moose135 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2020 posts, RR: 12 Reply 1, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 7459 times:
The cuts are much more widespread than the two teams, and I suspect Congress will find a way to reach an agreement at the last minute as they usually do.
wingman From Spain, joined May 1999, 1856 posts, RR: 5 Reply 3, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 7251 times:
I love the Blue Angel displays myself but if the country needs to tighten its belt for the sake of defense spending in other areas, or God forbid infrastructure development or education or healthcare, then I'd put Blue Angel displays pretty near the bottom of the list of "Important Stuff To Spend Money On".
fsnuffer From United States of America, joined exactly 6 years ago today! , 229 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 7160 times:
This is just posturing. Just like in Congress when they propose cutting the budget. People scream and moan that we are going to be throwing grandma off the cliff. No one mentions the $400 million spent each year on government conferences. People love the flying teams so the Pentagon is saying they will have to go to try and get support for trying to lower the amount of cut they have to take.
Oroka From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 791 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (4 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 6743 times:
Still big cut backs even if the fiscal cliff is avoided. If I ever hope to see anything other than a RCAF or private jet... im going to have to hit an international war game airshow (like Maple Flag) or head to the US. From what I am being told US budgets to attend out of country airshows (ie Canada) are pretty much gone.
Though, I have been mulling a trip to Wright-Patterson AFB museum then a run upto the Cleveland airshow in the same trip in the summer.
connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3894 posts, RR: 13 Reply 6, posted (4 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 6728 times:
Following along the basic line of this thread, I'd say the Snowbirds future in the CF is somewhat problematic. The Tutors are fairly old and tired, although there are some spare airframes available, but with the impending defense cuts here, the operational budget will certainly be closely looked at.
bikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1628 posts, RR: 4 Reply 7, posted (4 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 6724 times:
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 6): , I'd say the Snowbirds future in the CF is somewhat problematic.
The Snowbirds substituted for the Blue Angles one year at Seattle Sea Fair. Wasn't quite the same . . .
But anything will beat a bunch of flying drones.
At least we can still have the local C-17 and Chinooks from the local bases. Hopefully, we might be able to get a P-8 fly by and more 787 if they are not still grounded by then. .
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29367 posts, RR: 61 Reply 8, posted (4 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 6613 times:
Very possible, there where major cuts to the number of demonstration teams in the Air Force. I want to say they where left with the Thunderbirds, Raptor and F-16 teams. I cant remember the cut to the Arctic Thunder budget by the Air Force but i want to say it was 10% of the previous Air Force financial contribution.
Frankly i think it is a sign how poorly the current administration has managed its finances.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
twincommander From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 149 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (4 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 6578 times:
Quoting L-188 (Reply 8): Frankly i think it is a sign how poorly the current administration has managed its finances.
i remember in elementary school, learning how to balance a checkbook. not sure if they still do that now. ( i hope so, because i know my kids mother is useless as handling money)
seems that not one of the thousands of people in the government that manage the money they steal from us knows how to do that.
bikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1628 posts, RR: 4 Reply 10, posted (4 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 6529 times:
Quoting L-188 (Reply 8): Frankly i think it is a sign how poorly the current administration has managed its finances.
When it comes to the managing military budgets, you either fire the generals or fire congress. I don't think any recent administrations was any good at doing that . . .
rampart From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 2871 posts, RR: 7 Reply 11, posted (4 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 6448 times:
Someone correct me, but hasn't this happened once before during some financial crunch? Carter or Bush the First years, maybe? I seem to recall the Thunderbirds cancelling for reasons other than safety grounding.
I would think that if the budget freeze goes nuclear, curtailing non-essential military flying would be a reasonable show of sympathy while highway construction, access to national parks, and benefit payments to veterans stopped cold.
Quoting bikerthai (Reply 7): Hopefully, we might be able to get a P-8 fly by
Cadet985 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 1417 posts, RR: 5 Reply 13, posted (4 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 6366 times:
Quoting L-188 (Reply 8): Very possible, there where major cuts to the number of demonstration teams in the Air Force. I want to say they where left with the Thunderbirds, Raptor and F-16 teams. I cant remember the cut to the Arctic Thunder budget by the Air Force but i want to say it was 10% of the previous Air Force financial contribution.
Yeah...JSOH at Andrews really stunk last year. Most of the aircraft there were actually from the USMC, and I could count on one hand the number of USAF a/c on static display. Hopefully the 2014 show will be better.
AirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2530 posts, RR: 6 Reply 16, posted (4 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 5917 times:
I say Congress begin by reducing the budget for the 89thAW, it's absolutely pathetic when POTUS flies to LAS for a 30 minute speech he otherwise could have recorded from the White House.
rampart From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 2871 posts, RR: 7 Reply 18, posted (4 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5857 times:
Quoting AirRyan (Reply 16): I say Congress begin by reducing the budget for the 89thAW, it's absolutely pathetic when POTUS flies to LAS for a 30 minute speech he otherwise could have recorded from the White House.
