UNC_Samurai: Has anyone come in yet to complain about the supposed costs of the flyovers, ignoring the fact that pilots use these events to satisfy training and flight hour requirements, so the money would be spent anyway?

Sorelian's Ghost: And still be a monumental waste of time, energy and the typical NFL wrapping themselves in the flag.

oldernell: I assume the nfl is reimbursing the govt for the cost.

Yep, okay, glad to see that's covered.

UNC_Samurai: EqualOpportunityEnslaver: UNC_Samurai: Has anyone come in yet to complain about the supposed costs of the flyovers, ignoring the fact that pilots use these events to satisfy training and flight hour requirements, so the money would be spent anyway?

Sorelian's Ghost: And still be a monumental waste of time, energy and the typical NFL wrapping themselves in the flag.

oldernell: I assume the nfl is reimbursing the govt for the cost.

Yep, okay, glad to see that's covered.

Having never been a military aviator, my one question in that regard is always - do the flyovers satisfy all of the various maneuvers/scenarios that would be covered by/during a non-flyover training flight? That is, "Is the quality of hours/training equivalent?" If "yes," then by all means carry on.

Military aviators put in 150-200 hours a year, and there's a number of instructors screaming at the DoD that it's not enough.  A chunk of those hours are what they call "drilling holes in the sky" - flying for the sake of flying.  It's part of how units maintain readiness - air and ground crews need the practice, the repetition.

Flyover missions require specific approaches and time-on-target coordination over populated areas.  So these missions accomplish more than a crew spending a day on a sortie where the aircraft takes off, spends an hour in various holding patterns, and comes back down.