eyyy there goes $140 million dollars just so the chuds could take their chud-to-be tax burden kids to gawk at the military propaganda while saying “whooooa look at da airpwane”
I’m divided on airshows. I get that the spectacle is impressive. They’re also literal monuments to war that are burning an excessive amount of fuel to operate.
I get that you probably don’t have multiple military aircraft flying overhead every day. I chose to live in San Diego without knowing that was gonna be my version of the train that I had to learn to ignore. So that probably colors my thinking, as well as being a Navy Vet.
Personally I’d prefer more museums so they can be shown off without burning more fuel than is needed.
you are “pretty sure”… that flying hundreds of aircraft at the limits of their acceleration and capabilities (to put on a dramatic show for spectators) at hundreds of air shows around the world… uses less fuel than a single private jet flying routine passenger deliveries ?
They’re not flying the jets anywhere near the limit on airshows. For one it’s just not safe for the public. And secondly no one wants to reveal the actual limits to enemies.
And yes. I think it’s entierly possible. Seeing as she’s taken her jet for a whooping 40 second flight just to get from one side of LA to the other.
In fairness to contact sports / martial arts, when done properly, they can be significantly less dangerous, teach discipline and respect, instill a sense of realism and proportionality regarding the application of violence, keep you in decent physical shape, provide your life with a routine structure, and provide some real world socializing/social group.
Many also come with some kind of a philosophy that stresses self defense and essentially a ‘duty to retreat’ mentality: violence is always the last resort.
Many also come with some kind of a philosophy that stresses self defense and essentially a ‘duty to retreat’ mentality: violence is always the last resort.
Can confirm, every sensei I’ve had pushed this mentality constantly. The people who joined to “learn how to beat people up” never lasted very long when the first thing we’d teach is “how to run away”
Fuck off. Girls also like to go fast and literally flying. Seeing the pinnacle of flight engineering and human ability is enjoyable in the same ways as a car, tech, robotics, boats, trains, etc… Show or race. Weird thread of people wanting to be mad.
It’s not weird that people who have any ethics and a bit of context for what these things are used from can’t just separate the “cool technology” from their purpose and find them extremely distasteful.
Nothing outs a shit human faster than their use of memes that rely on negative stereotypes of the mentally challenged in an effort to insult their opponent. If you can’t craft an insult that doesn’t use a vulnerable section of humanity as the root, fuck off.
How’s the old saying go? Something along the lines of “the average person thinks they would be a genius if they were transported back to the Stone Age… But the average person wouldn’t even be able to build a toaster.”
…which aren’t (usually) paid for with taxpayer dollars
But I’m guessing doing air shows counts towards training hours, so they’re going to be flying those planes regardless. Still feels like a massive waste when two of them crash and burn in a show though
As someone who doesn’t attend them anymore, I think most of the fun in an air show ALSO involves the ground stuff. As a kid I actually touched and sat in a few planes.
Air shows are pretty far reaching, you don’t have to be in the paid box seating to watch generally. For example in San Francisco you just have to be anywhere with view to the water, in Salinas its a pretty small airport so you can be anywhere around it but tickets to get in are like $30 so its worth it to me to go in and be able to climb around helicopters and stuff, see the robotics and other stuff people bring and the play area for our kid to socialize a bit with kids
That’s definitely not true. Maybe it is in the US, but seeing machines go fast or tackle complex challenges isn’t a gender-specific thing. For example, 42% of Formula 1 fans are female. Plenty of women spectating and competing at drag strips, land speed, rally, etc.
The old conservative culture of assuming things of people or pigeonholing them based on gender—like, “attract and fascinate mostly men”—is not as relevant as it used to be back in the old days, nor should it be preserved.
you’re just be pedantic. The issue isn’t about it being “mostly”, it’s about if its a “men’s” thing. A 42/58 isn’t that wide of a gap to say that it’s one gender’s thing. As the difference could likely just be attributed to other cultural factors and not the thing itself.
If office workers were split 42/58, you wouldn’t call it a “man’s” job, even if technically there’s more men.
Well, if you look at the survey where the 42% number comes from, you’ll see that 75% of new F1 fans are female and it seems to be a trend, meaning total fandom will be mostly female very soon.
That word is covering a lot of ground. Why would you let language be so ambiguous to you? What would you call 75%, and then how can you destinguish between the two if they are both “mostly”?
Only if it’s young dudes playing. Conservative men also love movies where it’s mostly just young dudes (like that 300 movie where the cast is all handsome young dudes in leather panties being led by an older middle aged dude) They really seem to prefer young dudes in general I guess.
I see some people make similar comments in the gun community here in Australia. Everything they disagree with is considered controversial
These things are often in part military recruitment drives. There are plenty of airshows that don’t use fighter jets and don’t have military booths there (which I’m guessing is happening at that airshow).