Yeah, everything could be done from an office. Or his bedroom for that matter, he could keep his pajama pants on. But, people want to see their president in person. We are not yet at the stage where virtual meetings and Skype can replace a political rally, press conference, or show of presidential support.
Oroka From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 791 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (4 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5566 times:
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 6): Following along the basic line of this thread, I'd say the Snowbirds future in the CF is somewhat problematic. The Tutors are fairly old and tired, although there are some spare airframes available, but with the impending defense cuts here, the operational budget will certainly be closely looked at.
There was an announcement about $755m to be spend on new jets for the 431Sqn... but I dont think anyone expects that to ever come to fruition. If we cant work out getting some front line fighters... I dont see the Snowbirds getting anything.
rwy04lga From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2255 posts, RR: 7 Reply 20, posted (4 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5308 times:
Everyone moaning and groaning about the POTUS flying off somewhere don't seem to have a problem when 'their' man is office. You never saw/heard the Obama haters mouthing off when Bush flew around and Bush haters love seeing Obama stepping off AF1. Fact is, ALL presidents fly around on AF1, that's what it's there for. A large a/c like AF1 is needed because it's not just about hauling the POTUS around, but also the 'baggage' that's required to be with him. Also, the pilots need to remain current, so they'd still need to fly, even if empty. Sorry to burst the anti-Obama/Bush/government/military/USA bubble.
The early bird gets the worm, BUT...the second mouse gets the cheese!
the thing is there needs to be cuts everywhere, and gov conferences costing 400million is quite a bit, but in the whole scheme of things 400million is pocket change.. the gov really needs to just cut spending... and make cuts everywere with everything...
NASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3099 posts, RR: 5 Reply 24, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4412 times:
quote=g38,reply=0]Someone told me today that if the budget cuts hit March 1st, the Blue Angels and the Thunderbirds could be grounded.
Thoughts...? Whats the likelyhood of this?[/quote]
My first thought is changing the title. This isn't "The End" of the Blue Angels. At the most they sit the 2013 season out until things get straightened out. Most likely this Sequestration would also cancel all "free" airforce base airshows for the rest of the year.
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 6): Following along the basic line of this thread, I'd say the Snowbirds future in the CF is somewhat problematic. The Tutors are fairly old and tired, although there are some spare airframes available, but with the impending defense cuts here, the operational budget will certainly be closely looked at.
I keep hearing that Snowbirds are going to CF-118s (F-18s), but will only be a 4-6 ship demo team. I saw Thunderbirds and Snowbirds at Daytona Beach last fall - the Snowbirds put on a way better show. Snowbirds had very tight formations while Thunderbirds were kind of sloppy and not tight. I heard that Thunderbirds did a real flat show on Sunday and it wasn't even cloudy.
[
Quoting wingman (Reply 3): I love the Blue Angel displays myself but if the country needs to tighten its belt for the sake of defense spending in other areas, or God forbid infrastructure development or education or healthcare, then I'd put Blue Angel displays pretty near the bottom of the list of "Important Stuff To Spend Money On".
Like giving away free benefits and money to illegals? Giving away free F-16s to potentially hostile governments?
Quoting rwy04lga (Reply 20): Everyone moaning and groaning about the POTUS flying off somewhere don't seem to have a problem when 'their' man is office. You never saw/heard the Obama haters mouthing off when Bush flew around and Bush haters love seeing Obama stepping off AF1. Fact is, ALL presidents fly around on AF1, that's what it's there for. A large a/c like AF1 is needed because it's not just about hauling the POTUS around, but also the 'baggage' that's required to be with him. Also, the pilots need to remain current, so they'd still need to fly, even if empty. Sorry to burst the anti-Obama/Bush/government/military/USA bubble.
Being that I never have my man in office I always have a problem about how many times they take Air Force One, Marine One and Congress/Senate uses government aircraft for vacations instead of business - or how they insist on putting us on their government health care plan while our tax dollars pay for their much better health care plans.... ok I will stop here.
connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3894 posts, RR: 13 Reply 26, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4321 times:
Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 24): I keep hearing that Snowbirds are going to CF-118s (F-18s), but will only be a 4-6 ship demo team. I saw Thunderbirds and Snowbirds at Daytona Beach last fall - the Snowbirds put on a way better show. Snowbirds had very tight formations while Thunderbirds were kind of sloppy and not tight. I heard that Thunderbirds did a real flat show on Sunday and it wasn't even cloudy.
