Save the Eastbourne Air Show

The good

An air show is an attractive event; the drive to Eastbourne proved that. The fact that from the Thursday to Sunday not far off a million visitors turned out to see the show says it all and is just too powerful a draw to write off while consultations are conducted into its viability.

Showing aircraft such as the B1 and Typhoon firmly reinforces the value held by the event. What this demonstrates is how the tourism and marketing departments done a fine job of organising and promoting the show.

The bad

Economics: Two main comments about the shows economic viability focused on why queues of businesses weren’t lining up to sponsor the show and that visitors were getting a free day out and spending little or no money.

What I have to say is: 1, I didn't know who sponsored the show until the report about them withdrawing and 2, I actually found it hard to spend money when I was there.

Environmental: Localised pollution caused by low level flying was a concern but primarily and more seriously, the sheer volume of cars, idling in traffic pumping CO2 into Eastbourne seafront.

What I have to say is: I would like to hear any report of measurement into the aircraft pollutants distributed along the coast. Despite burning huge quantities of fuel, turbines are extremely efficient; they have to be. Regarding road traffic, it was a nightmare. I went in a party of 10, in two cars, to see the show and we crawled from the outskirts in. A lot of traffic and an awful lot of pollution no doubt.

My $0.02

Economics:

My perception of this point is taken from recent Formula 1 trips in Italy, particularly Monza. Monza GP is a weekend event that attracts around 150,000 people to a very small town. You are left in no doubt whatsoever to the sponsors of the event. At Airbourne, I had no idea. If a sweeping group of the visitors were asked to pick out sponsors from a list of businesses I doubt the majority could identify them. This has to be addressed. A business will not put money into an event without leaving an impression, something I felt lacked. There are many places to advertise such as coach pickup points, car parks, roundabouts, promenade etc, wherever people gather. There is most certainly scope to maximize the advertising impact of sponsors making it more attractive a proposition. Not everyone knows about Airbourne from the TV or radio. Word of mouth is by far the biggest referrer and there's no way word of mouth will carry advertising too. Definitely room for improvement.

Now, on to spending money. You have a million people, all staring at the sky, many of which don't have sun glasses, hats, umbrellas, cheap telescopes etc. Where were the traders? Admittedly, I was East of the Pier but so were many thousands of others, a huge buying market. After walking some distance to find somewhere to get a hotdog or ice cream, the queues were tiresome, and by the time I was getting served, I needed the loo, which also had a queue. All this meant I really didn't bother moving for the rest of the day.

At the Formula 1 event in Monza, apart from knowing who the sponsors are, you are also flush with opportunities to purchase pizza, hotdogs, drink, sunglasses, pretty much anything you need really; the traders came to the people. Definitely an opportunity missed.

Environmental:

I'll dismiss the low level flying issue as I genuinely believe it isn’t a major localised pollutant [unless told otherwise], but the major issue is the static cars bunched up in town.

I parked way back and walked in. What struck me was after walking for about 10 minutes, I saw buses and coaches taking people from car parks to the Pier. What is going on? Where is the encouragement to utilise the most economic, sustainable and environmentally friendly form of transport, walking and cycling? Where were the cycle hire stands? Why were coaches driving people to the show when they were within walking distance?

The nearer the town centre, the higher the ratio of person to vehicle needs to be. Personally, ability aside, more people should be walking or cycling their way into town, and leave the coaches further out. On the subject of ability, after walking some considerable distance already and then seeing people climb out of cars into a bus when they were 3 minutes away, it wasn't people needing a ride, it was hordes of teenagers, mums and dads with their kids [since when have kids not had the energy to walk a mile? It's not even uphill!].

By taking the coaches further out, it would allow the cars to start parking at a more consistent and even rate and also lower the person to vehicle ratio in town, lowering congestion and pollution.

I don't know the politically correct way of dealing with this, or even the optimal solution for laying out routes for coaches, cars, cyclists and walkers but there has to be a plan to cater for this and it seems to me there is room for improvement.

As much as I admire certain policies of certain political groups, I would ask if instead of calling for closure on which undoubtedly is a massive attraction for a small Sussex seaside town, perhaps put energy into sustainability by offering plans to counter current deficiencies.

It would be a very sad day to hear the Airbourne show has been grounded and something the business community wouldn't want to hear either. It's time the silent majority made a statement. We know they exist because they turned up to see the event.

You can leave your comments on the Easbourne Borough Council website.

Don't give up trying, MAKE IT WORK FOR EVERYONE!