Originally Posted by Astro14
Originally Posted by grampi
Originally Posted by Astro14
I've served with the USAF. Been through their schools and training. I've deployed with them. I'm experienced, with a variety of joint tours and exercises. I've praised the USAF, and USAF aircraft, in multiple posts.
That demonstrates both my experience and objectivity.
Since we are talking about fighter pilots, and flying, and I am a fighter pilot, that also makes me experienced and credible.
You've got zero experience with the Navy, or in the cockpit.
If anyone has questionable objectivity in this discussion, it's not me.
If you say so...
You started this whole thread with this:
Originally Posted by grampi
I don't know how many times I've heard people say "the Blue Angels are better than the Thunderbirds". I just saw the Blue Angels perform at the Dayton air show this past Sunday and I still say the Thunderbirds put on a better show...
I'm tired of your trolling.
You're like a kid that's read car magazines, but never driven a car, and has no license, telling us all what car is better.
And here is someone with lots of driving experience disagreeing with you.
I've been reading posts from you and others claiming how Navy pilots are the best in the world because their Blue Angels fly tighter formations than the Thunderbirds do, or because they land on carriers...the only reason the TBs don't fly as tight of a formation as the BAs is because someone up the chain of command won't allow them to. It certainly isn't because the pilots, or their planes don't have the ability to do it. And landing on a carriers only means that Naval pilots have more difficult landings. It doesn't mean they are better pilots. Aerial combat is what determines how good the aircraft and their pilots are, and in that realm, the U.S. Air Force is the best in the world, and that's a fact.