My aerobatics instructor (who actually once had a mid air collision and still managed to land the plane by using thrust to pitch) used to fly at a lot of smaller shows where it was genuinely about planes and the pilots, and no hidden agenda
It doesn’t mean the pilots are there for the military, but it is a huge part of it imho. It’s cool to see military planes, but, they’re there so people go "wow, I want to join “air force”
eyyy there goes $140 million dollars just so the chuds could take their chud-to-be tax burden kids to gawk at the military propaganda while saying “whooooa look at da airpwane”
I hate this take. Air shows are awesome, they fascinate children and adults alike. Seeing these machines first hand is inspiring…
There’s little enough in this world that I would describe as “inspiring”, so I’ll take what I can get.
I’m divided on airshows. I get that the spectacle is impressive. They’re also literal monuments to war that are burning an excessive amount of fuel to operate.
I get that you probably don’t have multiple military aircraft flying overhead every day. I chose to live in San Diego without knowing that was gonna be my version of the train that I had to learn to ignore. So that probably colors my thinking, as well as being a Navy Vet.
Personally I’d prefer more museums so they can be shown off without burning more fuel than is needed.
All those military pilots need to fly those aircraft regularly so their skills remain current, right? Might as well do it for an audience.
Seing one operating in person and seing one on display are two very different things.
But military airshows are not just for ordinary people to be amazed. It’s an opportunity for the manufacturer to market their airplanes.
And while it does burn a lot of fuel. It’s nothing compared to all the private jets flying around the world.
I’m pretty sure Taylor Swifts jet burns more fuel in a year than all airshows combined.
Ohhhh, they’re good because they’re promotion for the military-industrial complex, of course…
I didnt say they were good or bad. I said why they exist in the first place.
If you came to the conclusion that makes them good, well that’s a journey you took all on your own.
you are “pretty sure”… that flying hundreds of aircraft at the limits of their acceleration and capabilities (to put on a dramatic show for spectators) at hundreds of air shows around the world… uses less fuel than a single private jet flying routine passenger deliveries ?
press X to doubt
They’re not flying the jets anywhere near the limit on airshows. For one it’s just not safe for the public. And secondly no one wants to reveal the actual limits to enemies.
And yes. I think it’s entierly possible. Seeing as she’s taken her jet for a whooping 40 second flight just to get from one side of LA to the other.
Most of the acts aren’t military aircraft. Lots of acrobatics in private plans and such. The jets are impressive though.
Yeah we’re going to hell in a handbasket because the racoon part of our brain that likes shiny things is just so strong
Removed by mod
Petty name calling, what a great addition to this community.
Almost ironic really, I’m appreciating childlike wonder, and you’re acting like a child.
This was obviously to be taken in the context of the comment at the top of the chain, but okay, I guess I’ll add a /s next time.
Stfu, airshows and jets are fun to watch
See also: monster trucks, demolition derbies, fireworks, contact sports, and so much more. Wasteful and dangerous? Yep. Fun? Also yep.
In fairness to contact sports / martial arts, when done properly, they can be significantly less dangerous, teach discipline and respect, instill a sense of realism and proportionality regarding the application of violence, keep you in decent physical shape, provide your life with a routine structure, and provide some real world socializing/social group.
Many also come with some kind of a philosophy that stresses self defense and essentially a ‘duty to retreat’ mentality: violence is always the last resort.
Can confirm, every sensei I’ve had pushed this mentality constantly. The people who joined to “learn how to beat people up” never lasted very long when the first thing we’d teach is “how to run away”
They’re fun as fuck. Some of the best pics I have are from an air show! f35
^f35 doing a zooom!
F-22 for life lol, 2000s era Lockheed tincan doesn’t even look good after they threw all my tax money at it.
Designs should’ve never progressed past the F-104. Change my mind.
Nothing will top lawn dart and the slick F-86 haha
Air shows appeal to the male fantasy of being Tom Cruise / go really fast
Kickstart My Heart but you’re avoiding Air Defense in WW3
Fuck off. Girls also like to go fast and literally flying. Seeing the pinnacle of flight engineering and human ability is enjoyable in the same ways as a car, tech, robotics, boats, trains, etc… Show or race. Weird thread of people wanting to be mad.
It’s not weird that people who have any ethics and a bit of context for what these things are used from can’t just separate the “cool technology” from their purpose and find them extremely distasteful.
Saw the RedBull Air Race in NYC. Amazing stuff.
there are plenty of things which are fun to watch which didn’t involve spending billions of tax dollars on killing machines
Removed by mod
Fucking hate it when I go to the air show and the plane sucks up my internal American flag spirit straight out of my mouth
Nothing outs a shit human faster than their use of memes that rely on negative stereotypes of the mentally challenged in an effort to insult their opponent. If you can’t craft an insult that doesn’t use a vulnerable section of humanity as the root, fuck off.
okchamp.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
If they were free and couldn’t kill anyone etc.
