Blue Angels on the chopping block????

[graves_09]

This is typical budget cut politics 101, you cut the most highly popular, highly visible parts of government first even though it saves little or no money relative to the entire budget. What that does is gets people angry about the cuts and increases demands to do something about it. Last time there was a state shut down in MN, the state shut down all the state parks and rest stops during 4th of July weekend. Of course that caused a stir among the public and a compromise was reached on the budget. Threatening the BA is similar.

I would be willing to bet that the $37 mil spent on the BA is more than recouped in the local economies during the airshows. The recruiting aspect of the BA isn't solely to recruit pilots; Sailors are needed to maintain the jets, etc. I personally know an enlisted Sailor who told me he was inspired to join the Navy after seeing a flight demo team. Flight demo teams inspire kids to want to be pilots, but also to be engineers, scientists, maintainers, etc. All of which are good paying jobs and professions that the US desperately needs new people.

[-Neu-]

What about other programs that spend mega bux? NASA? Conducting experiments and developing medicines/technology in a 0g environment is good an produces results, but all these telescopes that we use to look back in time and space and try to find life on other planets are pointless. We should only have telescopes to look out for near-Earth projectiles that may one day hit us.

Actually alot of those experiments have important real world applications. Looking back into the nature of the universe allows us to validate and answer questions about how it functions, from its large scale structures to its smallest particles. For example, they have helped us to build more efficient chips in computers. So what might seem a useless area actually has some pretty important effects on our daily life.

Edited November 23, 2011 by -Neu-

[TaiidanTomcat]

My mention of Top Gun was just to point out that people are inspired from seeing something to join up ... And I'll bet more people sign up for the Navy to to go into the aviation fields than there are wanting to be SEALS ...

how soon you forget...

Thats my point- SOMETHING, Doesn't necessarily mean Demo Teams. I am willing to bet if you ask a recruiter (again this is anecdotal) They will tell you "I get recruits-- not the Blue Angels. Its hard work and shoe leather" You also tend to pander to folks who are already into the military/aviation as well. if you could spend less, and reach a wider audience, that money is better spent.

If you kill the demo teams, you kill airshows in every State that doesn't have a major base that houses combat units.

Good point, because there is no way if you can FLY a jet to an airshow. If the military made the commitment you could use funds to ensure that fast jets showed up at more shows, rather than the 37 million it takes a year to send the blues, and yes you would save money.

In response "to you make that back with the 'local economy'" that is simply not true. You cannot create enough business in one weekend a year to validate such claims. The same BS has been used to have governments buy expensive sports stadiums, and the math never works out even with sports that have 9 month seasons because half the games are "away" anyway.

Its very simple, can you "get away" with spending less, and getting the same result-- IE encouraging people to join/interacting with the public? If the answer is yes, you are overspending. If the Answer is No, than you need to find a way to save money while maintaining the blues (Half the aircraft and personnel would be smart) It should be noted, that of course there are going to be plenty of anecdotes about people being inspired by aircraft, and then joining aviation (surprise!) than the awful lot of people who join and serve in capacities that have nothing to do with aircraft. If this were say a Tank modeling forum, a lot of people probably wouldn't even blink.

In the end its just hard ball anyway.

Actually alot of those experiments have important real world applications. Looking back into the nature of the universe allows us to validate and answer questions about how it functions, from its large scale structures to its smallest particles. These discoveries in physics allows us to build more efficient electronics. What might seem a useless area actually has some pretty important effects on our daily life.

indeed. If you have used a cell phone or velcro in your life, thank NASA.

Edited November 23, 2011 by TaiidanTomcat

[Jinro]

Good point, because there is no way if you can FLY a jet to an airshow.

Then why haven't they flown here in the past 24 years? And won't sending all those gray jets end up costing just as much per year as the Blues?

[GreyGhost]

Oh yeah, how could I forget that Big Hit ...? :huh:

You are preaching about saving money in this discussion but in the F-35 thread, you're all "Damn the torpedoes! I don't care how much it costs, we neeeeeed it ..."

I do agree we need F-35 but not at the expense of sacrificing everything else including the cost of being able to operate it ...

Lock-Mart might need that $37Mill to fix another door hinge assembly on the F-35 so ...

Gregg

[Wayne S]

A show with couple of fast roping helos would be nice but rather short if that's all ya got ...

And who's to say that if the Teams go away that the whole Military Base Open House/Show won't be far behind ....?

