San Francisco votes to Ban the Blue Angels

[O-Rex]

I live in Ft. Lauderdale: every year we have a big Air & Sea show, alternating between T-birds and Blue Angels.  Each year there are noise abatement concerns, but nonetheless the show goes on to a crowd of literally millions on the beach.

There is an agenda here, and it's not safety, nor noise, not fuel economy. . .

I am sure others cities have declined the Blue Angels' offer to visit, and I'm also sure they did so politely, without great fanfare or rhetoric.

My condolences to those enthusiastic San Franciscans who will miss the show.

[smj58501]

Does anyone remember when were they scheduled to fall in the Pacific Ocean?

Seriously, if they don't want the Blue Angels, or any other demonstration team, I am sure there are several cities in this great nation (mine included) that would be proud to host them during San Francisco's timeslot. What is the number to their scheduling desk?

[Smokey]

They don't actually perform the demo over the city......The Blues  follow FAA rules about where it can be flown (distance from the crowd, etc).

This is political grandstanding by that wacko city's political folks...

I tried to see if Al-Qaeda would attack City Hall but they said something about  "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"  !!!!

[flynd94]

I will throw my .02 cents in considering I live in the SF Bay Area (Fremont).  The Blue's/Navy have skipped SF Fleet Week before.  If memory serves me correct, they weren't there 2 years ago.  It was funny, the Thunderbirds performed.  The reason behind the Blue's absence was the previous year they had a problem landing.  One of the F-18's blew a tire landing at SFO.  It shut down the runway for awhile.  The city went to the Navy asking for loss of revenue.  Of course the Navy didn't pay and, they said "no" to the Fleet Week organizers.

San Francisco is a weird place, a country to their own.  When I mention I live in the San Francisco Bay Area, I make sure I let folks know that I don't live in SF.

[flyguy06]

Now why do you guys have to go and start a political debate? Just protest being against SF from baning the Blue Angels (As I would be) But you dont have to go around saying things like Lefties, and Communist. Those words spark heated unneccesary debate. Everyone who is liberal is not against the military as the media and certain others would have you believe.

SO PLESE LETS NOT GO THERE

[SarDragon]

[portions redacted] So if we ignore the partisan language, it looks like there are two "real" reasons for the resolution, both related to the Board of Supervisors' job description, which is to "take anticipatory action to prevent harm" to the city's residents.

1. Airshows featuring jet fighters doing formation flying are incredibly loud! So much that they probably shouldn't be conducted right over a major city, thereby turning the city's residents into a captive audience. They should probably be held in less populated areas, where the majority of the people who will hear the noise will be willing participants. (Can you imagine the guy who lives right next to an Air Force Base calling up his town councilman and complaining about the noise from the F-16s? Me neither. )

Incredibly loud!  I beg to differ. I lived 4 miles from Miramar Air Station for 6 years, and my house was directly in the path of the cross-show flying. The sound was noticeable, but never loud enough to suggest ear plugs, or not ignore. Takeoff and landing traffic at a regular airport is much noiser, and for longer duration.

2. Airshow flying is, well, risky. It sometimes, though rarely, results in crashes. We've all seen the videos that get passed around - videos taken at airshows, where something goes wrong and a plane goes down. Thankfully, the pilots usually eject in time... and the broken airplane ends up hitting the ground with an explosion. No harm done, except to some insurance company's budget.  That seems like a reasonable risk to me... but is it really wise to hold an airshow right over a city? If something hits the ground, the possibility of collateral damage is infinitely higher than at a typical airshow location (sparsely populated area).

right over a city  I am not clear on the exact flight path of the SF airshow, but, based on seeing BA shows at several other venues, it is not directly over the city. Show center and the primary flight path are usually along a runway to facilitate lineup. I don't know of too many runways right in the middle of a city, particularly San Francisco.

Don't get me wrong, I love going to airshows! - but WOW are they are loud! When I first read this, I thought "they hold an airshow right over a densely populated urban area? You've got to be kidding me!" But reading further, I gather this has been a regular part of SF's Fleet Week for years.

The lesson here may be: "if you make insane amounts of noise right over people's homes, year after year, they will eventually complain so hard to their local government that you'll lose your right to fly there."

I think we're getting some "Chicken Little" reaction here. The first thing in the minds of the Blue Angels, and other flight demonstration teams, is safety. First and foremost. The flight path is selected with that in mind - safe for the participants, and the spectators.

As for the noise, it bothers people because they want it to bother them. It is easy to ignore if you really want to. These folks should try living on an aircraft carrier for three years. You learn to ignore the noise, or life gets even more stressful.