Relatively intriguing 6-foot-tall bipeds are able to travel through the air in such a manner
reminded of comic
Obviously not advocating for anything
Just “how’d humans engineer that! I couldn’t build a good bike!”
How’s the old saying go? Something along the lines of “the average person thinks they would be a genius if they were transported back to the Stone Age… But the average person wouldn’t even be able to build a toaster.”
So are drag races and monster truck rallies. Big and fast machines attract and fascinate mostly men.
…which aren’t (usually) paid for with taxpayer dollars
But I’m guessing doing air shows counts towards training hours, so they’re going to be flying those planes regardless. Still feels like a massive waste when two of them crash and burn in a show though
It happens during training, too,so I don’t really see a distinction.
Most airshows I’ve been aren’t put on by the military, they are usually just invited to a segment but often times they don’t even show up.
Most planes are privately owned like old planes or stunt pilots.
The military jets definitely cost money to move around so it is an extra expense
I’m pretty sure it does. Flyovers at ballgames etc do so I don’t see why airshows wouldn’t.
There should be an option of going to a simpler airshow. Planes takes off, circle the airfield and land, one after the other.
Most airshows have this, usually with historic planes and such. Similar with the air taxis they were showing off recently for the Olympics
Like, i know im a little odd, but i would for sure attend this if it was affordable
You can just go sit outside the airport and watch for free
Thats not a showcase of cool planes. Like a train convention but for cargo planes and jumbo jets and cool prop planes
As someone who doesn’t attend them anymore, I think most of the fun in an air show ALSO involves the ground stuff. As a kid I actually touched and sat in a few planes.
Air shows are pretty far reaching, you don’t have to be in the paid box seating to watch generally. For example in San Francisco you just have to be anywhere with view to the water, in Salinas its a pretty small airport so you can be anywhere around it but tickets to get in are like $30 so its worth it to me to go in and be able to climb around helicopters and stuff, see the robotics and other stuff people bring and the play area for our kid to socialize a bit with kids
That’s definitely not true. Maybe it is in the US, but seeing machines go fast or tackle complex challenges isn’t a gender-specific thing. For example, 42% of Formula 1 fans are female. Plenty of women spectating and competing at drag strips, land speed, rally, etc.
The old conservative culture of assuming things of people or pigeonholing them based on gender—like, “attract and fascinate mostly men”—is not as relevant as it used to be back in the old days, nor should it be preserved.
TIL 58% isn’t “mostly.”
you’re just be pedantic. The issue isn’t about it being “mostly”, it’s about if its a “men’s” thing. A 42/58 isn’t that wide of a gap to say that it’s one gender’s thing. As the difference could likely just be attributed to other cultural factors and not the thing itself.
If office workers were split 42/58, you wouldn’t call it a “man’s” job, even if technically there’s more men.
Nevertheless, if you want to say it’s not “mostly,” your example ought to do better than 42%!
Well, if you look at the survey where the 42% number comes from, you’ll see that 75% of new F1 fans are female and it seems to be a trend, meaning total fandom will be mostly female very soon.
https://cdn-8.motorsport.com/static/custom/piano/2025globalf1fansurvey.pdf
Just over half is mostly?
That’s almost 50% more men than women
Yes, anything over half is literally what “mostly” means. Doesn’t matter if it’s 99% or 51%.
Removed by mod
What the fuck is your problem? Words have meanings.
If your friend group is 6 men and 4 women, do you tell people “I’m mostly friends with men”?
Yes, they often have multiple meanings depending on context.
That word is covering a lot of ground. Why would you let language be so ambiguous to you? What would you call 75%, and then how can you destinguish between the two if they are both “mostly”?
Those arent used to bomb innocent civilians… Wtf are you talking about?
also racecar/nascar, its so mind-numbing boring, but conservative seems to love any kind of sports.
Only if it’s young dudes playing. Conservative men also love movies where it’s mostly just young dudes (like that 300 movie where the cast is all handsome young dudes in leather panties being led by an older middle aged dude) They really seem to prefer young dudes in general I guess.
Perfect example of the kind of comment that makes social media so toxic to everyone.
I see some people make similar comments in the gun community here in Australia. Everything they disagree with is considered controversial
These things are often in part military recruitment drives. There are plenty of airshows that don’t use fighter jets and don’t have military booths there (which I’m guessing is happening at that airshow).
My aerobatics instructor (who actually once had a mid air collision and still managed to land the plane by using thrust to pitch) used to fly at a lot of smaller shows where it was genuinely about planes and the pilots, and no hidden agenda
It doesn’t mean the pilots are there for the military, but it is a huge part of it imho. It’s cool to see military planes, but, they’re there so people go "wow, I want to join “air force”
Actually, celebrating child-bombing devices crashing is not toxic!
You just be really exciting at parties