Poll
Question:
Which do you like better: The Blue Angels or The Thunderbirds?
Option 1: Blue Angels
votes: 27
Option 2: Thunderbirds
votes: 11
(http://www.windcanyonbooks.com/images/products/THUNDERBIRDS.jpg)
We were recently at an air show and saw the Thunderbirds perform, having seen both now many times, I was wondering which tends to be the favorite of the two in general.
No...there will be no "boobies" selection. [cheeky]
thunderbirds, duh!
(http://blastr.com/assets_c/2011/01/Thunderbirds-thumb-358x512-55238.jpeg)
no contest! blue angels!!! i've spent a lot of time in pensacola & even watching them practice is INCREDIBLE... seeing an inverted fat albert O M G!!!! crazy cool!! [bow_down]
Hell, that's easy. Blue Angels. They can do this:
(http://www.highgallery.com/Navy-Blue-Angels/blue-angels-unusual/blue-angel-unusual-carrier-4.gif)
I think that it depends where the Angels are flying. I saw them in Spokane WA and it was lame. I caught a little of their practice in Chicago over the lake and was really impressed. Being an Air Force brat, I'll have to vote Thunderbirds!
When I last saw the Angels here in flat ol' Spokane they were preceded by a F-22. That one little fighter made the Blue Angels look stupid.
*hiccup*
(http://consumerist.com/images/consumerist/2008/06/thunderbird.jpg)
sac
They're both great...but I like the Angels better (although I like the T-Birds planes just a little better).
My 1st job was working at the tank farm across the hwy from Nellis AFB (home of the Thunderbirds) in Vegas. I got to watch a lot of short Thunderbird practice routines that summer. Very cool. [thumbsup]
(http://satellitesolarsystems.com/wp-content/uploads/blue-angels.jpg)
Quote from: spolic on March 24, 2011, 12:07:12 PM
I think that it depends where the Angels are flying. I saw them in Spokane WA and it was lame. I caught a little of their practice in Chicago over the lake and was really impressed. Being an Air Force brat, I'll have to vote Thunderbirds!
When I last saw the Angels here in flat ol' Spokane they were preceded by a F-22. That one little fighter made the Blue Angels look stupid.
As a kid, I have many memories of the amazing air show at Wright Patt AFB.
I've heard that - perhaps the Blue Angels are able to take more risks when they fly over the water?? I've always thought that the Angels were better (IMHO), but either way, what either of the teams do is totally awe-inspiring.
Definitly a treat to see Fat Albert:
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/46/150083446_7f57f35d43.jpg)
Thunderbirds Oops at Mountain Home a few years back
(http://www.visualintel.net/SpecialTopics/Demonstration-Team/Thunderbird/040130-f-0000c-3/652816211_hs6k6-S.jpg)
Thunderbirds Eject/Crash -- How It Happened (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alo_XWCqNUQ#normal)
My dad was one of the firefighters from Nellis who responded to the earlier 1982 crash in Indian Springs (their practice grounds just north of Las Vegas) when they flew T-38s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Thunderbirds_Indian_Springs_Diamond_Crash (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Thunderbirds_Indian_Springs_Diamond_Crash)
In 1982, the Thunderbirds suffered a catastrophic loss, occurring during pre-season training on January 18. While practicing the four-plane diamond loop, the formation impacted the ground at high speed, instantly killing all four pilots: Major Norman L. Lowry, commander/leader, Captain Willie Mays, Captain Joseph N. "Pete" Peterson, and Captain Mark Melancon. The cause of the crash was officially listed by the USAF as the result of a mechanical problem with the #1 aircraft's control stick actuator, resulting in insufficient back pressure by the formation leader on the T-38 control stick during the loop. Visually cueing off of the lead aircraft during formation maneuvering, the wing and slot pilots completely disregarded their positions relative to the ground. A five-page report of the mishap was published by Aviation Week & Space Technology in their issue dated May 17, 1982.
YIKES!!
About Fat Albert:
"An all-Marine Corps crew of three officers and five enlisted personnel operated the Lockheed-Martin C-130T Hercules, affectionately known as Fat Albert Airlines. Fat Albert, which joined the team in 1970, flew more than 140,000 miles each season and carried more than 40 maintenance and support personnel, their gear and enough spare parts and communication equipment to complete a successful air show. Fat Albert was retired last November. The Navy is expected to announce a new chapter in transport operations for the Blue Angels soon."
:-\
I wonder what the next iteration will be? That sucks...
