Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Time magazines view of Corporate aviation

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Sounds like the response I posted when this first broke. This guy plagerized my post.
They were too stupid to realize how dumb the press and the public is. The cost of the business jet pales in comparison to the Savings to the corporation this business tool provides.

Shall We go back to using typewriters and post it notes instead of laptops and blackberrys on corporates mail servers?

Yeah they were bad on Perception ... but they are doing the right thing using those jets.

Now we can excuse the stupid press and ill informed public ... but the lectures from Congress ... people who should know better -- now that is scary.

BTW, No Bailout for Detroit ... but not because they have corporate jets.
 
Last edited:
HOLY CRAP a reporter that actually gets it. How refreshing.


As a former reporter (in a past life a couple centuries ago), I resemble that remark :rolleyes: .......but you're right.
 
The reporter neglected to explain why a FA serving lobster and cocktails is required in the name of efficiency. Or, why a GV is necessary for a flight from DTW to IAD. A Kingair would have gotten them there a few minutes later, and a CJ would have gotten them there at roughly the same time. My belief is that airplanes definitely have a place in business. But, luxury aircraft are no more necessary to a business than are luxury stamping machines and luxury forklifts.
 
Except, maybe that CEO the stockholders are paying a few million a year might need to go from Detroit to Dusseldorf to close a deal in Europe. Is he going to take the King Air for that trip? Or lose the deal because his airline flight with two connections cancelled and he missed the meeting? Or maybe the company has to buy TWO airplanes instead of one?

Business jets are a tool. Like any other tool they can be used inappropriately. But, for once, a "news distorter" (as I call them and I used to BE one) came pretty close to being right about business aviation in a news story. And That is something to celebrate.
 
I think the gm execs could have stated "I know this looks bad...us flying in our private jet asking for money...but... has anyone been on an airline recently? We needed to arrive on time with our bags to save our companies and our employees. "
 
Not to mention

Those CEO's probably had there entourages with them as well.


Let me ask? Wasn't there some sort of flap awhile back about Pelosi needing a bigger jet? A gulfstream would not do?

What about all the VP aircraft at Andrews?

All those politicians can sit around and pontificate about the CEO's and they are even worse!

(Don't get in a "huff", I presently fly military VP)
 
Those CEO's probably had there entourages with them as well.


Let me ask? Wasn't there some sort of flap awhile back about Pelosi needing a bigger jet? A gulfstream would not do?

What about all the VP aircraft at Andrews?

All those politicians can sit around and pontificate about the CEO's and they are even worse!

(Don't get in a "huff", I presently fly military VP)

Yeah, she needed a 757 to fly her from DC to California because the Gulfstream wasn't big enough... :rolleyes:
 
Yeah, she needed a 757 to fly her from DC to California because the Gulfstream wasn't big enough... :rolleyes:

I thought it was because the would need to stop in "one of those Red states" for fuel if the headwinds were strong....
 
I thought it was because the would need to stop in "one of those Red states" for fuel if the headwinds were strong....

Yes. Haster could go nonstop to IL so she wanted to go n/s to CA. The Boeing was the smallest option.

My favorite line from the article:
"The corporate fleet has mushroomed over the years as commercial service has deteriorated. Going from Grand Rapids, Mich. to Jackson, Miss.? That will only involve an entire day shoehorned into "regional" jets apparently made in a region where all the people are 4 ft. 6."
 
I wonder if Ackerman has lost any sleep over the 50 GM flight department employees he just caused to lose their jobs?

He knew that what he was saying was BS, but at the same time it would resonate with people that had no idea about the "real" face of corporate aviation and ultimately shame the big 3 into doing this.

Anyone know any of the pilots that lost their jobs as a result of this?
 
I thought it was because the would need to stop in "one of those Red states" for fuel if the headwinds were strong....

What kind of headwind would cause a G V to need a fuel stop from DC to the Left Coast?
 
Let's see, we (the taxpayers) are getting ready to lend these guys several billions of dollars and because of some show boating politician, they are driving to Washington? Do we really want them spending their time driving or do want them using every minute they have in figuring out how they are going to pay us back? Why do politicians use chartered jets? Efficiency is the reason. They can cover a lot of ground in a little bit of time. Hypocrits.
 
What kind of headwind would cause a G V to need a fuel stop from DC to the Left Coast?

Pretty sure a headwind that strong doesn't exist on this planet.

The 89th AW at Andrews AFB operates 5 C-20Bs (G-III) and 4 C-37As (G-V). Even if Pelosi was in the C-20B, I think a G-III could do ADW-SFO nonstop against the strongest winter winds every time.

There are also at least 3 C-40s (BBJ) based at Andrews...
 

Latest resources

Back
Top