Gregg

For the first sentence, keep in mind you are talking about a time slot, so what flys when is not technically a big deal, it is who flys for how long.

Second Sentence has to do with sponsorship, no sponsorship money, no show or a watered down show.

Funny or sad thing to think of with the Blues or Birds is, People have this thought of going to a show to see them, yet leave to beat the traffic there for not seeing them fly.

If push came to shove, I guess in the realm of marketing budget, it depends on who's budget came from where and the return on the investment. 20 million race-car sponsorship, Tv comercails or 20 million dollars worth of say Thunderbird shows. The way things work, all could possibly or never will be in the same budget.

Edited November 23, 2011 by Wayne S

[TaiidanTomcat]

Then why haven't they flown here in the past 24 years? And won't sending all those gray jets end up costing just as much per year as the Blues?

No because you are flying fewer aircraft, shorter distances.

You are preaching about saving money in this discussion but in the F-35 thread, you're all "Damn the torpedoes! I don't care how much it costs, we neeeeeed it ..."

I do agree we need F-35 but not at the expense of sacrificing everything else including the cost of being able to operate it ...

Lock-Mart might need that $37Mill to fix another door hinge assembly on the F-35 so ...

You really think this is the same thing? One is a combat asset, the other is a recruiting tool. I would probably be all "damn the torpedoes" if it was something like MRAPs, or improved body armor and other such wacky combat needs as well. Its not a fair comparison. We don't neeeed the Blue Angels. I'm sorry but we don't. I like them, and they are nice to have. But people join the military for a variety of reasons, and there are other ways to get people into the military.

[niart17]

Playing devil's advocate: So then the question becomes one of bang for buck. How much did the taxpayers have to spend to recruit each one of those people who may (or may not) have been swayed toward a military career by the display teams? And could that recruiting money have been better utilized in another way?

Don't get me wrong - I love display teams. I'd hate to see them go. But the fiscal reality we live in in 2011 and for the foreseeable future is drastically different than the one we've been living in for the past 60 years. I don't think a lot of people have really had that sink in yet.

Playing devil's advocate advocate. Granted this is a weak arguement but what the heck, here goes. What about the people that demand to see what their taxes are used for. That want to have some transparency into the workings of all the things they are funding. Short of sending everybody to a combat zone or a training excersize, airshows (including the teams) give a small peek in to the world of the military. Yes it's a peek with a lot of sequins and lip stick on it, but it's still an example of the capabilities of the equipment we pay for. That's another use for them. Might be weak but it's a point.

Bill

[niart17]

In the end this is still the USN's best recruiting tool:

Thousands join wanting to be Navy SEALs and thanks to high attrition, the SEALs maintain their elite notoriety, while the rest get stuck on tin cans for 3 years.

True, it is NOW. It was everyone wanted to be an Aviator back in the mid to late 80's. Everyone wanted to be a diver probably after "Men of Honor", a JAG after "A Few Good Men" and everyone wanted on a sub after "Hunt for Red...

well you get the point. Probably exagerating a bit but I'd imagine up until more recently, the majority of the public had little to no knowledge of what the Navy Seals were. In my opinion it's just like anything else, there are fads that come and go. But the Blues have always been around (not always but still)

Bill

[DutyCat]

I have always wondered (much as I love watching military teams perform) how many people have *ever* actually joined the military because they saw the team?

I can tell you absolutely that the Blue Angels were a major influence on me joining the Navy. I saw them first in A-4s and my eye was on the Naval Aviation from that point onward. Additionally, after my first show, I went to every show I could after that, and sought out every bit of info about the Navy I could. I never even considered joining another service or any other occupation. Naval Aviation was always it for me, and it started with the Blues.

Oh, and it absolutely was about the glitzy jets and what they represented in terms of performance, technology, excitement, professionalism of Navy pilots and maintenence crews, and the challenge and just total coolness of shipboard flight operations.

Free food, housing, medical, education, and foreign travel to exotic locations never entered my mind except as an after thought. I would have done it for free.

Edited November 23, 2011 by DutyCat

[twhite80]

They won't cut the Blues. As Homer Simpson once said about the Blue Angels: "it's America's favorite waste of taxpayer money." What the mere mention of cutting the Blues should do is reinforce the idea that Congress can't solve problems any more and it will do damage. Debt reduction and spending priorities have become politicized to the point that Congress is paralyzed. And that Ladies and Gentlemen is why Congress has a 9% approval rating.