Yeah we got Fat Albert at our show but there was no assisted take off. >:(
Buddy of mine is a mechanic for the BA. Loves it. Very difficult screening though.
After all those years and all those miles, it must have started putting too much strain on the airframe. That was cool though.
The Air Force is gonna loan the Blue Angels a Smoke Angel to replace Fat Albert...
(http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafiles/gallery/550B2615_1143_EC82_2EFF859D847421F2/40(A4).jpg)
Now let's see em put that porker down on a rolling deck with a 20 knot crosswind! [laugh]
Quote from: Monster Dave on March 24, 2011, 12:53:24 PM
Albert was retired last November.
awww!! i didn't know that.. that does suck!!
i'm from sacramento, ca & we had 2 air force bases here when i was growing up, mcclellan & mather (they've since closed). i've seen a million air shows. i've seen them in surrounding areas too. but, my favorite airshow has been the ones on pensacola beach,fl during red, white & blues week. this year it's 7/4 - 7/9. they used to allow you to be in the water while the air show was going on. that was awesome, the water would vibrate & rumble around you & you felt like you could reach out & touch the planes. they no longer let you in the water because of "safety concerns" (like a plane can't crash on the beach just as easily as it could crash in the water), but it is still an absolutely incredible site to behold
Quote from: ZLTFUL on March 24, 2011, 01:16:09 PM
The Air Force is gonna loan the Blue Angels a Smoke Angel to replace Fat Albert...
(http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafiles/gallery/550B2615_1143_EC82_2EFF859D847421F2/40(A4).jpg)
Now let's see em put that porker down on a rolling deck with a 20 knot crosswind! [laugh]
That would be something to see for sure!! Better remove the con-tower from deck first though!!
We're planning on getting out to Mirimar late this year for the air show. It's not until October, but at least it won't be so hot then!!
I was in Boeing St. Louis last week, so I have to go with the BAs. But I love me some F-16s too.
I love the thunderbirds overall, but i like the actual planes the blue angels use more.
Love the Blue Angels. First time I saw them, one buzzed the San Francisco Bay, sent up a huge jet of water behind it :D
If I weren't on my phone, i'd post a cool pic w cockpit view while doing their awesome moves over Alcatraz.
Quote from: AJ on March 24, 2011, 02:41:17 PM
Love the Blue Angels. First time I saw them, one buzzed the San Francisco Bay, sent up a huge jet of water behind it :D
If I weren't on my phone, i'd post a cool pic w cockpit view while doing their awesome moves over Alcatraz.
The BA used to be allowed to fly under the GGB. No longer... :(
Quote from: slowpoke13 on March 24, 2011, 02:54:21 PM
The BA used to be allowed to fly under the GGB. No longer... :(
I bet that would have been cool to see!
Blue Angels - RAW COCKPIT FOOTAGE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nM_ZB7jqxz8#normal)
Wow!
At 41 seconds at then at 3:05, you can really get an idea of how close are!!
What a ride that must be!! Put that strait on the top of my "If we win the lottery..." wish list!! [evil]
Quote from: Monster Dave on March 24, 2011, 02:57:13 PM
I bet that would have been cool to see!
No kidding. I've been to the top of the GGB South tower. I can only imagine if the BA were screaming under me.
depending on what year that cockpit footage was shot, I'm down in that gaggle of boats off Annapolis. ;D
Something to remember when you watch the blues do what they do.... No G-suits. Not sure if the thunderbirds are the same. Either way, those guys push harder than the fleet guys, with tighter tolerances, without g-suits. A-freaking-mazing.
That cockpit footage is fantastic! [thumbsup] [thumbsup] Too bad the lead pilot's cadence isn't included...that would have very cool.
Blue Angels Awesome Take Off!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnaT4ESKaOo#normal)
Quote from: Punx Clever on March 24, 2011, 04:29:43 PM
Something to remember when you watch the blues do what they do.... No G-suits. Not sure if the thunderbirds are the same. Either way, those guys push harder than the fleet guys, with tighter tolerances, without g-suits. A-freaking-mazing.
In an 18 the stick is between the legs, the g suit would inflate and cause unwanted motion translated to the stick, a problem in tight formation. (always what I heard).
The 16 has a side stick, the suit will not interfere.
Double Farvel (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DogRTw3cJNQ#normal)
Blues High G (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-ZImEJWg6s&feature=related#normal)
fly navy!
Quote from: Airborne on March 24, 2011, 05:34:35 PM
In an 18 the stick is between the legs, the g suit would inflate and cause unwanted motion translated to the stick, a problem in tight formation. (always what I heard).
