Messages

1

General Chat / Houston Bush Airport?

« on: April 16, 2008, 09:40:13 pm »

Dallas/Ft Worth
Dallas Love
San Antonio
Austin Bergstrom
Orlando....

Orlando?  I don't remember being close to Houston  :shock:

I would think that Corpus Cristi or even New Orleans would be closer.....

2

General Chat / RIP

« on: April 13, 2008, 11:42:34 pm »

now, who next?

NORTHWEST

The only reason ATA stayed afloat was their affiliation with Southwest.

Didnt Northwest merge with Delta?

No.  The merger fell apart when the pilot's unions couldn't come to an agreement for merging the seniority lists.

Just happened to be scanning the news and the Wall Street Journal is now saying that the Delta-Northwest announcement could come Tuesday - even without the support of the pilot's unions  :shock:   Brings back thoughts of Pan Am-National.......
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120811358101510993.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

3

Game Data / States, Provences, Counties oh my!

« on: April 12, 2008, 03:38:40 am »

United States:

Florida:
221, 550, 233, 296, 563, 304, 1546, 1552, 2419, 225, 2421, 1415, 2200, 738, 533, 531, 1471, 1091, 1492, 301

4

General Chat / RIP

« on: April 09, 2008, 01:56:06 am »

now, who next?

NORTHWEST

The only reason ATA stayed afloat was their affiliation with Southwest.

Didnt Northwest merge with Delta?

No.  The merger fell apart when the pilot's unions couldn't come to an agreement for merging the seniority lists.

5

General Chat / RIP

« on: April 04, 2008, 02:17:47 pm »

Chapter 11 is actually a section of the US Bankruptcy Code, and a rather unusual one when you look at how other nations have traditionally handled insolvencies.  I believe that there is now a European version of Chapter 11, but don't quote me on that.  As for the shutting down operations, if you look back at history when airlines have filed for Chapter 11 they will almost always bring all their aircraft back to their base of operations to protect them from creditors seizing them at the out stations before the filing is official.  Braniff did this both times, Continental did it both times, Pan Am did it, Eastern did it - it is simply an asset protection move.  I believe if we looked at the recent filings you don't see this pattern as the airlines are filing much earlier than they used to (Chap. 11 has lost it's stigma) and since the aircraft can't be seized if they are current on their payments, it is unnecessary.  The standard pattern has been to shut down for a couple of days, then to begin limited operations again, focusing on only your most profitable routes and aircraft.  There are cases however where the Chapter 11 morphs into a Chapter 7 liquidation filing, a la Eastern, and that is when the assets get sold and the company simply ceases to exist.  But almost always, they will try to reorganize under Chapter 11 first.

ATA was not owned by Southwest but rather was working as an affiliate to fly the routes, mainly Hawaiian, that Southwest wasn't ready to undertake on their own.  They also handled the charters and vacation packages for SW.

6

General Chat / What aircraft fly to your home airport?

« on: February 15, 2008, 08:38:35 pm »

MCO

We see pretty much everything Western built that has wings.  Haven't seen too many Russian built aircraft (an AN-124 a while back) and the USAF doesn't come round too much anymore, though I have seen C-130s, C-141s and C-5As here.

7

General Chat / Army

« on: February 13, 2008, 01:26:58 am »

Have you watch the movie "Jarhead"? It's from real life story about marine who serve in Iraq on the first dessert storm operation. And there's part of the movie where there's some media who come to Iraq to interview the marine, then the sergeant tell them not to tell any truth but only say something full of spirit and supporting the nation. The dialogue gone like this :

Kruger: This is censorship.
Sgt. Siek: This is what?
Kruger: Censorship. You're telling us what we can and can't say to the press. Thats un-American.
Anthony 'Swoff' Swofford: Yeah, what about freedom of speech? The Constitution?
Sgt. Siek: No you signed a contract. You don't have any rights. You got any complaints you complain to Saddam Insane and see if he gives a *cabbage*.
Kruger: Why that's exactly what Saddam Hussein does. You're treating us the same way.
Sgt. Siek: You are a marine. There is no such thing as speech that is free. You must pay for everything you say.

LOL    Any organization, any job - this same basic tenet holds true.  I cannot badmouth the organization I work for without having to worry about the consequences.  When you sign a contract, as you do when you join the military, you agree to certain rules and restrictions.  In the US, if you don't agree to the rules, you certainly do not have to sign up.  It's that simple.  But if you agree to them, then you have no right to complain when they infringe upon your desire to do what you want.  The First Amendment only says that Congress shall pass no law abridging one's freedom of speech.  It does not mean that a contract - a legal, binding document entered into voluntarily by two parties - cannot place restrictions on those freedoms.  Also, keep in the mind that the intent of the Constitution is to limit the power of government, not to guarantee rights and freedoms.

