This flyin seems to be the new euro-oshkosh (maybe the comparison is a bit exaggerated):
https://sites.google.com/view/experimental-aviation
It is the european experimental fly-in, in Switzerland this year. Camping is allowed, along with local flying during the weekend and visits of the area.
which, if it were more general, would confirm the demise of volunteer enthusiasm, as claimed here in another thread.
Or maybe confirm that taking a PPL means you want to fly, not run air shows?
… which, if it were more general, would confirm the demise of volunteer enthusiasm, as claimed here in another thread.
Regarding Hahnweide I was able to talk to a member of the flying club that is the organiser of the event. According to him, the cancellation of the airshow is not caused by regulations or complications inflicted by the insurers, but rather by a kind of silent revolt of the flying club members against the club management: ”We joined this club and spend our money and free time here because we want to fly aeroplanes and not because we want to organise and host airshows.” But of course this is only the opinion of one person.
I know nothing of the background to this but there are many instances of where somebody pulls the plug on something, citing “insurance” or “liability”.
In virtually all cases it turns out to be bollocks, and the reason is really something else.
You can get insurance for nearly everything, and the price is usually not as high as people think.
One example: people who own hangars claim that insurance costs are prohibitive, and they use this to increase the rental to say 10 aircraft by a total of £5000/year.
Guess what the annual premium for a 10 x TB20 sized hangar is?
About £600/year (quoted a few years ago, and aviation insurance hasn’t gone up).
“Liability” is a handy excuse for just about everything that somebody doesn’t want to do anymore for private/personal or business reasons.
If you then call the person’s bluff and ask them to show you their insurance quotes, they usually get aggressive and terminate the conversation…
You can never mitigate all risk. Because when you do someone more creative will find away around your mitigation.
The problem is when a regulator clamps down on all flying events because of a mistake by one pilot. If the organiser is negligent, then I agree with additional regulations to with may close an event, but when an individual makes a mistake or is negligent, why do the majority suffer?
We are still speculating but if the reasons for Hahnwiede and Tannkosh are additional regulations, then an individual has ruined things for the rest of us. If you want no risk, stay at home.
I agree with Rhino’s perceived risk statement… Because it is subjective. Oh yeah, and don’t go around anyone else’s house for dinner at the moment in case you catch Ebola from Spaghetti – the risk is HUGE…
Good explanation of reality, Rhino 
Shorrick, how I manage my own risks is my own business, not yours. I’ve been pretty good at it to date. I’ve never been hospitalized for any reason and never made a claim on any vehicle insurance policy I’ve ever bought. I think that’s pretty good after (for instance) 40 years of continuously riding motorcycles all over the world – never mind flying. I think part of the reason for that success to date is that I was not discouraged from taking risks as a kid, and learned that part of adult behavior early. I started with motorcycles every day when I was nine, and flew first at fifteen, soloing on my 16th birthday. That’s the best kind of training for life.
You do. Your wife and especially your children come with you, to some extent out of their free will, but they know nothing about their risk.
Isn’t that a bit condescending? Children is another story, obviously, up to a certain age. That’s why they have legal guardians. Wives (and other people) don’t usually have that and don’t need to, I should like to think.
Do they know there’s a risk of an accident when going to an air show, maybe witnessing crazy aerobatics? Sure they do. In my experience, women (especially mothers) are MORE aware of the risks than others, not less.
Can they accurately judge the odds? Certainly not. Can you? Certainly not! Can all healthy, adult attendants judge for themselves if they are willing to take the perceived risk of an airshow? Certainly.
QuoteAnd the whole risk management thing only works if the odds are known, which in many cases in life they are not.
I don’t see why I can’t manage (i.e. mitigate or willfully accept, …) a risk if I don’t know the odds. In risk management, I will ALWAYS work with approximations and I will almost never actually KNOW the odds (unless maybe in a staged experiment in a controlled environment, say rolling dice). There’s just too many factors involved. Even for pilots.
As a pilot I certainly hope you work out your risks and odds ex-ante as opposed to “by doing”…
The way you work out the risks and odds is by doing which is why I think societies eventually stagnate and fail when individuals are prevented from taking risks. The same is true when government improperly encroaches into the role of the family unit.