The 16 has a side stick, the suit will not interfere.
fly navy!
Same story I've gotten. I suppose it also matters that the f-16 is better suited to pulling G's cause the pilot is more reclined too.
I first saw the T-Birds when they flew F-100s during a tour in South America, though I was only a year old and dont remember =)
Next time I saw them they were flying F-4Es. About the same time I first saw the Blues flying F-4Js. I cant begin to describe the sheer spectacle of 8 J-79s flying in close formation. I was sorely disappointed when the teams switched to T-38s and A-4s, but I started taking a much more detailed view of HOW each team flew their respective aircraft. The Blues just showed a little extra flair that set them apart for me. After the tragedy of 1982 and the switch to the F-16, the Birds became even more restricted and opened up their formation a few more feet. The Blues kept their tight formation and fly the shit out of their Hornets. Word has been going around for a couple of years that they might switch to the T-45 for cost reasons (Super Hornets are a tad pricey).
All that being said, I prefer the Red Arrows to the American teams, and no team on earth has the sheer panache that Italian Frecce Tricolore have. Granted, they had their own tragedy at Ramstein, but you have to see these guys fly. Ten aircraft in formation! I had the pleasure of seeing them perform at Moffet Field in August of 1986 (along with the German "Vikings" demo team...a pair of F-104s!!)
FRECCE TRICOLORI 2010 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCOx3U2eXug&feature=related#normal)
It would be hard to see the BAs change from the F-18s after all this time. I would hope that if they were going to change that they'd get the F22 and the TBs would get the F35.
I verified this is a CGI rendering (a very good one) of the F-35:
(http://www.popsci.com/files/imagecache/photogallery_image/files/articles/Picture%2030.png)
(http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/dangerroom/2009/07/6451_115835652408_570477408_2235562.jpg)
Quote from: Monster Dave on March 24, 2011, 07:27:42 PM
It would be hard to see the BAs change from the F-18s after all this time. I would hope that if they were going to change that they'd get the F22 and the TBs would get the F35.
But the F-22 is not a Navy aircraft, it is Air Force only. If anything changes, I would think the Blue Angels would get the Navy or Marine version of the F-35 while the Thunderbirds would get the Air Force version of the F-35.
Fighting Falcons!! [thumbsup]
As a Vet of the Air Force I go with the Thunderbirds!!!
Quote from: AeroGeek on March 24, 2011, 08:38:56 PM
But the F-22 is not a Navy aircraft, it is Air Force only. If anything changes, I would think the Blue Angels would get the Navy or Marine version of the F-35 while the Thunderbirds would get the Air Force version of the F-35.
Exactly.
Also, if the F-18s are too expensive, there's no way in hell either team will be getting either of those planes, especially the F-22.
Honestly, the F-16 is probably the best fighter the US has for aerial teams. I doubt either the F-22 or F-35 would be superior, as they're both designed as a do it all plane.
Quote from: Triple J on March 25, 2011, 08:56:52 AM
Exactly.
Also, if the F-18s are too expensive, there's no way in hell either team will be getting either of those planes, especially the F-22.
Honestly, the F-16 is probably the best fighter the US has for aerial teams. I doubt either the F-22 or F-35 would be superior, as they're both designed as a do it all plane.
I hadn't thought about the service branch related to the planes used (good point), but was thinking more of the distinctive differences between the two.
Personally I think the F-22 would make an amazing aerial demonstration aircraft - it's vectored thrust would make for an amazing show in formation.
I much prefer the F-18 to the F-16. Side-by-side, I've always felt that the F-16 looked more like the ugly little brother even though it was built first.
They are purpose built aircraft for sure and each have distinct operational differences that change their performance capabilities, but still...I'd take an F-18 any day.
Quote from: Monster Dave on March 25, 2011, 09:23:20 AM
I much prefer the F-18 to the F-16. Side-by-side, I've always felt that the F-16 looked more like the ugly little brother even though it was built first.
Both are great aircraft (my 2 favorite actually), but both competed against each other when the Air Force asked for a dedicated air superiority figher. The F-16 was the winner, unanimously chosen by all of the pilots who flew it during testing due to its superior agility. The Navy then decided to purchase the F-18 (called the YF-17 during the competition) to be their new fighter. If anything, the F-18 is the ugly little brother (even though it is a fantastic airplane).