[Les / Creative Edge Photo]

Again, the Blues ain't going anywhere. Even if they were cut the said to be $37Mill per year would only be squandered on some other govt./mil. expense and NOT saved. The Blues and T-Birds are more for especially US taxpayers getting a bit of a reward for tax monies spent and when each perform outside the USA they do more good will and Ambassadorship than any faceless, over paid, govt. bureaucrat or politician can do.

[DutyCat]

What about other programs that spend mega bux? NASA? Conducting experiments and developing medicines/technology in a 0g environment is good an produces results, but all these telescopes that we use to look back in time and space and try to find life on other planets are pointless. We should only have telescopes to look out for near-Earth projectiles that may one day hit us.

I don't know whether to call you a visionary or an Luddite. How about both. Luddite for your first couple of comments, visionary for your last. NEO's are a real threat.

NASA's budget is tiny compared to DOD. They are not spending "mega bux."

I don't want to get into a debate about the merits of space exploration. My stand on that is obvious. So is yours. I will say this...like it or not, the distant future of the human species is in space...or extinction. Our eggs are in one basket on this little island we call Earth.

I recommend reading some of Robert Zubrin's work...."The Case for Mars" and "Entering Space - Creating a Spacefaring Civilization."

Also, the moment we find life on other worlds is going to be one of the most significant moments in our history. That alone makes it worth the effort.

[TaiidanTomcat]

True, it is NOW. It was everyone wanted to be an Aviator back in the mid to late 80's. Everyone wanted to be a diver probably after "Men of Honor", a JAG after "A Few Good Men" and everyone wanted on a sub after "Hunt for Red...

well you get the point. Probably exagerating a bit but I'd imagine up until more recently, the majority of the public had little to no knowledge of what the Navy Seals were. In my opinion it's just like anything else, there are fads that come and go. But the Blues have always been around (not always but still)

Bill

I beg to differ, even years before the UBL raid everyone who talked to me and realized I was a Marine, told me how they "wanted to be a Navy SEAL" or "a sniper" At which point I would bore them to death by telling them that they could join the USMC, Get all the training they needed and then go to BUD/S and upon completion, join the teams. the SEALs are one of the few units the public thinks of consistently when it hears "Navy" even kids in my high school with no knowledge of the military would wax poetic about the sheer awesomeness of the SEALs. Never underestimate how that awesomeness translates to 18 year olds and their thought process.

[SBARC]

or velcro in your life, thank NASA.

NASA didn't invent Velco.........you should be thanking a Swiss inventor. Just keeping things real. :D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velcro

[Hawkeye's Hobbies]

As a friend said...Why is it that teachers, staff, facilities and programs get cut from schools who need to trim their budgets, yet the expensive sports programs, especially football seems to be protected? If you take the percentage of students who after graduation go into sports as a vocation whether as a pro or as staff, its very small. Yet these programs are kept for their "entertainment" and "team building" value.

So with this mentality one could expect Congress to save the demo teams but dump such things as training programs, bases, equipment and personnel to keep'em flying.

Edited November 23, 2011 by Hawkeye's Hobbies

[Jinro]

I don't know whether to call you a visionary or an Luddite. How about both. Luddite for your first couple of comments, visionary for your last. NEO's are a real threat.

That's why I was saying to focus on NEO's and scrap the life on other planets jazz. What will we gain from learning that intelligent life exists on other planets? It will disprove religion. That's it. We won't be able to meet these beings. Probably won't be able to communicate with them. Won't be able to learn from them. So what's the point?

Likewise with finding inhabitable planets. They're so far away a person won't be able to get to them in his/her lifetime, even if we were able to travel at light speed. Once again, what's the point?

That's how I view it, anyway.

[-Neu-]

That's why I was saying to focus on NEO's and scrap the life on other planets jazz. What will we gain from learning that intelligent life exists on other planets? It will disprove religion. That's it. We won't be able to meet these beings. Probably won't be able to communicate with them. Won't be able to learn from them. So what's the point?

Likewise with finding inhabitable planets. They're so far away a person won't be able to get to them in his/her lifetime, even if we were able to travel at light speed. Once again, what's the point?

That's how I view it, anyway.

