• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Miles

  1. My thoughts exactly. Looks like an opportune time to make an announcement about it so it looks like it's the market's fault there's no IPO...
  2. the news said the cop told him to put the ammo in checked luggage...
  3. You have to be kidding me.
  4. They aren't in my mind, but that's not a good sign.
  5. perhaps when they got the glideslope error, they changed their minimums on the fly and changed the plan to a loc only approach instead of the ILS?
  6. This crash sure hits close to home for me. There was speculation on another forum they may have had the VOR frequency dialed in thinking they were on the ILS... The position of the crash site does look like they were tracking direct the VOR parallel to the runway.
  7. Here it is, Although much less information than the french version, it seems:
  8. Read my mind, Mitch, thanks... I'm looking forward to the anglo version
  9. maybe, maybe not. That's a helluva coincidence.
  10. I've flown the 737-200,600,700 and 800, and all are impressive stopping machines. IMO Boeing has done a great job giving these planes the ability to stop on a hot and heavy day with rarely any quick turn issues to contend with. That being said, I wouldn't be attempting a flapless landing with an -800 on a wet, short runway... A flapless 800 landing at 150,000 lbs on a dry runway is just over 4900' stopping distance. A flapless 800 landing at 150,000 lbs on a runway with 'good' braking action is just over 6000' stopping distance Medium braking: about 8400'. If they touched down with 1/2 the runway behind them, flapless, they never had a chance. "The Trinidad and Tobago-based Caribbean Airlines said it did not know the cause of the accident, which happened during good visibility and light rain."
  11. It was suggested to me that perhaps they attempted to put more weight on the wheels by retracting the flaps on landing, but I disagree. Anyone who's ever operated an NG will know that when retracting flaps the time required to go from flaps 5 to fully retracted(including LE devices) takes longer than the second coming of christ, and, seeing the damage to the aircraft I'm doubting the flaps continued retracting after the crash to that position IF they did attempt to retract them. So IMO they did attempt to land flapless... for whatever reason. Very curious indeed, whatever the reasoning behind it.
  12. My question about the whole thing: Why were the flaps completely retracted, including leading edge devices? Did they attempt to land an -800 on a short, wet runway with the flaps up? check out the images...
  13. I was hoping it was a link to Cabela's online or something!
  14. Flying is not a right. If I was a boss at AC I'd make sure these people were never inconvenienced again on their flights.
  15. Mandatory retirement upheld at Air Canada July 11, 2011 17:07:00 Susan Pigg Staff Reporter A Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has upheld Air Canada's right to force pilots to retire at the age of 60. Overturning retirement in the cockpit would lead to increased operational costs, scheduling difficulties and have "negative ramifications" for the pilots' pension plan and collective agreement, according to the 19-page ruling. Both Air Canada and the pilots' union were pleased saying the ruling upholds decades-old provisions in the collective agreement that ensures senior pilots, who can make $239,000 a year, don't block the career advancement of younger pilots. Air Canada warned, and the tribunal agreed, that it would face severe scheduling difficulties if pilots were allowed to fly past 60: The International Civil Aviation Authority (ICAO) requires that a younger pilot be in the cockpit with older pilots on flights over international airspace. That's 80 per cent of Air Canada flights. The ruling on a case involving pilots George Vilven, 67, and Neil Kelly, 65 — the third on a case that has deeply divided Air Canada's pilots and lead to a raft of other similar cases. Raymond Hall, a lawyer representing the two pilots, called the ruling "seriously flawed" and said he plans to appeal to the Federal Court. The case could drag on for years more unless the federal government presses forward on a bill to end the last vestiges of mandatory retirement in Canada, warns Susan Eng of CARP (the Canadian Association of Retired Persons) which is lobbying for legislation. Bill C-481, which died when the federal election was called, would have repealed a section of the Canadian Human Rights Act that allows federally regulated businesses, such as transportation and banking, to terminate employees who've reached "the normal age of retirement" in their sector. http://mobile.thesta...article/1023259
  16. I guess it depends on your definition of middle class.
  17. Disregard. Too early in the morning.
  18. I've worked construction, I've literally dug ditches by hand, I've waited tables, I've chucked bags and countless tons of freight, I even worked a production line in a factory... and no, I didn't get paid for lunch, not once, but yes, I was smart enough to know that I didn't want to grow old doing any of those things and that knowledge lit the fire under my butt to do better. I refuse to accept that those who sat back and entrenched themselves in unskilled jobs instead of learning a skill and improving their situation should have the nerve to expect things handed to them on a silver platter... like a DB pension that allows them to retire and live like millionaires. What's really backwards here?? You say you remember your factory days... what do you do now, and why didn't you stay in the factory?
  19. I didn't cherry pick, I paraphrased.
  20. And my question to you is, why do you think you should be paid as much as your CEO?
  21. You're kidding right? Paid lunches??? The horror! Canada Post doesn't want to pay the employees when they're not working!? So I'm supposed to feel sorry for all those people who just sat back their entire lives and never attempted to improve their education(and career) when they were making that $20/hr sweeping floors at GM, or chucking bags at AC, or sorting mail at CP? People who didn't have the foresight to see the writing on the wall years ago that tough times were ahead at the company they worked for? There's a difference between someone who isn't mentally or physically capable of improving their education/job status, and I do agree they should be helped, but that's not what we're talking about here, is it? We're talking about people who were so overpaid for doing grunt work that they made a career out of it, and now they're reaping what they've sowed all these years by forcing unreasonable contracts on the companies AND in the case of crown corporations... the taxpayers. treated fairly- agreed unreasonable pay vs deserving to be well paid- I'm pretty sure some of us out there will agree that you have a very different definition as to what a well paid(fairly paid) unskilled worker is worth.