Both have since had ground support capabilities added to them, which is a shame as it detracts from their original purpose. Notice the small nose cones on the prototype aircraft below...before the Pentagon forced the addition of massive radar and the current bulbous nose cones. That's the Pentagon way though.
It'd be interesting to see how an F-22 fared against an F-16 in air to air combat with equal pilots, when stealth is useless. I think the F-16 would hold it's own well.
(http://www.2brothersautomotive.net/images/YF-16_and_YF-17_in_flight.jpg)
That's a cool pic. [thumbsup]
I can't look at an F-16 without thinking:
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSL0XV9n4b0CLSaIXiGcG6GCnP3a8UsYvVhxZfmfF9oYhqets1A&t=1)
That movie's been forever etched in my memory.
From what I've seen the F-22 do, I really don't think (for as agile and competitive as it is) that the F-16 would stand much of a chance. But that ultimately might come down to pilot skill.
Anyone remember seeing the BAs or the TBs when they flew the F4's?
(http://aerobaticteams.net/images/blue-angels/blue-angels-f-4-01.jpg)
(http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices/gallery/images/f4/d4c-118173-12.jpg)
Quote from: Monster Dave on March 25, 2011, 10:15:09 AM
Anyone remember seeing the BAs or the TBs when they flew the F4's?
Yup...mentioned it in my post further back.
FYI, the YF-17 that competed against the F-16 in the original LWF was completely different than what eventually became the F-18. They make look similar, but the 18 is about 25% larger in almost every respect. The Navy's requirements for carrier ops, range, payload necessitated an all new design, larger and heavier. Though Northrop designed and built the YF-17, the Navy pretty much demanded that McDonnell-Douglas be given the contract for the F-18. The newer FA-18E/F Super Hornet is for all intents and purposes, a completely new aircraft and shares almost nothing with earlier Hornets.
Quote from: orangelion03 on March 25, 2011, 10:58:19 AM
FYI, the YF-17 that competed against the F-16 in the original LWF was completely different than what eventually became the F-18. They make look similar, but the 18 is about 25% larger in almost every respect. The Navy's requirements for carrier ops, range, payload necessitated an all new design, larger and heavier. Though Northrop designed and built the YF-17, the Navy pretty much demanded that McDonnell-Douglas be given the contract for the F-18. The newer FA-18E/F Super Hornet is for all intents and purposes, a completely new aircraft and shares almost nothing with earlier Hornets.
Interesting, I didn't know that. [thumbsup]
Quote from: orangelion03 on March 25, 2011, 10:58:19 AM
FYI, the YF-17 that competed against the F-16 in the original LWF was completely different than what eventually became the F-18. They make look similar, but the 18 is about 25% larger in almost every respect. The Navy's requirements for carrier ops, range, payload necessitated an all new design, larger and heavier. Though Northrop designed and built the YF-17, the Navy pretty much demanded that McDonnell-Douglas be given the contract for the F-18. The newer FA-18E/F Super Hornet is for all intents and purposes, a completely new aircraft and shares almost nothing with earlier Hornets.
Very true...they made it a do-it-all airplane, instead of the air superiority fighter it was originally designed to be. Same thing happened to the production F-16, just to a lesser extent.
Interesting that the F-16 has the greatest range of any modern fighter. The F-18 and F-22 are tied for the worst. F-16 also has a higher top speed.
Quote from: Monster Dave on March 25, 2011, 11:05:55 AM
Interesting, I didn't know that. [thumbsup]
(http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk/smile/confused/confused0052.gif)
MonsterDave did not know something?!!!
My image of you is completely shattered!
Quote from: Bick on March 25, 2011, 11:22:36 AM
(http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk/smile/confused/confused0052.gif)
MonsterDave did not know something?!!!
My imagage of you is completely shattered!
smartass.
[laugh]
Anyone that can land on a moving runway that's pitch black gets my vote.
Quote from: Monster Dave on March 24, 2011, 12:53:24 PM
YIKES!!
About Fat Albert:
" The Navy is expected to announce a new chapter in transport operations for the Blue Angels soon."
:-\
I wonder what the next iteration will be? That sucks...
I hope its a J model.
(http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_C-130J_lg.jpg)
Quote from: Bick on March 25, 2011, 10:35:40 AM
Of course, everyone knows that the best pilots are Army.
my dad is a retired army aviator
i used to ask him why the army didn't have a flight demo team. he never actually gave me an answer. lol
Quote from: KnightofNi on March 28, 2011, 09:55:39 AM
my dad is a retired army aviator
i used to ask him why the army didn't have a flight demo team. he never actually gave me an answer. lol
US Army Sky Soldiers Demonstration Team clip#1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVG-OeL-btw#normal)
where did that clip come from kop? i haven't heard of an army team since the one from the 70's.
and yes bick, they do need to brag.
that's why i was told "i'm a trained killer" more than a few times. and this from the man with the standards patch on his sleeve.