I appreciate your compliments w.r.t. Snowbirds. They do wonders considering the a/c (CT-114 Tutor) was never designed for aerobatic manouevres and is basically 50 years old. Also cheap, relatively, to operate (i.e., no Herc following the pack, the mx staff fly r.h.s. en route). But to replace them with CF-188s (actually) is just not defensible financially, faced with large defense funding cutbacks. Perhaps a demo team with Tucanos borrowed from BBD, but I am not sure.
NASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3099 posts, RR: 5 Reply 27, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4427 times:
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 26): I appreciate your compliments w.r.t. Snowbirds. They do wonders considering the a/c (CT-114 Tutor) was never designed for aerobatic manouevres and is basically 50 years old. Also cheap, relatively, to operate (i.e., no Herc following the pack, the mx staff fly r.h.s. en route). But to replace them with CF-188s (actually) is just not defensible financially, faced with large defense funding cutbacks. Perhaps a demo team with Tucanos borrowed from BBD, but I am not sure.
As much as I love the F-18. I would rather see the Snowbirds fly a Super Tucano or CT-156 (which is the T-6 Texan II for the Yankees). I believe the Canadian version is called the Harvard II also. I think with the CT-156 or Super Tucano we could still see a 9 ship demo team and that is what makes the Snowbirds so great. Another rumored Aircraft that Snowbirds might be getting is the CT-155 Hawk (which is what we call the T-45 Goshawk in the US that the Navy has as their jet trainer)
I love the large multiship demo teams
Have only seen the Snowbirds (2X in Canada, several other times in the US), The Italian Frece Tricolori and the Brazilian Smoke Squadron. Never got to see the Red Arrows yet.
boeingfixer From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 491 posts, RR: 0 Reply 28, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4366 times:
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 26): They do wonders considering the a/c (CT-114 Tutor) was never designed for aerobatic manouevres and is basically 50 years old.
I'm curious, what makes you say this? The design and use of the CT-114 was as a primary jet trainer. A primary jet trainer, by definition alone, is designed for aerobatic maneuvers. I also had the opportunity to work the overhaul/mod line on the Tutor in the 90's and it is a well designed and built aircraft regardless of its age. The only thing about being 50 years old would be fatigue life and corrosion issues.
cjg225 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 209 posts, RR: 0 Reply 29, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3977 times:
There is a certain public relations value to these appearances. I wouldn't be certain that they'll be stopped entirely. You have to assume that they'll be significantly cut back, but the military does still have to recruit (even though we're seeing drawdowns in the size of every branch). Appearances like this do provide another angle to get people to want to join up. So long as we're maintaining the all-volunteer model, I doubt we'll see such appearances (the Blue Angels, the Thunderbirds, fly-overs, the Golden Knights, the Leap Frogs, etc.) totally disappear.
There are other ways to cut down the military budget significantly without having to cut a recruiting/public relations tool completely.
checksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 999 posts, RR: 0 Reply 30, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3902 times:
Had the opportunity to see the Red Arrows at Langley back in 2008...they put on a great show! And seeing them flying with the F-22 in formation was pretty cool.
TheCol From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2012 posts, RR: 6 Reply 32, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3880 times:
Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 24): I keep hearing that Snowbirds are going to CF-118s (F-18s), but will only be a 4-6 ship demo team.
DND has extended the life of the CT-114 Tutors until 2020, so there is plenty of time still left in those frames. The government has hinted at 2015 for a loose decision date. As for 431 Squadron, the cuts to the DND budget have already been planned out and tabled. The Snowbirds are to be kept operational.
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 26): Perhaps a demo team with Tucanos borrowed from BBD,
DND has indicated they plan to dump the leased trainers.
No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
cjg225 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 209 posts, RR: 0 Reply 33, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3762 times:
Quoting avnut43 (Reply 31): I concur with cjg225. I wonder if the military will continue to sponsor something like a NASCAR team down the road though?
Off the top of my head, I believe that the southeastern US provides, proportionally, the most members of our armed services of any region of the country. NASCAR, I think, is also most popular in the southeast. So, I'd venture to say that the military would want to keep a sponsorship like that going, again for recruiting/public relations reasons.
Given how much has to be cut, I wonder if the military won't try to find a few elephants to bag to make up the difference or they will go for a huge amount of smaller expenditures. I honestly don't know where something like sponsoring a car fits respective to, say, the Littoral Combat Ship, which has become a nightmare project, which I'd say is an "elephant" project that could be cut and free up a lot of dollars. I hate seeing projects like the LCS fail, but you have to break away from the black hole...
