Bye bye demo teams (A-10, F-15E, F-16)

[Guest]

Do you know (past or present) anyone on the Thunderbirds? Everyone I've known on the team has been just fine. Some better than others, but all that I've known are folks I enjoy spending time with.

I've known some tools. Both demo and T-Clone. Most have been good dudes who liked airshows a lot.

[Right Seat Driver]

Will it save money? Yes. But, there are other areas we could have cut such as TIB or the Do Something Amazing Commercials. I think a Viper or A-10 demo is more inspiring than see than TIB at the Deid.

EDIT: Spelling

Edited April 22, 2012 by Right Seat Driver

[Ram]

1. Saves money

2. Those pilots can go to other billets which need to be filled (staff).

I don't know whether those pros outweigh the cons or not.

You're talking out of your ass, holmes.

Saves money? Oh, you mean...when they mothball the jets the guys were using? But wait - those jets are counted in a SQ's line-up and will fly anyway. Perhaps they'll fly MORE, which burns MORE JP-8! Woah...how much money did we just save there?

And the pilots? They're CMR dudes in CAF squadrons, most are experienced IPs that will most definitely stay exactly where they are.

As it's been said already: We're not saving as much money on this decision as it seems. TIB, USAF bands, and a thousand other money wasters should have been cut before we axed these programs.

[matmacwc]

The man speaks the truth.

[Groundbounder]

As it's been said already: We're not saving as much money on this decision as it seems. TIB, USAF bands, and a thousand other money wasters should have been cut before we axed these programs.

Agreed. Unless the plan is to sing the enemy to death next go round.

What the crap does TIB and USAF bands have to do with air power.

Edited for spelling.

Edited April 24, 2012 by Groundbounder

[billy pilgrim]

The true tragedy here is that the Thunderbirds are stuck in fourth generation "legacy" fighters instead of the F-22.

[spaw2001]

Why is it that everyone has to spin everything? You could literally make a case that a turd should not be cut because it motivates and "creates" jobs...People on here are starting to sound like nancy pelosi making the important case for every government program.. At the end of the day, something and some program has to be cut...We already have a mass-marketed demo team and they are called the Thunderbirds (love em or hate em). We all know that a band is cheaper to maintain than a demo team especially considering any demo team other than the t-birds is redundant...Spin spin spin

[Spoo]

We all know that a band is cheaper to maintain than a demo team especially considering any demo team other than the t-birds is redundant...Spin spin spin

You are nucking futs if you think the travel expenses, care and feeding costs, per diem, etc. of TIB is less than the price of one A-10 working a few air shows every year.

[Kelvin]

Last Viper West demo flight.

[Danny Noonin]

You are nucking futs if you think the travel expenses, care and feeding costs, per diem, etc. of TIB is less than the price of one A-10 working a few air shows every year.

That's not what he said. Travel and per diem is not the real cost.

[Jaded]

Last Viper West demo flight.

I don't know how he did that while wearing a yellow t-shirt. Obviously that guy has no discipline.

[uhhello]

That's not what he said. Travel and per diem is not the real cost.

Tops in Blue don't get per diem anyway. They get a monthly allowance of $240.

[Spoo]

That's not what he said. Travel and per diem is not the real cost.

That's exactly what he said. Let me clarify though, "travel expenses" includes the dedicated airlift required to haul their glittery asses all over the world, ground transport, lodging, etc. This "band" is not cheaper to maintain than an aircraft demo team, especially since that aircraft will still be flying the line if it's taken off the demo circuit. If I'm still not getting it, please explain to me what the "real cost" is.

[Danny Noonin]

If I'm still not getting it, please explain to me what the "real cost" is.

Ok. The real cost is that for demos (F-15, F-16 for sure, not positive about A-10) they have to slick off the jets..no pylons, no tanks. That means a jet and a spare are out of the lineup and dedicated to airshows. For all of the demo teams, they generally practice at least once a week. They practice several times a week before the season starts. They send 2 jets to every show...most every weekend, all summer long.

Not only is that a lot in flying hour cost, it has a training cost to it. There are fewer jets to fly for training.

If you listen to ACC/A3--the guy who made the decision--he cut the teams because he could not justify using up all of those flying lines/hours for airshows when dudes were getting their training chopped to pathetic levels.

Lost training--that's the cost.