[RogueLeader]

Now why do you guys have to go and start a political debate? Just protest being against SF from baning the Blue Angels (As I would be) But you dont have to go around saying things like Lefties, and Communist. Those words spark heated unneccesary debate. Everyone who is liberal is not against the military as the media and certain others would have you believe.

SO PLESE LETS NOT GO THERE

While what you say about not all liberals-leftists/communists are against the military, is true; it is also true that this stance is very much anti-militrary.  Being anti-military IS leftist.  It may not include you, but it is on that side of the fence.
Another example is that I am very conservative, but I do not  want to start hanging Blacks or bring the KKK back.  Are those Right wing, yes; but that does not mean all right wingers want that.

[O-Rex]

One can sea beauty even within squalor: the fact that the elected officials of San Francisco can waste time and ink on such rot, and the fact that we can debate about it without fear of ending up in a gulag is a testament to our system of government, our freedom and the Blue Angel's, as well as their brethren's ability to protect it.

If the fine folks at the San Francisco Board of Supervisors are still in office 3 to 5 years down the road, then the people of that city deserve what they get.

I for one am going to boycott sourdough bread, rice-a-roni, and hope that the Blue Angels do a double show in my town 

(I though a little levity was in order. . . )

[JohnKachenmeister]

The USS Hornet is in Alameda, and is being turned into a museum on the lines of the USS Intrepid museum in New York.  My uncle served on the Hornet during World War II and I have his old cruise book.  I considered flying out to SF on vacation to visit the Hornet, since my son works for an airline and I get to fly for free.

But after the Supervisor of San Francisco called the United States military an "Evil institution" that is not needed, and after San Francisco banned military recruiters, and after San Francisco banned ROTC from its schools, I decided that San Francisco is a left-wing festering sore that I do not need to support with even one tourist dollar.

[alice]

Ummm..... I live in the SF Bay Area.  Haven't heard anything in the news about an actual final vote on this evergreen issue. Ever since housing costs went through the roof in the 1980s and thanks to that more than any other reason the military pulled out of the SF Bay Area en masse from Hamilton AFB, Hunters Point, The Presidio, Mare Island, Yerba Buena and Treasure islands, Alameda NAS and Moffett NAS with the extra kickers from Flower Power hereabouts plus lots of locals and their politicians like to bash any remaining hint of US military.  It's like a religious sport for many.

But.... when the chips are down.... like the week after 9/11, the military was very popular here, Combat Air Patrols overhead, National Guard at the big commercial airports and all.

The SF Fleet Week website still says the Blue Angles are coming and the local press last said the proposed we-hate-the-Navy-zoomers resolution was just going to a committee.  SF City Council knows jolly well one of the town's key tax earners is the tourism industry of which Fleet Week is a part and I doubt they would jeopardize that by going along withe Supervisor Daly's resolution.

http://fleetweek.us/fleetweek

[acarlson]

Im working without a net here, but Im guessing that the Blue Angels are responsible for fewer air crash fatalities than the airline industry. ...

I agree... and my initial thoughts was:   How much training do the B.A. pilots get?  answer: LOTS!
How often do the B.A. fly over S.F.? answer:  not as often as commercial aircraft... and what about private aircraft?   and let's not forget those pesky TV news station helicopters!

...Over the past 60 years, the air show has resulted in 26 fatalities

the Blue Angels air show poses an unwarranted risk to life and property in the densely-populated, urban environment of San Francisco

Crime rates for 2006 from fbi.gov

Population 746,085
Violent Crime 6,533
Murder 86
Forcible rape 154
Robbery 3,858
Aggravated assault 2,435
Property crime 36,992
Burglary 6,465
Larceny- theft 23,891
Motor vehicle theft 6,636
Arson 226

sooo that means the score is...
B.A. 26/60 = .433333 fatalities per year on average.
S.F. population = 86 "fatalities" in 2006 alone

Conclusion:
B.A. has 85.567 FEWER fatalities per year on average. 
Hey S.F. ... do the math!

[gallagheria]

You can't be serious about the noise actually being harmful?!

I live in Savannah, Georgia, and Hunter Army Airfield is literally in the middle of the city. You can see the landing strip just a few hundred feet from the main road. One of the two main malls is straight under the flight path. So that is just a generic argument.

I still say strip them of federal funds just like colleges would lose if they did the same with ROTC.

[PHall]

So, what exactly in this proposed resolution required all of the wisecracks and insults aimed at San Francisco, California and the West Coast in general?

[ZigZag911]

Everyone who is liberal is not against the military as the media and certain others would have you believe.

This is quite true.