The other thing, 'Jarhead' was a movie, not a documentary.  The fact that it was presented that way indicates that there has been some embellishment and, with as with any embellishment, an introduction of a bias - the setting up of two parties as the antagonist and protagonist.  It makes for a much better story.  To see what I mean, watch a documentary on D-Day and then watch the movie 'The Longest Day.'  They both are based on the same event, but you get a much different picture as you watch each.

8

General Chat / U.S. Presidential Election

« on: February 10, 2008, 02:27:21 pm »

Nazi Party = National Socialist German Workers Party.  Hitler and his ilk were self described socialists and as Cornfield pointed out, the description was accurate.

The problem with the whole left-right continuum that everyone likes to try and pigeonhole people to is that it is not a line.  It is circular and the further around to the extremes that you get, the more you begin to resemble the other side.  At the point were the two ends would meet, you simply end up with the distinction being between a corportist state or a communist state.  In either case, the power would be concentrated in a few select individuals and as the saying goes, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

9

General Chat / U.S. Presidential Election

« on: February 09, 2008, 03:54:12 am »

well im not like NwaBoy that doesn't do research. I have done research on the internet kept to the news and had a class on the running of president. And I just found that he is a better choice

:x oh, i do research alright.  and every time Obama has prevailed.

OK, you two.  I am the proverbial "undecided" voter.  Use your research to tell me WHY Obama is the better choice.  Give me facts and data.  This is your opportunity to "sell" your candidate.

10

General Chat / U.S. Presidential Election

« on: February 09, 2008, 03:50:07 am »

War Powers allows for 60 days.  The problem is that the Constitutionality of the Act is still in question.  As long as that question hangs out there, it really acts as a restriction on the freedom of the President to act freely - even in an emergency situation.

And you are right about the President being able to propose bills like anyone else.  I meant to say that he could not sponsor a bill on the floor on Congress.  Sometimes the semantics DO matter.

11

General Chat / U.S. Presidential Election

« on: February 09, 2008, 01:38:27 am »

As for whether the President has any "real power", seriously... whenever he says something wrong, the stock prices drop and the oil prices raise.

And same holds true for the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank.  Should I be concerned about his lack of foreign policy experience?  

As CornField pointed out, the real power in the United States is in the Congress, not the Executive Branch, all the implications of an "Imperial Presidency" notwithstanding.  In the end, the President can only do what Congress funds him for.  No funding=no action.  Period.  It is the power of the purse.

The President is the most over-rated position there is.  His real power is limited.  In every case I can think of since I was born, he is elected based on promises that he has no authority to keep.  The President cannot enact universal healthcare or the FairTax or make a cut in spending - all of that is the purview of Congress, as is the funding and declaration of war.  He can't even propose the bills for any of these items.  More than anything else, he is the saber-rattler in chief.

12

General Chat / U.S. Presidential Election

« on: February 08, 2008, 11:25:45 pm »

OK, curiousity is getting the better of me now.  Why Huckabee or why Obama?  At this point, the only candidate that even marginally appealed to me has dropped out, so I'm looking for more information about the rest of the people who are left.  I don't care to hear the negatives about the others, just real, solid reasons to vote FOR a candidate.  Something real and concrete (i.e.: the Obama girl is not reason enough to vote for him..... :? )

Any takers for any of the candidates?

13

General Chat / U.S. Presidential Election

« on: February 08, 2008, 03:56:40 pm »

It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. - Winston Churchill

I have travelled throughout Europe and the Middle East, as well as every region of the United States, and I can assure you from first hand knowledge that we Americans do NOT have the market cornered on stupidity or ignorance.  Perhaps you should spend less time watching CNN - which is fairly hardcore anti-American - and try investigating the world on your own.  Then you just might discover that your ingrained stereotypical beliefs aren't quite as accurate as the media would like you to believe.

14

General Chat / My new background

« on: February 08, 2008, 03:39:51 pm »

Looks like Space Invaders right before you lose....

15

Game Data / The Data of A300B1

« on: February 06, 2008, 11:29:53 am »

For the Tristar's, is that the 1011-1? There are some later versions with 302 pax in the database.

All of Delta's L1011-1s and -250s were 302 pax.  Eastern's -1s were also.  The 5000 nm range is a bit excessive for the -1s though.  The -250 would have been closer, probably in the neighborhood of about 4000 nm (They used to fly ATL-LGW)

If I recall properly, the 256 pax version with the 5000+ nm range was the short body -500 variant