USAF CUTS AIR SHOWS IN 2012/ T-Birds and F-22 Remain

[fox18delta]

Budget crunch hits home. http://www.airshowbuzz.com/go/articl...upport_in_2012

[OleBoy]

Not to sound negative. I'm not even going to read it. Just the topic alone makes me comment.


It's about time the government cut spending!

[Thiago - Crosshairfilms]

I foresee a discussion on this topic, I wonder what we have in store for airshows in the next decade.

[Railrunner130]

The statement mentions eliminating most ACC-funded airshow performers. If I'm interpreting this correctly, it doesn't necessarily mean there won't be any. What it ultimately means is that airshow performances will be "locally" funded by the flying units themselves. Units will have to use their own training hours (and pay their own associated expenses) to support airshows, should they choose to do so. Because of this, I imagine many units will decide not to participate. Before, ACC paid for the practice, performance, rooms, per diem, etc. of their sanctioned demo teams in the past.

[stiz]

"One decision we’ve made is to sponsor one single-ship demonstration team for the 2012 air show season, scaling back from the six teams we’ve historically sponsored – A-10 East & West, F-16 East & West, F-15E and F-22. "

not the end of the world really.

It's about time the government cut spending!

gotta cut back that trillion doller debt somehow :mixedsmi:

[tommieboy]

Not to sound negative. I'm not even going to read it. Just the topic alone makes me comment.


It's about time the government cut spending!

I was thinking the same thing this week.....

Tommy

[fox18delta]

The statement mentions eliminating most ACC-funded airshow performers. If I'm interpreting this correctly, it doesn't necessarily mean there won't be any. What it ultimately means is that airshow performances will be "locally" funded by the flying units themselves. Units will have to use their own training hours (and pay their own associated expenses) to support airshows, should they choose to do so. Because of this, I imagine many units will decide not to participate. Before, ACC paid for the practice, performance, rooms, per diem, etc. of their sanctioned demo teams in the past.

Good point. I would think local commanders would be heavily "encouraged" not fly in the face of this initiative, sort of speak.

Imagine a wing boss having to submit an incident or accident report up the chain... or maybe loss of an aircraft. Yikes.

[modelr]

Not to sound negative. I'm not even going to read it. Just the topic alone makes me comment.


It's about time the government cut spending!

Ok, let's start with congress, and their free flights home for the leaders every weekend. One weekend for Nancy Pelosi would pay for an airshow. Airshows are useful training and proficiency outings. As well as good advertising. Airshow costs are a drop in the ocean compared to other waste in the government. But it looks good.

[Panther_99FS]

Careful now - responses are now moving towards thread-locking material.....

[stansdds]

And I'm in before the lock!

Sad to see, but with budget cut backs and still fighting overseas... eliminating some of the flying for entertainment of the masses is an easy way to cut the budget.

[Sascha66]

Ok, let's start with congress, and their free flights home for the leaders every weekend. One weekend for Nancy Pelosi would pay for an airshow. Airshows are useful training and proficiency outings. As well as good advertising. Airshow costs are a drop in the ocean compared to other waste in the government. But it looks good.

I image the costs for John Boehner are much the same.

[Allen]

And I'm in before the lock!

Yeah....

I image the costs for John Boehner are much the same.

A few of his tanning sessions could save at least one airshow. Nancy botox sessions too!

Golf clap

[glh]

I would imagine fuel and maintenance costs for these aircraft are LARGE expenses to maintain the show schedule. Possibly re-equip the Thunderbirds and Blue Angels with T-33 aircraft or even step back to acrobatic propeller aircraft.

[stansdds]

I would imagine fuel and maintenance costs for these aircraft are LARGE expenses to maintain the show schedule. Possibly re-equip the Thunderbirds and Blue Angels with T-33 aircraft or even step back to acrobatic propeller aircraft.

Could put them in the T6 Texan-II.

[Allen]

I would imagine fuel and maintenance costs for these aircraft are LARGE expenses to maintain the show schedule. Possibly re-equip the Thunderbirds and Blue Angels with T-33 aircraft or even step back to acrobatic propeller aircraft.

I see nothing wrong with the Navy using T-45 and Air Force using the T-33.

[stansdds]

The only issue with the T-33 is that it is long out of production and the entire fleet was retired from U.S. service in the 1980's.

[Wittpilot]

It is a shame that rather than step down the operations slightly, they choose to essentially eliminate them for the upcoming season. I am concerned with the fact that you won't get that "Sound of Freedom" sensation when an F-16 goes streaking past the crowd at full afterburner...

Now I do not attend airshows for modern military jet demonstrations, but I think they are an important part of the air show culture....

[Allen]

The only issue with the T-33 is that it is long out of production and the entire fleet was retired from U.S. service in the 1980's.

Facepalm.jpg

I ment the T-38.

[redriver6]

It is a shame that rather than step down the operations slightly, they choose to essentially eliminate them for the upcoming season. I am concerned with the fact that you won't get that "Sound of Freedom" sensation when an F-16 goes streaking past the crowd at full afterburner...

Now I do not attend airshows for modern military jet demonstrations, but I think they are an important part of the air show culture....

so true...a couple of years ago the Strike Eagle put on an unforgettable display....on a dark and humid day...

[stansdds]

Facepalm.jpg

I ment the T-38.

I wondered if you meant a little later model training aircraft. Although, the T-33 was pretty nimble. The Thunderbirds used to fly the T-38 many, many years ago, back when the Blue Angels flew A-4's. These days, both teams use front line fighter aircraft to showcase the capabilities of our air superiority fighters, but I think going back to trainers would save some money. Especially if they went to the T-6 Texan II or similar turboprop aircraft.

[argo147]

Even though I love attending airshows I can understand why the military would want to cut back on some of their airshow expenses. The last show I attended at Edwards Air Force base (2005, been way too long!) was one of the best air shows I have ever attended! but even then I couldn't believe how much money it must have cost to put on! The base itself is huge so once you're there and have your car parked you walk over toward a taxiway and stand in line to board one of several charter buses ferrying people from the "parking lot" to the main ramp where the show takes place. That day we saw a B-1B set up some world speed records (fairly obscure ones related to payload over a set course at speed and altitude) the small prototype Northrop flying wing, demonstration teams for the F-16, F-15, A-10, F-117, B-2, Thunderbirds and the first public demonstration of the F-22. The B-52 was down from maintenance. Oh yeah and the very first thing I saw that day before I even knew what was going on was an F-15 D or E in full afterburner hugging the ground, just before he pulled just before he pulled up into a max performance climb I saw 'Glamorous Glennis' painted on the nose, to actually see Chuck Yeager, not to mention seeing him fly was the the fullfillment of a childhood dream and it still gives me goosebumps. Okay now I'm rambling to sum up when you stop to think about all of the logistical challenges to putting on an airshow somewhere like KEDW and the cost for all the personnel, fuel, flight time, static displays , etc... I can't imagine how much it all cost and factor in the fact that you don't have to pay a dime for anything once you're there. I can see why the government would want to cut back, even without bringing politics into it. LOL thanks for bearing with my rambling