It is also true that some states/cities/areas of the country are more radically liberal than others.....the Pacific Northwest, Minnesota, Massachusetts and yes, California, are viewed as demonstrating such trends by many observers.

Certainly not everyone in the state....nor is every idea such citizens express absurd.

However, it often strikes me as ridiculous for a city council to start passing resolutions about global, international, or national situations.

If they want to turn down the Blue Angels because of noise, traffic, congestion, or other local concerns, that is their business -- literally.

The rest of it strikes me as posturing.

[PA Guy]

The USS Hornet is in Alameda, and is being turned into a museum on the lines of the USS Intrepid museum in New York.  My uncle served on the Hornet during World War II and I have his old cruise book.  I considered flying out to SF on vacation to visit the Hornet, since my son works for an airline and I get to fly for free.

But after the Supervisor of San Francisco called the United States military an "Evil institution" that is not needed, and after San Francisco banned military recruiters, and after San Francisco banned ROTC from its schools, I decided that San Francisco is a left-wing festering sore that I do not need to support with even one tourist dollar.

Since the Hornet is in Alameda, across the Bay, you can still visit the Hornet and stay and spend your money in Alameda, Oakland and the rest of the East Bay and never drop a dime in the city of San Francisco.  You could even fly in and out of Oakland, Sacramento or San Jose.

[Eagle400]

So, what exactly in this proposed resolution required all of the wisecracks and insults aimed at San Francisco, California and the West Coast in general?

Because some people are too lazy to do the research and see for themselves.  It's so much easier to say "I believe this because I heard it somewhere" than it is to go and find out for sure. 

Generalization is a substitute for analysis. 

[DHollywood]

ok... speaking legally now.....  this is a Resolution.

Nothing has been banned and "San Francisco" did not vote on anything.

Resolutions are passed everyday by local governments but they carry no force of law.

Only the federal government can regulate aviation and any attempt by a state or a subordinate government to a state to regulate a federally occupied area is violative of the Constitution... unless the feds allow some minimal state involvement.

Cities and counties in California pass goofy and stupid resolutions all the time ... it makes them feel better about themselves I suppose.  But its not law.....

Even if the people of SF did vote to ban the Blue Angels, they still have no way to enforce the ban.

It does however generate enourmous amounts of free press for these goofy politicians.

IMHAO

[flyguy06]

Now why do you guys have to go and start a political debate? Just protest being against SF from baning the Blue Angels (As I would be) But you dont have to go around saying things like Lefties, and Communist. Those words spark heated unneccesary debate. Everyone who is liberal is not against the military as the media and certain others would have you believe.

SO PLESE LETS NOT GO THERE

While what you say about not all liberals-leftists/communists are against the military, is true; it is also true that this stance is very much anti-militrary.  Being anti-military IS leftist.  It may not include you, but it is on that side of the fence.
Another example is that I am very conservative, but I do not  want to start hanging Blacks or bring the KKK back.  Are those Right wing, yes; but that does not mean all right wingers want that.

And so who makes these "rules" As to what a person beileives or puts them in categories as "left" and "right"?

[SARMedTech]

When I was younger (ie in college) I just automatically considered myself liberal no matter what the situation. As i grow older, I find myself more guided by the mandates set down in the Constitution. I think whether you consider yourself liberal (which I am on many points) and conservative (which I am on issues like crime, economy, etc) the guiding principle is that piece of paper that says what and who we are as Americans. I have many college friends that say that I gave up my liberal status when I joined CAP because of its military affiliation. I tell them that the military is what gives us the right to be liberal or conservative, left of right and to voice our opinions. And regardless of what my personal social and political beliefs are, when I put on my CAP uniform, I check my politics at the door and serve at the pleasure the Civil Air Patrol, the United States Air Force and the President of the United States. Whether I am out shutting of an ELT or looking for a lost person after a crash, my politics have no bearing. The only thing that matters is that I follow orders (and unlike some I have encountered in CAP, an order from officer of high rank or position is just that...an ORDER) and perform my duties to the best of my abilities. The only place I stray from that is that when I take any oath, I affirm, rather than swear  "so help me God" since I am a Buddhist and not a Christian and feel that it would be hypocritical not to mention meaningless for me to swear to a God who is not part of my religion. (Steps off soap box).

[RiverAux]

Who exactly is in charge of "hiring" the Blue Angels for the show?  If the city is involved directly in this, they can certainly decide not to invite the Blue Angels.  If they need a city permit to have the event, the city also certainly has some sway in what happens.  You're right that they're not in charge of the airspace, but there are still ways that they may have input into this particular event.