Honestly, I think you would be surprised about how little money is spent on this area. There is very little government money focused solely looking for life on other planets. Its not like they spend money to build a telescope only for that purpose. Really much of that budget piggybacks on other research into other areas. A scientist interested in other planets would obtain time or data from a existing telescope to run his experiment... so its not like we're spending hundreds of millions on this area that can be easily cut.

Although this area is in its infancy, it also provides insight into how our own solar system operates.

Edited November 23, 2011 by -Neu-

[Alvis 3.1]

Well, there's always corporate sponsorship to help take up some slack. Perhaps we may see "The Taco Bell/US Navy Blue Angels" or the "McDonalds/USAF Thunderbirds". Hey, it works for NASCAR!

Of course that means Canada would have to get the "Tim Hortons/RCAF Snowbirds".

Alvis 3.1

[Jay Chladek]

Hmmmmmm, NASA spending. Lets see. At last check it was about 1/2 of a penny for every tax dollar collected. As such, bang for buck they have done a HECK of a lot with less. Okay, so maybe they didn't invent velcro, but they used A LOT of it and made it popular. As for other innovations, how about scratch resistant coatings on glasses (used on astronaut helmets originally), or how about flexon frames for glasses to keep them from breaking (originally used on neck and wrist lock rings). What about all those great aircraft innovations of the past century which we have thanks to NACA AND NASA? Try to pull funds out of NASA at this point is not going to do much since there isn't much there to get.

Part of the problem is when Eisenhower created NASA, its funding came from health and welfare, NOT the DoD like the military agencies. So in the funding tree, the DoD gobble up stuff higher up the food chain while NASA deals with leftovers alloted to it from down low. This is why NASA budget fights have come down to house the homeless, or feed the hungry, or build the next spacecraft.

Of course THIS guy (Neil deGrasse Tyson) can explain WHY we need NASA FAR BETTER than I ever could and his reasons are the best I have ever heard. And again, it comes down to who takes interest in NASA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoW-gxakIU8

Edited November 24, 2011 by Jay Chladek

[Av8fan]

Well, there's always corporate sponsorship to help take up some slack. Perhaps we may see "The Taco Bell/US Navy Blue Angels" or the "McDonalds/USAF Thunderbirds". Hey, it works for NASCAR!

Of course that means Canada would have to get the "Tim Hortons/RCAF Snowbirds".

Alvis 3.1

Oh man. Those are images..

Anyone remember what the SeaVixen looked like in RedBull colours..ouch.

I have seen a few Airfix SeaVixen builds, not a one on those colours.

I do not think an F-18 or f-35 would look any better.

Edited November 24, 2011 by Av8fan

[Johnopfor]

And btw, a lot of people would see things like the Thunderbirds and the Blues *as* examples of government waste that should be eliminated first thing. It's all a matter of your perspective.

That's the same arguement that anti-Military people use about recruiters ( I actually heard one person say "Why is he in my son's school talking to kids, shouldn't he be in Iraq or something?"). There is nothing more that would make these people happy than to keep all military personnel stuck on base and away from the general public.

The flight demo teams operate off the same recuiting budget as bonuses for joining and for the recuiters themselves.

Let's be honest, this is scare tactics. The Super Committee was a set-up from the beginning...and these 1.2 trillion in cuts....

1) It's not carved in stone, Congress can delay or eliminate them if they vote to.

2) They have until Jan, 2013 before the cuts take effect....one year from now, and after elections.

This was just another "kick the can down the road" moment.

[Kalashnikov-47]

Thunderbirds 2014 season:

[Camus272]

The question in my mind is: has anyone officially proposed removing these teams? If not, then these articles are pointless speculation. $37 million in a 1 trillion dollar defense budget is nothing. As for going back to trainers, that seems pretty uninteresting to me, I much prefer to see front-line high performance aircraft. With the high number of F-16s and F-18s around I don't think keeping the teams going is that much more expensive. Perhaps their budget could be scaled back a bit: no more media rides, no more overseas trips, and scale the season back by a few weeks. As far as air shows go, I think the golden days are gone. Now that the Air Force will only allow one single-ship team at a show (including Nellis) and the F-18 teams don't get around as much the shows are getting thinner. I would like to see some places move to an every-other year schedule so that teams have a chance to get all over the county. Does Houston, Seattle or Chicago really need a show every year? I think people need to look at small cost saving measures now to avoid bigger ones later.

Brian

[TaiidanTomcat]

NASA didn't invent Velco.........you should be thanking a Swiss inventor. Just keeping things real. :D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velcro

Oops!