The download hangar is currently disabled. We're doing our best to bring it back as soon as possible.
2 Blue Angels grounded
- jetmax
- Major
- Posts: 656
- Joined: 04 Nov 2006, 20:47
- Version: FS9
- Location: The Gateway to the Air Force KSKF
2 Blue Angels grounded
There is no excuse for this type of thing. It shows a lack of displine. I think the Navy made the right call.
(OK that was the Senior NCO coming out in me)
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/31/blue.a ... index.html
(OK that was the Senior NCO coming out in me)
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/31/blue.a ... index.html
Make love not war.......
Couldn't resist.
Couldn't resist.
-Mike G.
Recovering flight sim addict, constant lurker.
Check out my real life RV-8 build here: RV-8 Builder Log
Recovering flight sim addict, constant lurker.
Check out my real life RV-8 build here: RV-8 Builder Log
- davidbernard
- Captain
- Posts: 245
- Joined: 26 May 2008, 14:35
- Version: FS9
- Location: The Netherlands
- VulcanDriver
- MAIW Staff
- Posts: 4508
- Joined: 11 Aug 2006, 20:58
- Version: FSX
- Location: EGHH
- Jumpshot724
- Major
- Posts: 767
- Joined: 16 Feb 2008, 20:20
- Version: FS9
- Location: New York, USA
It's bad just like an inter-office relationship. The reason it's more serious is because it is the military and they're supposed to be as "proffessional" as possible.
Relationships amongst military members IS allowed (my old roomate's parents were enlisted in the NYANG together, then when they divorced his stepdad was also in the NYANG). This most have been a highly innapropriate one to warrant such publicity and a hearing.
Relationships amongst military members IS allowed (my old roomate's parents were enlisted in the NYANG together, then when they divorced his stepdad was also in the NYANG). This most have been a highly innapropriate one to warrant such publicity and a hearing.
-Joe W.
"I love the smell of jetfuel in the morning....smells like VICTORY!!"
"I love the smell of jetfuel in the morning....smells like VICTORY!!"
It is not that this would adversley affect the operations of the Blue's per se, but rather, this behavior between members of any organization in the US military is strictly against regulations, and is delt with harshly. The reasons are many and varied, with some debatable, however, the most important thing is that they have disobeyed lawful orders.
For another example, look at the recent outcome of the same behavior between two astronauts. It isn't strictly a military organization, however, the people were military assigned to the program, and the program was forced, by their behavior, to adopt, and announce yesterday that they have implemented new regulations similar to the military (as some astronauts are civilians - the military people are already subject to military action).
It is not civilian life, and never will be. Special circumstances - special rules. If you want to play in the game you have to follow the rules.
Ron
Edit: to address the comment from Jumpshot, the regulations address inappropriate behavior between persons not married to each other. Further, even if persons in separate organizations are of disparate ranks, ie officer and enlisted, senior to junior, the same prohibitions apply. It is possible, just barely, for service members to court and marry, but the process of doing so can easily run afoul of the regs.
The Guard may have some loosened up regs in this area due to their part time nature, but in the active service things are pretty tight.
Also, diddle with a married person, not married to you and that old fashioned word, adultery, raises its' ugly head, and the punishment can be swift and sure! ron
For another example, look at the recent outcome of the same behavior between two astronauts. It isn't strictly a military organization, however, the people were military assigned to the program, and the program was forced, by their behavior, to adopt, and announce yesterday that they have implemented new regulations similar to the military (as some astronauts are civilians - the military people are already subject to military action).
It is not civilian life, and never will be. Special circumstances - special rules. If you want to play in the game you have to follow the rules.
Ron
Edit: to address the comment from Jumpshot, the regulations address inappropriate behavior between persons not married to each other. Further, even if persons in separate organizations are of disparate ranks, ie officer and enlisted, senior to junior, the same prohibitions apply. It is possible, just barely, for service members to court and marry, but the process of doing so can easily run afoul of the regs.
The Guard may have some loosened up regs in this area due to their part time nature, but in the active service things are pretty tight.
Also, diddle with a married person, not married to you and that old fashioned word, adultery, raises its' ugly head, and the punishment can be swift and sure! ron
-
- Lieutenant Colonel
- Posts: 823
- Joined: 08 Jul 2007, 22:15
- Version: FS9
The problem -Jumpshot724 wrote:This most have been a highly innapropriate one to warrant such publicity and a hearing.
1. It's a small unit with a narrow chain of command structure.
2. I would guess that it's a case of a senior-subordinate relationship.
3. In cases such as #2, the concern is "favortiisim" - whether actual or just from appearance due to the pschology of jealousy and ego running up against "emotonal control" assumed in situations and organizations operating under military discipline.
4. IF it involves a single-sex relationship, then there's a major PR issue given the current domestic American politics on that matter regardless of whether or not #2 applies.
Any such relationships, especially having become "public", would garner an investigation and, if there's anything turned up in the investigation that could "reflect poorly on the well-being and reputation of the service", a hearing would be normal procedure. How public that hearing would be is another matter.
Consider that "the Blues" are held up as "the best of the best", one of the most public faces of the US and the US Navy. Anything that screws up the desired PR image of "perfection" will be jumped on by the press as "news"/newsowrthy and because of that, gain more offical attention than any similar situation in any other unit.
-
- MAIW Veteran
- Posts: 1376
- Joined: 26 Jun 2007, 02:22
- Version: P3D
- Location: KRDR
There are lots of dual military married. assignments usually suck for them tho. I even knew a girl when I was station at Kef who was AF but was married to a Navy guy, I think there was only like 5 bases they could go to.Jumpshot724 wrote:It's bad just like an inter-office relationship. The reason it's more serious is because it is the military and they're supposed to be as "proffessional" as possible.
