RAF / USAF ranting and expostulating

[monkey]

WTF?  Got to admit to being completely mystified at the idea of the RAF demonstration team being disbanded. Is the RAF that hard up for cash?  Just wouldn't happen to the T-Birds and Blue Angels.
As far as the best, I've seen the Red's, very, very good, but until you've seen the USAF Thunderbirds do their signature high speed, high altitude starburst...you haven't seen the best.
Fax

I have to say that I would be really surprised if they were better than the Red Arrows. Anyway I think the USAF would be better served learning how to distinguish who is 'on their side' before they spend hours pi++ing around doing w+nky aerobatics.


<Topic split from original Red Arrows topic - Steve>

[oldtimer]

As far as the best, I've seen the Red's, very, very good, but until you've seen the USAF Thunderbirds do their signature high speed, high altitude starburst...you haven't seen the best.
Fax

I have to admit that I haven't seen the USAF Thunderbirds, but given the description of the stunt you describe sounds nothing that the Red Arrows can't or indeed don't already do.  I wonder how they compare with Gerry Andersen's Thunderbirds?

I have to agree with Monkey's sentiment.  I hardly think that now is the time to be extolling the virtues of the USAF as they clearly cannot, or perhaps just don't want to, follow established procedure when it comes to engaging ground forces.  Even if they did follow the rules the sunglasses the posing 'Top Gun' prima donnas always seem to insist on wearing are clearly having an adverse effect on their ability to distinguish colours.

[Steve Pyro]

For those unaware of the background to the 2 previous posts - see here http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6339369.stm

[Andy Zarse]

As far as the best, I've seen the Red's, very, very good, but until you've seen the USAF Thunderbirds do their signature high speed, high altitude starburst...you haven't seen the best.
Fax

I have to admit that I haven't seen the USAF Thunderbirds, but given the description of the stunt you describe sounds nothing that the Red Arrows can't or indeed don't already do.  I wonder how they compare with Gerry Andersen's Thunderbirds?

I have to agree with Monkey's sentiment.  I hardly think that now is the time to be extolling the virtues of the USAF as they clearly cannot, or perhaps just don't want to, follow established procedure when it comes to engaging ground forces.  Even if they did follow the rules the sunglasses the posing 'Top Gun' prima donnas always seem to insist on wearing are clearly having an adverse effect on their ability to distinguish colours.

Well when was the right time? 1943? A daylight raid over Berlin perhaps? 

Whilst I concur that there are many awkward questions to answered with regard to the level of professionalism of the part time Air National Guardsmen involved and their level of competence to be flying combat support missions in A10's, I do feel this has absolutely nothing to do with the display abilities of the Flying Angels and the Thunderbirds, both who are utterly awsome to watch.

I'm disappointed too about the making of infantile comments about Gerry Anderson. Had you seen them (the USAF ones that is, not the puppet ones on the telly) you would know just how spectacular they are. I was lucky enough to witness and then meet several members at Pensacola FL some years ago. And it's also a fact that the Thunderbirds and Angels can do things the Arrows can't do simply because the US Govt see's fit to equip them with aircraft that have reheat.

[monkey]

I was lucky enough to witness and then meet several members at Pensacola FL some years ago. And it's also a fact that the Thunderbirds and Angels can do things the Arrows can't do simply because the US Govt see's fit to equip them with aircraft that have reheat.

Andy I couldn't give a toss about this mate

[mgmark]

Please, please, please, do not let this thread descend into a slanging match about the current news events that relate to a very tragic blue-on-blue engagement in 2003  My banter with Fax about the relative merits of aerobatic teams was just that.

Just as a personal plea, unless you have experience of flying a fast jet in the midst of a battle, with active ground-to-air threats, whilst actually flying the aeroplane, talking to multiple ground and air contacts, monitoring your wingman, your defensive aids and sorting out what is going on, then please don't make judgements based on just seeing the video and reading the transcript. 

A series of mistakes were undoubtedly made, not just by the pilots involved, which led to the very tragic finale, in what is the most direct, unclear and rapidly changing battle scenario of close air support.  They will have to live with their actions, just as the families of those injured and killed are forced to come to terms with their disabilities or loss. 

Nobody got up that morning with the intention of making it all go so horribly wrong.  And yes it makes me bloody angry and sad that it keeps happening, but think about the relative numbers of nations involved and probabilities, and don't forget blue-on-blue engagements are not confined to the US v Brit scenario.

End of plea

MG Mark

[Nobby Diesel]

Thanks Mark, well said.

[monkey]

Please, please, please, do not let this thread descend into a slanging match about the current news events that relate to a very tragic blue-on-blue engagement in 2003  My banter with Fax about the relative merits of aerobatic teams was just that.

Just as a personal plea, unless you have experience of flying a fast jet in the midst of a battle, with active ground-to-air threats, whilst actually flying the aeroplane, talking to multiple ground and air contacts, monitoring your wingman, your defensive aids and sorting out what is going on, then please don't make judgements based on just seeing the video and reading the transcript. 




