PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - FAA & CAA disagree over B747 continued 3 engine flight
Old 12th May 2005, 18:33
  #175 (permalink)  
cargo boy
I've only made a few posts so I don't feel the need to order a Personal Title and help support PPRuNe
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Devil

Oh no! Who pulled another pedant out of the hat? Now we have Mr Crash & Burn, professional pilot but very obviously NOT experienced with either the B744 OR obviously LONG HAUL (notice I didn't mention ETOPS) operations giving us the full wisdom of his opinion and then when it is disputed or more likely ignored (except for the few who also have very little real understanding of B744 long haul ops but feel the need to get their "hear hear" in) we get him going on and on and on and on and on... with the usual scenario of the 'less well informed' about winds and the FMC, weather forecasts, choice of alternates and whatever else pops into his non-B744 world. Fer gawds sake, are you really a professional pilot or just a PC Simmer trying to kid us with a few key words? That's what it sounds like!

So you won't ever fly BA again! Good riddance and it will give another one of us trying for a standby that bit of an extra chance to get on. Duh! It's one thing voicing your opinion but then it gets quite pathetic when you repeatedly try to justify your weak argument, ad nauseum, with irrelevant tidbits of useless facts. Please read the post about the difference between 'probability' and 'possibility'. The way you are going on it is becoming quite apparent that you are a windbag with very little real knowledge about what you spout. Give us a break, please!

Cargo Boy
B747-400
Long Haul
cargo boy is offline