Smacktard said:So then you haven't flown the 170 yet????
Why does it matter? He will be within a month. He knows a whole lot more about the airplane than you do.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Smacktard said:So then you haven't flown the 170 yet????
vclean said:PCL_128,
Unless you are completely out of it, you must realize by now you have lost all credibility on this board. You made the PFT mistake, and now feel that you can rationalize your actions by dancing on the ALPA/MDA/U/CHQ soapbox. You continue to dig yourself into a hole.
If you feel the need to post something useful, create a new username. We are more likely to believe someone posting their first message, then listening to you.
FurloughedAgain said:Oh, and by the way Flyingdawg,
I believe that Stickman (page 5 of this thread) wasn't referring to scope or parity when he talked about, "...the fact that some chose poorly"
He did not come back and discuss his meaning so we are left to speculate -- but I believe that he meant that the decision to accept employment with US Airways was a poor decision.
Now I dont know if Stickman has a crystal ball, or other such Harry Potter magic, but if any of you folks were AROUND in 1999 you might have seen a very different world.
US Airways was taking delivery of a new airbus every week. They were hiring 100 pilots per MONTH. The CEO was known throughout aviation history for cleaning up and then merging airlines. After a 7 year hiatus in hiring, US Airways would offer the fastest upgrades of any major airline.
The airlines that you folks fall all over each other to fly for today weren't even on the career pilots radar screen. Jetblue did not exist. AirTran had just furloughed (Oct 98') and was still a dirtbag company.
To say that the decision to go fly for US Airways in 1999 was a poor one is frankly silly.
What would YOU have done?
FurloughedAgain said:To say that the decision to go fly for US Airways in 1999 was a poor one is frankly silly.
What would YOU have done?
NickASA said:Another CFI that knows everything.
TheBigPicture said:S5....??
MDA.....??
CHQ=Screw everybody you can
You guys make me sick
TheBigPicture said:S5....??
MDA.....??
CHQ=Screw everybody you can
You guys make me sick
TheBigPicture said:S5....??
MDA.....??
CHQ=Screw everybody you can
You guys make me sick
stb said:Something tells me that FlyingDawg was not offered a job after their interview with USAirways.
Benefit of the doubt Flyingdawg, which airline TODAY offered you a flying position would you accept and not accept?
FlyingDawg said:Didn't apply to US.
Just look at any airline just like you would a stock investment. Earnings isn't everything. Cash is.
Most important is Cash from Operations. This adds back those noncash expenses. Depreciation on aircraft and equipment can add up!
Net Cash Flow should also be considered.
Good Bets: LUV, CAL, ALK
Bad Bets: DAL, NWAC, UAL, U
Just a quick note in addition to $44 million in earnings, RJET had $116 million in cash flow from ops and $24 million in net cash flow. Not too bad of a place to hang out until the airline duststorm settles.
Back to the topic.