I can certainly understand why it would be preferable not to have the logo, I too am of that opinion as I like authenticity. However the idea that it is in anyway disrespectful to veterans? To me that is nonsense. I'm sure like every other operator of historic warbirds the Red Bull fleet are very respectful. Most of these organisations that operate historic aircraft openly invite veterans to come and see their aircraft and love having them visit to tell their stories. I'm sure Red Bull are no different. Just a case of over sensitivity I guess.
My grandparents were veterans too and I know they would have loved to see these aircraft, even with the logo. Respect does not just come in one form. I personally feel that keeping the aircraft flying is the greatest respect you can pay. Their appearances at airshows alone is enough to keep the stories and memories alive. It will not be long before world war two will be beyond living memory so giving the younger generations a tangible link to that period of history is invaluable. I really don't see how the choice to use the Red Bull brand to market the fleet of aircraft makes them disrespectful. If anything it will give their presence in the world of aviation vital publicity. That publicity will in turn highlight the sacrifices men made in these machines.
I wouldn't mention that if I were you! My challenge of that view did not go down well by a certain commentor and that argument carried on via note. Apparently I am disrespectful to veterans because of my views that the logo isn't that much of a problem. Especially not so bad that the owner should be "beheaded" anyway. A laughable reaction from him but I'm not going to change his mind clearly. Anyway I'm glad somebody is on my side there. After all it isn't just a sponsor it is one of the owners of the Red Bull company that operate the fleet. If the logo keeps them flying then that's great by me. Just by keeping them flying they honor the memory of all those that fought and died in them. Their appearances at shows keeps the memories and their deeds alive.
I fail to see how it's disrespectful to veterans. My grandfather was a pilot, and I don't see this as any disrespect to him. I'm just as happy to see them still in flying condition after all these years. That seems like a good way to pay respects.
He also objected to the fact that I hid the comments. I didn't want a stupid argument or a distasteful comment spoiling my photograph. Apparently that made me a coward. Oh well, at least there are sensible people out there too such as yourself. Thanks for the comment by the way.
Personally I really don't see why there is so much fuss over the logo. I would personally prefer a more authentic colour scheme but I am alsovery grateful to those who fund the operation of these fantastic warbirds. If the owners chooses to adorn the aircraft with their company logo then so be it. They are keeping them flying that is the main thing. Warbirds are hardly cheap to operate, especially in Europe as the cost of maintenance, fuel and insurance etc is very high. With that in mind I am pretty sure that without the Flying Bulls they certainly would not be flying over here in Europe. For the enjoyment that brings to the thousands that get to see a Lightning, Corsairn Mitchell or any of the collection fly that is worth the small inconvenience of the logo. It's not as if they have adorned the entire aircraft with the brand. Personally I hope they remain with the flying bulls for a very long time.
Alright. If they are going to put their stupid red bull logo go ahead and paint the whole airplane with the brand, yellow and red or pink, whatever.
But do not put a logo of an energy drink on a War Plane when its wearing the War Colors, U.S. Naval Aircraft Markings, tags and numbers. I don't mind if you put the logo on a race car or any sport vehicle or uniform. Or if you use it to promote a party or a stripclub.
But not put it on an airplane who was used to defend this country. Or any other country.
I can see the "genius" idea. Trying to put the logo as it was Nose Art. It's one thing to paint a Pin-up Girl, a mascot, the name of your girl or wife or sons or something or someone that inspired these soldiers and pilots to keep fighting and another completely different thing to put a logo of a corporation which only intentions are to take your money out of your hands and put a drink instead. And I know the whole story of the Nose Art in WWII since I'm a Pin-Up Artist myself, sir.
Also I personally know Veterans who pilot B-17 and I listen to their stories of how BRUTAL WWII was. Thousands of airplanes and pilots sacrificed for just one mission, just one mission. And I have dozens of friends, man and women in service as a right now and I lost 2 of them in battle already. Go ahead sir, try to put a red bull logo in their tanks or airplanes, right now, I dare you.
Those brave pilots used beautiful airplanes like that to fight for their country. Some of those F4U-4 may still lie at the bottom of the ocean, in the Pacific, along with their skeletons. As the ultimate unknown tomb of Honor.
The hell with the lousy airshows. If you own one of those airplanes you can afford another way to keep the integrity of it.
Shame on the corporation who paid for this outrage and shame on the owner of the airplane. You are a great photographer sir, no doubt about it, but after years of doing what you are doing I was expecting more of you, its a shame you can't see what's all this fuss about.
Exactly how is it disrespectful to use these machines to entertain or even promote a buisiness. I really don't see how any of what you said adds up to being disrespectful to any veterans. In fact they are keeping the memory alive just by operating the aircraft, They keep them flying for the veterans. My grandmother used to arm Spitfires during the war. She saw some terrible things doing that job seeing wounded pilots and bloodied up cockpits etc. Before she died our family used to take her to airshows to see Spitfires and Hurricanes. She always used to love seeing them, not because of what the aircraft did in the war but because they now entertain. They no longer kill and instead they entertain crowds and that made her happy. SO don't tell me that it is disrespectful because she would have loved to see the aircraft operated by the red bull fleet logo and all! I really am sick of people doing down the efforts of those that seek to keep aircraft in the air. A logo does not make somebody evil because they want to promote their business and I'm sorry but it isn't disrespectful to veterans either. Veterans always attend airshows like flying legends and I have not heard of any complaining about the logo yet. In fact what I do think is disrespectful is suggesting that somebody should be beheaded in front of the public. Hardly the words from somebody with respect?
Agreed. I'm sure it's good to get the money from the sponsor, but I really hate seeing warbirds with stupid corporate logos all over them. That Red-Bull sponsored P-38 looks bloody awful, as well as the Mig-15 that they have polluted with their branding. Shame to see a Corsair ruined in a similar way.