Lavdumper
If you have been a professional pilot for
more than five minutes you will either be cynical or have management ambitions.
For example I have been at the sharp end of a Lear 60 in Europe, it was far from being amazing or wonderful.I genuinely could not believe the poor training and the unprofessional attitude taken by the company towards many operational matters.
You don't seem to take on board the reality of what some people are telling you, so it is frustrating to continually see posts drooling over 'hot rods' like the Lears.
I personally think the Lear 60 looks quite nice, has nice engines but apart from that its awful.Ours were never out of maintenance for starters, the thing uses more runway than Concorde(AOC operation).I never met anyone who actually got to FL510 in one even if you were mad enough to want to!How it was certified for it I'll never know.
You can barely fit a pen in the cockpit and it's noisier than a bloody Islander - INSIDE!
The King Air 200 is the only other corporate type I have flown and although it is of course in a different class,it is ten times betterIMHO.
So if you go from a Bonanza to a Cheyenne, you will think the Cheyenne is a rocket ship.The rambling point of this post is that it's all relative when it comes to aeroplanes.
By the way I have no clue as to how happy or otherwise Goldairs pilots are,but are unlikely to be very different from any other bunch of pilots - an overpaid underworked bunch of whinging primadonnas!!
