Jump to content

Blue Angels Announce 2007 Show Schedule


erynthered

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

that depends on how old you're turning :unsure:

 

mind you, flour, unlike fueling a jet, doesn't cost over a $1000.

 

 

Try calling for an angel food cake when you really, really need an airstrike !

 

Pilots ahve to fly to maintain their skill - so, they could fly out over the middle of the Nevada desert where no one can see them - or in front of a really big crowd of appreciative taxpayers.

 

They are going to fly anyway !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so the American people need to be deafened/wowed by priceless, highly volatile air craft?

 

I understand the need for combat, but we're talking about flying around in circles so a bunch of half-drunk people in lawn chairs can say, "ooooooo."

 

I think the good folks at Lockheed Martin would take offense to your highly volatile aircraft sentiment.

 

Think of it this way:

 

Major corporations spend millions of dollars a year on public relations and advertising. If the military wants to connect with the public and attract next generations pilots, it needs to spread good will to the public it serves. These displays do just that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like that. Am I the only person who thinks the Blue Angels and air-shows in general are a collosal waste of gas and money? Does the world really need more noise pollution? Not that airplanes aren't really cool, and fast, and ultima-killing machines and all...

 

Smile and say "cheese" for the pipper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try calling for an angel food cake when you really, really need an airstrike !

 

Pilots ahve to fly to maintain their skill - so, they could fly out over the middle of the Nevada desert where no one can see them - or in front of a really big crowd of appreciative taxpayers.

 

They are going to fly anyway !

 

haha best point so far!

 

and for the record I don't really hate on air shows as much as this debate might suggest. I just found myself in defense mode...

 

but seriously, they're dangerous and loud! :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like that. Am I the only person who thinks the Blue Angels and air-shows in general are a collosal waste of gas and money? Does the world really need more noise pollution? Not that airplanes aren't really cool, and fast, and ultima-killing machines and all...

Well of course it always has to start. Why do you suppose we are Bills fans and like to watch the Bills play? It is because they are professionals and we enjoy watching some of the things they can do, that we can't. You wanna be impressed? Download Limewire, then download Van Halen's "Dreams" video. You DO NOT see this stuff everyday. Like them or not, they are talented professionals!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the military even pretends these shows are NECESSARY for testing, t=etc. That's a totally bogus argument, IMO.

 

They are for show...patriotism...PROPAGANDA. pure and simple. That's the deal:

 

"For us, it's a recruiting opportunity. It's a requirement," said Navy Lt. Rob Webster, who books the prestigious Blue Angels precision flying team for about 36 aerobatic displays each year.

The best argument for doing these shows, IMO, is to give the public a view of where their tax dollars go:

 

"Air shows represent a unique opportunity for the American military to demonstrate the capability of the planes and the pilots in front of the general public," said John Cudahy, president of the International Council of Air Shows, a trade group in Leesburg, Va.

 

They play "a critically important part in getting and keeping American citizen support for all that the military does."

 

However, I have a feeling the public may not be so supportive if they new exactly how much these events cost. That's just my guess though.

 

As for the risk...Of course there is risk. Some places more than others. When a Blue Angel went down in rural Niagara County, I don't think it did much damage. On the other hand, if one had hit a high rise in downtown SF...well, we know how that turns out, right?

 

Cudahy conceded that the performances "come with a certain amount of risk, but not more so than a typical training exercise that the military has.

 

"If an F-14 crashed into the North Atlantic on a training exercise, nobody would be paying much attention," Cudahy said. If the crash occurs at an air show, "where everybody has video cameras, it's burned into the conscience of anybody who watches the local news."

 

What is forgotten, Cudahy said, is that on average, there are "a tad over four" air show accidents a year involving civilian and military equipment.

 

"Flying has some inherent risks. Air show flying has additional inherent risks," he said.

They have moved the show from downtown SF, but still buzz the Golden Gate Bridge. No biggie if they hit it I suppose.

 

So, put a sock in the, necessary for training, bulls#it. It just isn't so. So, should we spend the $ and risk lives for this show? You make the call:

 

But ending military participation in such shows would be "a horribly shortsighted mistake" because of the goodwill and attendance the appearances generate.

 

"The Blue Angels and the [Air Force] Thunderbirds are the Rolling Stones of air shows," Cudahy said.

 

I think the Rolling Stones concert is a waste of $...and I'd vote to stop them. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey guys, NO ONE here has no dog in the money needed for one of these shows. If you are a Bills fan, or fan of any professional team, you pay for tickets, shirts, jerseys, ball caps, food, memorabilia, etc... so a guy can make a cool 7 mil a year. Yeah, good point to argue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey guys, NO ONE here has no dog in the money needed for one of these shows. If you are a Bills fan, or fan of any professional team, you pay for tickets, shirts, jerseys, ball caps, food, memorabilia, etc... so a guy can make a cool 7 mil a year. Yeah, good point to argue.

 

English motha phocker, do you speak it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the military even pretends these shows are NECESSARY for testing, t=etc. That's a totally bogus argument, IMO.

 

They are for show...patriotism...PROPAGANDA. pure and simple. That's the deal:

 

The best argument for doing these shows, IMO, is to give the public a view of where their tax dollars go:

However, I have a feeling the public may not be so supportive if they new exactly how much these events cost. That's just my guess though.

 

As for the risk...Of course there is risk. Some places more than others. When a Blue Angel went down in rural Niagara County, I don't think it did much damage. On the other hand, if one had hit a high rise in downtown SF...well, we know how that turns out, right?

 

They have moved the show from downtown SF, but still buzz the Golden Gate Bridge. No biggie if they hit it I suppose.

 

So, put a sock in the, necessary for training, bulls#it. It just isn't so. So, should we spend the $ and risk lives for this show? You make the call:

 

 

 

I think the Rolling Stones concert is a waste of $...and I'd vote to stop them. :unsure:

 

 

It's an airshow. You either get it or you don't. You obviously don't. Next, fly-in breakfasts. Another waste of aviation fuel, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...