Edited April 23, 2012 by Danny Noonin

[Claybird]

Guys, I am normally just a lurker here so take a rookie poster for what its worth. Most of you are USAF dudes, so a little perspective from the civilian side. I farm and live in flyover country, more or less. There are only about 3 airshows a year that can be driven to and home from in a single day, and the closest one is Quad Cities which is a 2 hour drive from my house. Trust me, there is no AF or Navy presence out here. (and they are axing the Des Moines Vipers..) I have literally dozens of family and friends who have gone to some of these events with me, and it is about the only exposure these taxpayers get to what you guys do. Sure, the Blues and Tbirds are pretty and draw the crowds. But I'm tellin ya, people get pumped up by fifteen minutes of a Mudhen or Super Hornet or Viper. The Hog demo with pyro? Pure awesomeness for somebody who has never been within 10 miles of a tactical jet. These are people that want to go back next year, and take their kids along too. And there is nothing inherently bad about the big jet teams, but their day is so scripted you can't stand around and talk to them about what they really do. I've met several of the single ship pilots and crews, even have a few BookFace friends from them. Walk up to an A-10 team booth with a Viper West Tshirt on and you can start a conversation right now! Anyway, I know the budget sucks, but don't forget about what impact there is on John Q. Sixpack the taxpayer who bought the jet and never gets to see what it does in any other situation.

[Ram]

But Claybird, wouldn't you rather see a bunch of talented airmen in sequined jumpsuits playing 1950s jazz standards?

[Claybird]

Hmm. Strike Eagle or band? Let me make a few phone calls, I'll have to get back to you on that one

[Cap-10]

During fiscal constraint, everything not involved with or supporting flying (we are the AIR Force) should be cut...TIB and every other band should be gone...If big blue says they need something for morale and recruiting, then demo win hands down over bands.

I know seeing jets flying at air shows when I was young made me want to join!!

As for the single ship demo's, the hours and jet fuel would be flown at home by the squadron anyway. For those that will say "those hours will increase production", I submit the following:

Hours: 35 air shows a year: 2 jets XC x 1.5 out, 1.5 back, and 3 single ship flights on station (practice and two show days). 0.3 normal demo , .5 if there is a heritage flight....that's 7.5 hours for the whole weekend x 35 shows = 269 (262.5 to be exact). Throw in another 15.6 (52 weeks x .3 for home station practices and initial cert flights) and we are talking < 300 hours for the entire team for the entire year.

Those 300 hours will get you an extra 1.69 F-15E B coursers in a given year, a 1.8% increase to the 96 noobs the FTU can already produce IF our B courses were maxed out, but they're not (different story/thread)...that's not going to replace the 4 x bro's in my squadron alone that are punching this year...3 of them after their initial ADSC is up. If big blue could collate their feces with regards to FTU pipeline feeding, getting the short notice deployments under control and RIF'ing WSO's when we're are WAY undermanned (some Ops WSO'S are 6 home/6 deployed, non-vol'd), that would have a much more positive effect on manning levels because dudes wouldn't be jumping ship, IMHO.

Rental cars and hotels are provided by the airshow, so no cost to mother air force, so that leaves per-diem. F-15E demo has 4 maintainers at the show and 4 aircrew, so 8 total...how many people are in TIB? I also believe TIB stays in billeting if able...even at $16.69/night, that's more than the $0/night that the demo's don't pay.

Most of the Mx travel is via mil air, but there is the occasional civilian airline tickets that are bought.

If the sticking point is money, I believe TIB is more expensive than a single demo team.

If its recruiting, I know 69 people who joined partly because of jets they saw at air shows...can't name one that joined because they saw TIB perform.

Cheers,

Cap-10

Edit: I spell gooder.

Edited April 23, 2012 by Cap-10

[Danny Noonin]

During fiscal constraint, everything not involved with or supporting flying (we are the AIR Force) should be cut...TIB and every other band should be gone

completely agreed

As for the single ship demo's, the hours and jet fuel would be flown at home by the squadron anyway....I believe TIB is more expensive than a single demo team.

You're looking at this from the wrong perspective. Yes, the hours and fuel would be used up anyway. But they would be used on training. So, yeah, when those flying hours and jet fuel aren't used for training, the cost does apply. Otherwise, we could just cut those hours and save the money.