Quote from: KnightofNi on March 28, 2011, 10:11:47 AM
where did that clip come from kop? i haven't heard of an army team since the one from the 70's.
Those guys are all Retired Pilots. They do these demos on their own.
2003 Vectren Dayton Airshow - Sky Soldiers Demonstration (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVKUA2xJbmY#normal)
Red Bull Helicopter does back flips! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGu45s1_QPU#normal)
We've seen this outstanding demo several times. Unfortunately with video, choppers tend to look somewhat underwhelming, but I bet seeing them in person would be awesome.
We saw recently that you can do a ride in a Cobra at the Dayton air-show. Costs $$ but would be very cool! [thumbsup]
Quote from: Monster Dave on March 28, 2011, 10:26:30 AM
We saw recently that you can do a ride in a Cobra at the Dayton air-show. Costs $$ but would be very cool! [thumbsup]
http://www.armyav.org/cobra_flight.html (http://www.armyav.org/cobra_flight.html)
$450 for a 15 minute ride that will ruin every rollercoaster for you?
For about $1 million, you could buy your own ride. [evil] ;D [thumbsup]
http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/BELL-AH-1G/BELL-AH-1G/1174413.htm? (http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/BELL-AH-1G/BELL-AH-1G/1174413.htm?)
Wow, that's some $$!
Quote from: Bick on March 28, 2011, 11:01:19 AM
http://www.armyav.org/cobra_flight.html (http://www.armyav.org/cobra_flight.html)
$450 for a 15 minute ride that will ruin every rollercoaster for you?
I'd pay that! Hell, I paid like $200 to get flown around in Kauai in standard choppa!
keep in mind it's been about 20 years since he retired, but i seem to recall the patch being the word "standards" and i think it was on the left shoulder.
though i do specifically remember the bird grabbing the sword. i was wondering how the bird didn't stab itself.
Quote from: Bick on March 28, 2011, 08:06:49 PM
During the later '70's and into the '80's 1st Avn was the training brigade at Rucker, so he would have worn the Skewered Chicken on his left shoulder (it was also very prominently displayed at the gates, and pretty much everywhere else on post)
I forget the details of our discussion a while back... Did you say he was an Apache instructor?
he was sip for super huey, cobra, and apaches. he retired as cw4.
Quote from: KnightofNi on March 28, 2011, 08:29:28 PM
he was sip for super huey, cobra, and apaches. he retired as cw4.
I love this movie:
(http://www.moviepostershop.com/fire-birds-movie-poster-1990-1010233014.jpg)
The story can be a bit corny, but I really thought it a use of the Apache.
Quote from: Monster Dave on March 28, 2011, 08:43:26 PM
I love this movie:
(http://www.moviepostershop.com/fire-birds-movie-poster-1990-1010233014.jpg)
The story can be a bit corny, but I really thought it a use of the Apache.
to quote my father " ??? ??? [roll] [bang] [bang] [laugh] [thumbsdown]"
though it is a nicholas cage movie so it can't be good.
LOL - most people say that - but I'm a fan of movies that highlight military hardware, and the Apache is quite the piece of hardware. [thumbsup]
Anyway, back on topic of the BAs or TBs.
Blue Angels Commander Steps Down:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/27/virginia.blue.angels/index.html?iref=allsearch (http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/27/virginia.blue.angels/index.html?iref=allsearch)
Quote from: Triple J on March 24, 2011, 12:49:09 PM
Thunderbirds Oops at Mountain Home a few years back
I was at that show too. Took a minute to sink in--my wife even asked "what just happened?"
what I saw Wednesday, Thursday & this morning:
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5229/5793988190_81bc9bd45a.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28359945@N05/5793988190/)
DSC_0869 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28359945@N05/5793988190/#) by rand_max (http://www.flickr.com/people/28359945@N05/), on Flickr
Quote from: Monster Dave on May 30, 2011, 07:50:34 AM
Blue Angels Commander Steps Down:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/27/virginia.blue.angels/index.html?iref=allsearch (http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/27/virginia.blue.angels/index.html?iref=allsearch)
They've definitely been working getting their routines down.
They're out for the second time today.