A series of mistakes were undoubtedly made, not just by the pilots involved, which led to the very tragic finale, in what is the most direct, unclear and rapidly changing battle scenario of close air support.  They will have to live with their actions, just as the families of those injured and killed are forced to come to terms with their disabilities or loss. 

Nobody got up that morning with the intention of making it all go so horribly wrong.  And yes it makes me bloody angry and sad that it keeps happening, but think about the relative numbers of nations involved and probabilities, and don't forget blue-on-blue engagements are not confined to the US v Brit scenario.

End of plea

MG Mark

Sorry MG Mark it is not that simple. The mistake was made and as you correctly point out I am not qualified to comment on the circumstances. However I am qualified to be able to say that the forces responsible should have been man enough to stand up and be counted .Instead there has been a catalogue of lies and deceit that frankly I find utterly unacceptable. It would seem those responsible have so little respect for those that they killed and wounded that they think they can just shut up shop and the problem will go away. It really pi++es me off!! 

Any way enough from me. I have signed the petition   

[Nobby Diesel]

Thanks Monkey.

Every signature helps.

[Lawnmower Man]

signed. 

[mgmark]

Sorry MG Mark it is not that simple. The mistake was made and as you correctly point out I am not qualified to comment on the circumstances. However I am qualified to be able to say that the forces responsible should have been man enough to stand up and be counted .Instead there has been a catalogue of lies and deceit that frankly I find utterly unacceptable. It would seem those responsible have so little respect for those that they killed and wounded that they think they can just shut up shop and the problem will go away. It really pi++es me off!! 

Any way enough from me. I have signed the petition   

The facts of the incident (and all the others) have been known and published for over a year now - Appendix 2 of the NAO report published in February 2006 is pretty clear on the matter. Copy at:
http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/nao_reports/05-06/0506936.pdf

The catalogue of lies and deceit to which you refer has been not over the Forces - it's over the political machinations.

Nuff said - back on topic




MG Mark


< Pic link fixed - Steve >

[Boorish Grobian]

Interesting how some people would take a good natured debate about the relative merits of air force demonstration squads and go on a rant about a tragic sequence of events in the heat of combat. All I have to say is that horrible mistakes happen in war, always have and sadly always will.  As far as the way the US government handled it?  I've made my feelings quite clear about how I feel about the lot in power.
Andy hit my feelings about the qualities of the Red's vs the T-Birds & Blue Angels pretty well.  Yes, the Red's are terrific, as are the Royal Canadian Snowbirds.  But as the leader of the Snowbirds himself said, "We're using trainers, what we do is a bit more graceful and ballet like. The US guys, since they're using contemporary fighters hit the stage loud, fast and powerful."  They can do some staggering maneuvers that the Reds and Snowbirds can't, simply because they're flying supersonic fighters (F-16's for the T-Birds, F-18 Hornets for the Blue's).
Would be a great shame to see the Red Arrow's disbanded and hope it doesn't happen
Fax

[mgmark]

Interesting how some people would take a good natured debate about the relative merits of air force demonstration squads and go on a rant about a tragic sequence of events in the heat of combat. All I have to say is that horrible mistakes happen in war, always have and sadly always will.  As far as the way the US government handled it?  I've made my feelings quite clear about how I feel about the lot in power.
Andy hit my feelings about the qualities of the Red's vs the T-Birds & Blue Angels pretty well.  Yes, the Red's are terrific, as are the Royal Canadian Snowbirds.  But as the leader of the Snowbirds himself said, "We're using trainers, what we do is a bit more graceful and ballet like. The US guys, since they're using contemporary fighters hit the stage loud, fast and powerful."  They can do some staggering maneuvers that the Reds and Snowbirds can't, simply because they're flying supersonic fighters (F-16's for the T-Birds, F-18 Hornets for the Blue's).
Would be a great shame to see the Red Arrow's disbanded and hope it doesn't happen
Fax

Fax,

Well said on both fronts - and the assessment of the essential difference between the aerobatic teams is spot on.   Loud and fast or slower and elegant, they both fantastic to watch.

MG Mark

[Andy Zarse]

Monkey, if you don't give a toss then I fail to understand why you bother to comment at all. 

The thread was debating display teams and their relative merits. Ignoring the rudeness displayed to our many CA colleagues in the US, the fact of the matter is that the US teams have supersonic display aircraft with greater rate of climb and turn characteristics. By definition they will be able to do things which the Arrows cannot. The Hawk, pretty and manouverable as it is, is a trainer designed and built with all the limitations inherent in such aircraft. Perhaps then you're suggesting the US pilots are no good at displaying, despite a squadron heritage as rich as the Arrows? You may like to know the Angels started flying twenty odd years before the Arrows were formed.

I agree with Fax and Mark, needless to say. I really don't think it's appropriate for this thread to decend into an international slanging match. If you're so irked by by the political shennanigans (and who isn't?) then surely you would be better served starting a new thread on that topic?

[monkey]

Monkey, if you don't give a toss then I fail to understand why you bother to comment at all. 

If I had not commented, then you would not have known that I didn’t give a toss..........and I wanted you to know that. Simple really if you think about it