Air show schedual

Hamilton air show this sunday, does anyone know the schedual ???

A schedule is attached

wow they brought an airshow back ???

living away from Hamilton you miss some stuff .. altho here in the usa living very close to an air base i get an airshow everyday

Excellent! great picture of the CF-18 flying with an old F-86 Sabre Golden Hawk

At a much smaller scale! and Sat looks a washout but Sunday looks good :thup: Hey its a start but I thing because of insurance and how busy the Hamilton Airport is now compared to years past it would be hard to go big again things have really changed in the world since 9/11

Tidbit for everybody who loves aviation the CNE Airshow Sept 5-7th this year will have a very big act THE US NAVY BLUE ANGELS they only do 1 show a year in Canada and this is their first show in a very long time in our area

If you have ever seen the Blues they are the best! :thup:
If you have ever seen the Blues they are the best! :thup:
I respectfully disagree... The Snowbirds, IMHO are the best.

They perform the most advanced manoeuvres, fly the best formations and have the best opposing solo acts in the air.

If you want noise and a lot of fly-bys, then the Blue Angels are for you...

No-one can match our Snowbirds! :thup:

Yeah, when they are not grounded due to technical difficulties to their cheap antiquated planes. It boggles the mind how poorly our gov't equips our men and women. The most impressive air team i've ever seen was when i was in Poland. The Polish army has the SCORPION demonstration team that flies Russian Mi-24 gunships. It was incredible seeing these bahemoths flying rotor to rotor at high speed (speacially when these helicopters were never designed for agility).

Hey Big-Pole;

I agree that the Canadian government is an embarrassment when it comes to equipping our armed forces. BUT the Tutor jet that the Snowbirds use is no slouch. It is very manouuverable and is very agile.

I am surpised that the Polish military flies Russian choppers for their formation team. Especially gunships! What does NATO have to say about this???

I’ll meet you any time at my favourite pre-game hangout - Dom Polski Hall (downstairs) to discuss the finer points of airmanship!!


Well no doubt the Snowbirds are good but............. its their aircraft that lets them down. If you want to see a great team that performs with 9 Hawk aircraft that can do everything the snowbird to its
the RAF's "Red Arrows" very impressive. Its too bad the Snowbirds can't use the Hawk, the Hawk is Canada's new training aircraft but we can't afford to give it too the Snowbirds.

This is a big thing for me; I’m tired of people slagging the equipment the Canadian Armed Forces uses.

“Why can’t we buy new?”

It’s simple; we only have 35 000 000 people spread out over the second biggest country in the world. Britain has 20 000 000 people more than we do. Germany also has a greater population.

If we are to defend such a massive country with such a low capitol, we have to look at less expensive alternatives. For example, we can buy 1 state of the art tank or 5 that work fine but are 30 years old.

New equipment costs a lot of money and we as a country just don’t have the income.

Not sure what your rant is about. My point was that I have seen the "Red Arrows" in person and they are a great team! It doesn't mean that I am putting down our military or their equipment!! I would love to see the Snowbirds flying the Hawk afterall its our training aircraft and a demo team is supposed to show off the aircraft the CF pilots fly. The Tudor is not one of our trainning aircraft.

We have some of the best equipment right now, our CF-18s are being upgraded and have some of the most up to date weapons systems in the world. Our troops in Afghanistan have the most modern weapons and we have the best vehicles and unmanned airborne.

oh by the way I live in Ottawa and work at NDHQ (Air Force)

Spare parts could keep Snowbirds aloft until 2020

The cost of keeping the Snowbirds' aging Tutor jets in the air for a decade is estimated at $116 million. New aircraft could cost $30 million apiece, an unlikely expenditure given air force budget constraints.

Old jets can still be flown despite failing systems, defence report says

Jun 14, 2009 04:30 AM

Allan Woods

OTTAWA – The famed Snowbirds aerial fleet will be a shell of its former self if the government okays a proposal to extend the life of the aging jets by a decade, documents obtained by the Toronto Star reveal.

The plan to keep the team's Tutor jets in the air means Canada's finest military pilots will be flying planes that are jury-rigged with equipment that has been salvaged in a repair shop or was never intended for use in the Tutor, a model last produced more than 40 years ago.

"It has been determined that the aircraft structure and engines are capable of being extended to the year 2020," says a defence department analysis of the CT-114 Tutors.

"As far as electronics and avionics are concerned, there are various systems that will become unsupportable every year from 2010 through to 2020," says the document, which was the basis for a recommendation that Defence Minister Peter MacKay approve extending the life of the planes through the next decade.

Part of the rationale is that the military could save money by avoiding the immediate purchase of a replacement fleet.

The briefing note for MacKay, dated October 2008, warns of "technical risks" if the extension to 2020 is authorized. A second option, which "mitigates the technical risks," is to purchase a new fleet of jets in 2015. After the Star first reported on the impending decision, a defence department spokesperson said that the risks are "to the program, not to the pilots."

The documents do cast doubt on an official request by the Snowbirds to air force leadership for repairs and upgrades, particularly to the planes' navigation and communications systems.

"What is perceived is that the upgrades requested would be nice to have (rather than) required. The same goes with the weather warning system. (The Snowbirds) mentioned that it would greatly enhance safety of flight, but does not having one actually put the pilots at risk?" the analysis asks.

That position seems to have softened more recently.

The air force plans to strip instruments that measure engine speed from decommissioned Hercules transport planes for use in the Tutor when its dials become "non-repairable" in 2010, according to the documents.

Other parts, including the Tutor's vertical speed indicator and a system that measures operational loads – described as "mission critical" – are no longer produced, and the air force has few replacements.

The total cost to keep the Tutor jets in the air until 2020 is estimated by the military at $116 million.

"The Tutor is a great aircraft," said Lt.-Col. Darryl Shyiak, the Snowbirds' lead pilot in 1997-98. "The best analogy I can give you is to a beautiful 1967 Corvette that's been meticulously maintained, that looks good and functions well as long as it's in good shape mechanically."

The military expects a decision on the future of the Snowbirds "before the summer," according to internal defence department emails.

There is a possibility that the fleet, a fan favourite at air shows across North America, will become the victim of federal budget cuts. An order to cut the air force's budget by 5 per cent prompted reports that the Snowbirds could be grounded.

Shyiak says it's better to have old, overhauled planes in the sky than to scrap the Snowbirds team because the air force can't afford up to $30 million for each replacement.

MacKay has said that while the Snowbirds are dear to Canadians, they are low on the list of priority purchases the military must make.