As for recruiting, do we have a shortage of folks wanting to be pilots right now? Or to join the AF in general? Now that's not to say that there is a second or third order effect years down the road for the failure to ignite the flying fire in young kids. But who's to say that this demo thing is permanent?

Believe it or not, I'm with you. I'm sad to see the demos go away. They're a big reason I wanted to join the AF and fly. But I've heard the reasoning straight from the ACC/A3's mouth and I can understand his perspective on this. He doesn't own TIB, so the argument that it was one or the other is naive. He doesn't have anything to do with those clowns. But he does own the demo teams. ACC is out of money and is cutting training. Cutting demos was something he could do to try and help the problem. It was a tough call to can the demos in favor of training--even if it doesn't gain a ton of extra training in the big scheme of things. I'm not a big fan of it, but I can definitely see where A3 was coming from.

Edited April 23, 2012 by Danny Noonin

[BCan]

Cutting demos was something he could do to try and help the problem. It was a tough call to can the demos in favor of training--even if it doesn't gain a ton of extra training in the big scheme of things. I'm not a big fan of it, but I can definitely see where A3 was coming from.

We are still going to airshows from all the same bases with a 2-ship (excluding the F15E) to support Heritage. So I guess appling G to the airframe and exceeding 60 degrees of bank is where the real cost is at? Its like funding the TIB schedule, then having them lip sync...why not just do the demo since we are spending the resources going to the airshow?

The demo guys were logging RAP on most X-C sorties. To say every hour was saved for RAP was incorrect. Cancelling the demo program will require the demo dude to meet RAP requirements at home station....it won't allow for 69 wingmen to now meet RAP requirements...that was total BS.

If the program needed to be cut - OK...then cut. Instead we turn it into a shell of what it used to be....and claim we are saving money by not calling it a demo team. I think the new USAF Heritage Fly-By teams cost almost as much as the old demo teams...how am I wrong?

[Cap-10]

completely agreed

You're looking at this from the wrong perspective. Yes, the hours and fuel would be used up anyway. But they would be used on training. So, yeah, when those flying hours and jet fuel aren't used for training, the cost does apply. Otherwise, we could just cut those hours and save the money.

As for recruiting, do we have a shortage of folks wanting to be pilots right now? Or to join the AF in general? Now that's not to say that there is a second or third order effect years down the road for the failure to ignite the flying fire in young kids. But who's to say that this demo thing is permanent?

Believe it or not, I'm with you. I'm sad to see the demos go away. They're a big reason I wanted to join the AF and fly. But I've heard the reasoning straight from the ACC/A3's mouth and I can understand his perspective on this. He doesn't own TIB, so the argument that it was one or the other is naive. He doesn't have anything to do with those clowns. But he does own the demo teams. ACC is out of money and is cutting training. Cutting demos was something he could do to try and help the problem. It was a tough call to can the demos in favor of training--even if it doesn't gain a ton of extra training in the big scheme of things. I'm not a big fan of it, but I can definitely see where A3 was coming from.

I do believe we are both forth demo teams, I just feel there like the decision was the easy low hanging fruit without a real look at the true results gained in the end.

I think I did mention the training aspect, reference my extra 1.69 B coursers we could plus up with. If we want to talk Ops side, take the 300 hours and split evenly between the 4 squadrons (each AMU coughs up a jet and hours for the year) = 75 hours per squadron. The difference between BMC and CMR is 4 sorties/month at a 1.3 ASD = 5.2 hrs a month x 12 = 62.4 hrs per year...so end result is one extra crew COULD be CMR....the real problem is there ain't enought hours/sorties to maintain a normal crew ration of CMR dudes....one CMR crew does not an Ops squadron make.

The problem I have with A3 not having a say in TIB is indicative of the larger problem off shops/offices not communicating when dealing with related issues (in this case $$)...same thing happened when the VSP section of AFPC told guys they couldn't be let go due to manning requirements and then then RIF section turned around 4 months later and RIF'd them....that's how assinine decisions are made and I personally feel that cutting the demos is one of them.

How about we stop buying flat screen every year with the "extra" money (I know, different pots of money)

How about we stop PCS'ing a guy only to PCS him 6 months later just to fill a leadership square (happens all the time).

My point is to take the time to make a smart decision that makes a meaningful impact, not a knee jerk reaction that equates to putting a band-aid on a problem that requires a tourniquet.