Relationships amongst military members IS allowed (my old roomate's parents were enlisted in the NYANG together, then when they divorced his stepdad was also in the NYANG). This most have been a highly innapropriate one to warrant such publicity and a hearing.
The only thing that is frowned upon is Officers dating, or being married to and NCO and so forth, I wonder if this is the case with the Blue angels?
- Jumpshot724
- Major
- Posts: 767
- Joined: 16 Feb 2008, 20:20
- Version: FS9
- Location: New York, USA
- CelticWarrior
- Lieutenant Colonel
- Posts: 1122
- Joined: 15 Aug 2006, 17:16
- Version: FSX
- Location: Llareggub
We used to have this 20th century officer/NCO relationship crap, but we've moved into the 21st century. One of my best friends, as a Warrant Officer, married a Sqn Ldr in the RAF.
Now the major offence is inappropriate hierarchical relationships, most notably instructor/student. And rightly so.
Now the major offence is inappropriate hierarchical relationships, most notably instructor/student. And rightly so.
"We attack tomorrow under cover of daylight! It's the last thing they'll be expecting ... a daylight charge across the minefield .."
- VulcanDriver
- MAIW Staff
- Posts: 4508
- Joined: 11 Aug 2006, 20:58
- Version: FSX
- Location: EGHH
Which is the same as any teaching role. Speaking as one that worked for a University many moons ago it was frowned upon if we were found to be having a relationship with student we were teaching. If weren't teaching them it was OK! BTW the students were all over 18 years old!!
I have to smile at the Royal Navy's no touching rule when aboard. Anything goes ashore apparently.
John
I have to smile at the Royal Navy's no touching rule when aboard. Anything goes ashore apparently.
John
John
"That is the biggest fool thing we have ever done. The A-bomb will never go off, and I speak as an expert in explosives." - Admiral William Leahy
"That is the biggest fool thing we have ever done. The A-bomb will never go off, and I speak as an expert in explosives." - Admiral William Leahy
- CelticWarrior
- Lieutenant Colonel
- Posts: 1122
- Joined: 15 Aug 2006, 17:16
- Version: FSX
- Location: Llareggub
Excellent points, considering the nature of what they do, they need to be on top of their game all the time. Relationships among the team can be disruptive and dangerous especially if jealousy is involved.Ford Friendly wrote:The problem -Jumpshot724 wrote:This most have been a highly innapropriate one to warrant such publicity and a hearing.
1. It's a small unit with a narrow chain of command structure.
2. I would guess that it's a case of a senior-subordinate relationship.
3. In cases such as #2, the concern is "favortiisim" - whether actual or just from appearance due to the pschology of jealousy and ego running up against "emotonal control" assumed in situations and organizations operating under military discipline.
4. IF it involves a single-sex relationship, then there's a major PR issue given the current domestic American politics on that matter regardless of whether or not #2 applies.
Any such relationships, especially having become "public", would garner an investigation and, if there's anything turned up in the investigation that could "reflect poorly on the well-being and reputation of the service", a hearing would be normal procedure. How public that hearing would be is another matter.
Consider that "the Blues" are held up as "the best of the best", one of the most public faces of the US and the US Navy. Anything that screws up the desired PR image of "perfection" will be jumped on by the press as "news"/newsowrthy and because of that, gain more offical attention than any similar situation in any other unit.
There is an application and vetting process to get in and they know the rules before they accept the orders.
Yes, they are held to a higher standard and while it may seem unfair or ridiculous to some, that's the way it is.
- Victory103
- Colonel
- Posts: 3978
- Joined: 13 Aug 2007, 03:35
- Version: P3D
- Location: KPHX
-
- Lieutenant Colonel
- Posts: 823
- Joined: 08 Jul 2007, 22:15
- Version: FS9
Actually, I disagree with this to an extent.wktjr wrote:Yes, they are held to a higher standard and while it may seem unfair or ridiculous to some, that's the way it is.
They are held accountable to the standard of the regulations themselves more often than others. That's it. That others are not held to that standard is a different issue. Behavioural standards in the Navy are what the regulations say they are, period. Inconsistent enforcement of those regulations across the various Navy units and commands are what make the "appearance of a higher standard" argument seem valid.
- Victory103
- Colonel
- Posts: 3978
- Joined: 13 Aug 2007, 03:35
- Version: P3D
- Location: KPHX
It's been a few years since I was stationed at NAS Pensacola, watching the Blues once a week. Not having #4 seemed odd. The F-22 was impressive, my first live viewing, the "Wow" factor was pegged! I always love the Heritage Flight as well.BadPvtDan wrote:Is it me or did they kind of...not do it for you? Maybe it was all the other great demos...F15E, F16, AV8B and F22.
DUSTOFF
ARMY PROPS
NAVY SAR
-Chris
ARMY PROPS
NAVY SAR
-Chris
- Jumpshot724
- Major
- Posts: 767
- Joined: 16 Feb 2008, 20:20
- Version: FS9
- Location: New York, USA
I saw them at NAS Oceana this past September (or was it August I can't remember ). Anyway, the Blues were IMPRESSIVE, but it wasn't what I expected I guess?? My dad, an old F-14 RIO even agreed that at a US Navy airshow the US Air Force took the cake (with the F-22 and C-17 demos).BadPvtDan wrote:
Is it me or did they kind of...not do it for you? Maybe it was all the other great demos...F15E, F16, AV8B and F22.
It's been a few years since I was stationed at NAS Pensacola, watching the Blues once a week. Not having #4 seemed odd. The F-22 was impressive, my first live viewing, the "Wow" factor was pegged! I always love the Heritage Flight as well.
-Joe W.
"I love the smell of jetfuel in the morning....smells like VICTORY!!"
"I love the smell of jetfuel in the morning....smells like VICTORY!!"