Oroka From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 791 posts, RR: 0 Reply 34, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3629 times:
Quoting cjg225 (Reply 33): Given how much has to be cut, I wonder if the military won't try to find a few elephants to bag to make up the difference or they will go for a huge amount of smaller expenditures. I honestly don't know where something like sponsoring a car fits respective to, say, the Littoral Combat Ship, which has become a nightmare project, which I'd say is an "elephant" project that could be cut and free up a lot of dollars. I hate seeing projects like the LCS fail, but you have to break away from the black hole...
Just like the Comanche, it was just too much woman, but lessons learned and tech developed went on to improve other systems. LCS has failed, just no one wants to be the one to pull the plug on the program. Much of this project could go into a new advanced flight of Arleigh Burke destroyer. So much money has gone into these quasi magical requirements handed down to contractors... then everyone freaks out when costs explode. Bringing magical requirements into the real world is really expensive!
A342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4656 posts, RR: 4 Reply 36, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 2891 times:
Quoting L-188 (Reply 17): Congress will never cut that budget since they use them too....
In fact congress has been shoving unneeded and unwanted jets down the 89th's throat for years
"Sequestration Cuts Ground Politicians
As sequestration budget cuts start phasing in today, Vice President Joe Biden and members of Congress will have to find new ways to get where they’re going after the military aircraft they normally fly aboard were ordered to stay on the ground.
In the case of the vice president, his decision to stop flying on Air Force Two for trips between Washington and his Delaware home was voluntary. Instead, he’ll be taking the train."
NASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3099 posts, RR: 5 Reply 37, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2866 times:
Quoting avnut43 (Reply 31): I concur with cjg225. I wonder if the military will continue to sponsor something like a NASCAR team down the road though?
That has already been cut - Military sponsorships on all sports etc was cut long before Sequestration.
Quoting TheCol (Reply 32): DND has extended the life of the CT-114 Tutors until 2020, so there is plenty of time still left in those frames. The government has hinted at 2015 for a loose decision date. As for 431 Squadron, the cuts to the DND budget have already been planned out and tabled. The Snowbirds are to be kept operational.
Lets hope the neighbors to the North don't get stupid like the people in government here and ground them.
Quoting Oroka (Reply 34): Just like the Comanche, it was just too much woman, but lessons learned and tech developed went on to improve other systems.
I am sure some of that technology went to that "stealth" blackhawk that crashed on Osama's compound.
Quoting bmacleod (Reply 35): As spectacular as the CF-118's may be they are 25-30 years old and very loud during airshows, requiring most spectators to wear earplugs.
Don't they have any Super Hornet versions?
Quoting bmacleod (Reply 35): The CT-155 Hawk is much quieter and newer model, a better choice for Snowbird replacement.
I agree - you could logically keep it a 9 ship demo team, which makes Snowbirds great in the first place since the Red Arrows aircraft are basically the same type
Quoting A342 (Reply 36): In the case of the vice president, his decision to stop flying on Air Force Two for trips between Washington and his Delaware home was voluntary. Instead, he’ll be taking the train."
Is he going to have a private train? Because all that security involved plus secret service at every bridge and crossing I would think would cost almost as much as flying Air Force 2. I am glad to see these politicians are getting their planes grounded too.
bikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1628 posts, RR: 4 Reply 39, posted (3 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2637 times:
Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 37): Because all that security involved plus secret service at every bridge and crossing I would think would cost almost as much as flying Air Force 2.
Probably deal with it similar to how they deal with a motorcade. Secret service may not be at every crossing, but your local constable may be. At least they won't have to have Harley Cops leading the train down the tracks
No SHs even ordered yet, but I'm hopeful. Boeing are doing a full court press right now to dislodge the F-35, now tHat the government has decided that "well, you know, now that we think of it, perhaps a REAL contest between candidate a/c makes more sense". With an eye to an election in 2 years.
Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 37):
Lets hope the neighbors to the North don't get stupid like the people in government here and ground them.
Projected DND funding cuts over three years is about 8%, so something will have to give. There are many needs to address, including the new fighter, new fixed wing SAR, and possibly a replacement for the leased Hawks for LIFT. Other branches of CF also have requirements. So grounding is not really out of the question.
Quoting checksixx (Reply 38): Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 24):
I keep hearing that Snowbirds are going to CF-118s (F-18s)
Its CF-188 actually...however...even the Canadians usually refer to it as the CF-18.
With (officially) out of service by about 2020, I'd doubt it. However, with the new fighter aircraft still fairly far off, I'm thinking another SLEP for the CF-188s (or CF-18s, whatever) is fairly likely. So out of service might get stretched to 2023-2025. I understand the Aussies are looking at SLEPing at least some of their Classic Hornets as well, with or without another SH purchase.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 210 posts, 
From Spain, joined May 1999, 1856 posts, 
, 229 posts, 
From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 791 posts, 
.
From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3779 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4656 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
