I believe.

So what's so hard to agree on about? I believe what Red Bull did was is the right thing to do. And they WILL re-open the series make no mistake about that.
Reno should do the same for sure. But killing the series would just be wrong.

Originally Posted by Madfish

And they WILL re-open the series make no mistake about that.

They're flying high performance aircraft close to the ground. There is simply no way to make that safe. If they restart it's only because they decided to toss the dice.

[TomcatViP]

Yeah and let's stop all the running races as it claims to many ankles per seconds !

[Sammi79]

Originally Posted by Madfish

The "pro" fraction that always repeats the same childish insults and arguments is a bit annoying though. The spectators knew the risk? Maybe. But did they go there to die? No. All you hear on the videos is "oh my god" and other stuff - not "cool, a plane just crashed and killed a few people."
What you say there is without any respect for the pilots and people.

Also, regarding the "we knew the risk" thing. Yeah, knowing risks is all fine but if the risks are too big then it's called a suicide attempt or an attempted murder. Because, seriously, an air show can't just say: hey, we know the chances of an accident are very high so just get used to eventually ending up dead. That's completely rubbish.

Firstly, when and where did I (being "pro" as you put it) fail to respect or ever insult the pilots or spectators? I think you'll find its the "con" group that is doing that by implying that they are stupid/mindless/unable to understand danger. I might add that you have insulted me twice now with your statements against my childish point view, whereas I have tried to remain as objective as possible whilst being bombarded by the over zealous 'People should be forced to remain safe for their own good' camp. Nothing can be made perfectly safe. Mundane activities can nearly be made almost perfectly safe but extreme sports will always carry a significant risk. Make it safer by all means but prepare for the fact that at some point in the future, an accident will happen and more people will be hurt/killed no matter what controls you put on it, apart from total ban. There is an argument for increasing safety measures at Reno. There is an argument to make sure that attendees be made fully aware of the possibly lethal outcomes. But to cry out 'ban! ban! ban!' without any real knowledge of the sport smacks of being jealous that some folks are a bit less risk averse and are able to have fun that you'll never be able to have yourself. Ye GADS! some people jump off mountains in a flying squirrel suit. Others smoke cigarettes at 60 a day. We all gotta go sometime, somehow.

Secondly, If I am 'pro' anything it is not Reno air racing or any particular activity, I am pro choice, pro freedom, and pro accepting responsibility for my own actions and decisions and not leaving it up to anyone else to tell me I can't/shouldn't, especially when it affects them not at all. In my view the chances of an accident at Reno involving spectators are not that high - 1 in 48 (+- 2%) though I can understand that people might find this too high and I am not opposed to trying to reduce this chance, but at the present moment, if you can't stand the heat...

Originally Posted by Sammi79

if you can't stand the heat...

...you are forced to pay a massive insurance bill if you want to continue the carnage.

[JG52Krupi]

When Reno 2012 starts I will revive this thread to mock you....

In the mean time...







Choose one.