Cheers,

Cap-10

[Cap-10]

We are still going to airshows from all the same bases with a 2-ship (excluding the F15E) to support Heritage. So I guess appling G to the airframe and exceeding 60 degrees of bank is where the real cost is at? Its like funding the TIB schedule, then having them lip sync...why not just do the demo since we are spending the resources going to the airshow?

The demo guys were logging RAP on most X-C sorties. To say every hour was saved for RAP was incorrect. Cancelling the demo program will require the demo dude to meet RAP requirements at home station....it won't allow for 69 wingmen to now meet RAP requirements...that was total BS.

If the program needed to be cut - OK...then cut. Instead we turn it into a shell of what it used to be....and claim we are saving money by not calling it a demo team. I think the new USAF Heritage Fly-By teams cost almost as much as the old demo teams...how am I wrong?

Also valid points!

The other thing I will add is the possibility of A3 trying to "help"...knowing how difficult it would be to restart the demo teams if they had been killed off outright, he's giving the illusion of making cuts while actually trying to weather the storm with hopes of returning to normal ops a few years down the road....possibility, but not likely.

Cheers,

Cap-10

Edited April 23, 2012 by Cap-10

[Danny Noonin]

We are still going to airshows from all the same bases with a 2-ship (excluding the F15E) to support Heritage. ...why not just do the demo since we are spending the resources going to the airshow?

Agreed. Makes no sense to shit-can the demo but continue to do the heritage.

The demo guys were logging RAP on most X-C sorties. To say every hour was saved for RAP was incorrect. Cancelling the demo program will require the demo dude to meet RAP requirements at home station

Oh, for fuck's sake. They logged RAP "on most X-C sorties"? You guys get lots of good tactical training in the mudhen on your X-C sorties these days without pods or even PTMs on board? Do your guys only go to air shows in the local area?

I don't care if they logged and/or pencil whipped RAP on those sorties, but you cannot with a straight face argue that they got good tactical training enroute to most airshows. Just because they logged it, doesn't mean it was good or even adequate training. And, by the way, they only helped mask the problem (lack of training) by logging that crap.

Edited April 23, 2012 by Danny Noonin

[Danny Noonin]

The problem I have with A3 not having a say in TIB is indicative of the larger problem off shops/offices not communicating when dealing with related issues (in this case $$)...same thing happened when the VSP section of AFPC told guys they couldn't be let go due to manning requirements and then then RIF section turned around 4 months later and RIF'd them

Come on now Cap. Why on earth would the ACC/A3--the director of operations for ACC--have a say in TIB? What does that have to do with ACC or ops? What lack of communication is that indicative of? Unless you are suggesting every spending decision is supposed to go before CSAF for adjudication so he can do a mass rack n' stack--in which case, look out because that's micro-managment that you don't want.

Your VSP example is not even remotely relevant. The fact that the left hand didn't talk to the right in regards to personnel policy is not the same as a 2-star in a MAJCOM cutting something he owns while something he does not own survives the cuts. I get your frustration and I'm the sport bitching king when it comes to frivolous spending in the AF (don't get me started on bowling alleys, Dyson vaccuums and Bose speakers). But just because demos and TIB both require money doesn't make them at all related when it comes to this kind of thing.

I wish TIB would go away. I wish the demos would stay. But they are separate animals controlled by separate entities.

Edited April 23, 2012 by Danny Noonin

[Cap-10]

In response to your BCan response:

RAP: I was on the F-15E demo and I logged COB (cost of business) for the XC sorties...we logged RAP when we flew sorties with our normal squadrons when we were home between shows and yes we did in-deed fly with our normal squadrons to include the FTU's, writing grade sheets on noobs.

Training: we have missions on our Doc that don't require pods...I've made many a "picture", "sort" and "fox" calls during my XC's but maybe that's just me....you can get as much/little training out of your gas as you want....I'm sure there are dudes that just go XC and don't do squat, but those are the same guys not doing target attacks to/from W-122 on local sorties.

I'm not saying that ACC/A3 controls everything including TIB.

My VSP example was to show that there is a proven track record where one hand is not talking to the other (VSP/RIF, F-22, KC-X, CSAR-X, etc) so isn't it safe to assume that f&cked up financial decisions are also being made?

In the end this is just another example of us becoming the US Shoe Force...it was fun while it lasted.

Cheers,

Cap-10