Air shows are a much-loved relic of the age of empire. Watching highly skilled pilots perform high-speed aerobatics is an intensely patriotic experience evocative of the death-defying exploits of generations of heroic fliers.
But the deaths of two pilots and at least nine onlookers is a high price to pay for thrilling entertainment.
The skills and risks demonstrated in air shows are essential in other circumstances. Military pilots flying fighter jets, bombers, transports, spy planes and helicopters must be able to fly while being fired upon. Pilots who fly rescue helicopters and transport medical patients must cope with the challenges of bad weather and rough terrain. Cropdusters, less common today than in years past but no less skilled, must fly low over fields and then pull up to reverse course and avoid power poles. Test pilots must push unperfected equipment as far as they dare. Commercial pilots face horrendous weather, hijackers and equipment failure.
Individuals in those occupations are sometimes forced to risk their own safety, and sometimes that of others. The public values their dedication and talent, trusts in their judgment, and benefits from the services they provide.
But putting aging an aircraft through maneuvers it was not designed to perform, near a crowd of people, is not a good idea.
The plane that came apart in Nevada this weekend had been modified for speed and then inspected for safety. The modifications were too extreme, the inspection was inadequate, 10 people are dead and many more were injured. Had the wreckage burst into flames, the toll likely would have been far higher. The pilot was 74, far past the age limit for the military and commercial airlines.
The West Virginia crash killed only the stunt pilot, who undoubtedly knew the risks he was incurring. Intellectually speaking, the spectators may have known as well. Seventy-seven people died at an air show in the Ukraine in 2002; in 1988, 70 were killed at a show at a U.S. air base in Germany. Still, humans tend to see themselves on the winning side of such statistics.
Before this year, 19 flying accidents related to the Nevada race had resulted only in the death of pilots, although some of their planes crashed in nearby residential neighborhoods. Its hard to calculate a safe distance from a race that involves planes flying as low as 100 feet above the ground, just feet apart, at speeds above 400 mph. Equipment failure or pilot error can send an out-of-control plane on a trajectory no one could have predicted.
Both accidents could have been worse, in many ways, but it could have been worse is not an appropriate standard for public safety. The weekend accidents are two crashes and 11 deaths too many, and they arent even the first this year.
Its time for air show organizers to recalculate the limits of acceptable risk. Its time for federal regulators to take a firmer stance.
And its time for the public to reconsider its appetite for sports that have such a high potential for carnage.
