New jumpseat regulations?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Scotland
Age: 45
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About locking the doors, I vaguely remember something about the "animals" ENTICING the pilots out of the flight deck on at least one flight by killing the cabin crew in a terrible way. Did the doors on any of the aircraft have locks, if so, in some situations the locks may not even be enough.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: SW, UK
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The pressures of loved ones being a long way from home down route is hard at the best of times. If the powers that be put an end to fully briefed loved ones riding the jumpseat where a pax seat is not an option then the future may be rather dark.
Especially if the crew are generally operating a hectic summer schedule on short/medium haul routes.
Good luck and long may it continue.
FS
Especially if the crew are generally operating a hectic summer schedule on short/medium haul routes.
Good luck and long may it continue.
FS
Pat Pong:
Just what have I failed to think through?
My attitude to the social use of jumpseats became jaundiced in a previous company. One captain in particular seemed to need to take his wife with him just about everywhere he went (perhaps she didn't trust him). As often as not she would decide that the jumpseat wasn't comfortable enough and would lay on the flight deck floor just inside the door swathed in blankets and pillows!
In any event, minding your "Ps and Qs" for 10 hours is bad enough, but having to step over a human body every time you go for a pee is beyond the pale.
Then there was the emotional blackmail bit. The scenario would be that the agent would come up to the flightdeck and tell you that Capt Bloggs, his wife and family have been on holiday and are trying to get home. There are only two seats in the back so can we put the other two on the flightdeck?
What they really mean is that Capt Bloggs has been too tight-fisted to buy full-fare tickets and has taken his brood on holiday on ID75s!
I'm sorry but I shall continue to pay full fare for my family. That way I don't spend my holiday worrying about whether we are going to get back home or not.
If you really need to take your wife on the jumpseat then you are in the wrong job!
Just what have I failed to think through?
My attitude to the social use of jumpseats became jaundiced in a previous company. One captain in particular seemed to need to take his wife with him just about everywhere he went (perhaps she didn't trust him). As often as not she would decide that the jumpseat wasn't comfortable enough and would lay on the flight deck floor just inside the door swathed in blankets and pillows!
In any event, minding your "Ps and Qs" for 10 hours is bad enough, but having to step over a human body every time you go for a pee is beyond the pale.
Then there was the emotional blackmail bit. The scenario would be that the agent would come up to the flightdeck and tell you that Capt Bloggs, his wife and family have been on holiday and are trying to get home. There are only two seats in the back so can we put the other two on the flightdeck?
What they really mean is that Capt Bloggs has been too tight-fisted to buy full-fare tickets and has taken his brood on holiday on ID75s!
I'm sorry but I shall continue to pay full fare for my family. That way I don't spend my holiday worrying about whether we are going to get back home or not.
If you really need to take your wife on the jumpseat then you are in the wrong job!
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Best seat in the house
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jump seat occupancy
Nice as it would be to buy you family and friends a ticket, this is not always possible as the flights can be full, furthermore if you have the luxury of flying both Cargo and passenger aircraft the luxury of seats in the back are not always available either!
What has happened to the courtesy of asking the other crew members " Would you mind if i brought along ....... for a jolly?"
Good CRM dictates the use of manners regardless of the rank of the individual. I for one enjoyed entertaining visitors to the flight deck before the ramifications of the 11th September incidents, it was not only good PR if they were passengers, but it helped allieviate some of the more boring moments of the flight especially on the long flights without a lot to do.
I Hope that eventually circumstances allow the return of the flight deck visitors be they there for the duration of the flight or just a brief visit. What is this world coming to!!
What has happened to the courtesy of asking the other crew members " Would you mind if i brought along ....... for a jolly?"
Good CRM dictates the use of manners regardless of the rank of the individual. I for one enjoyed entertaining visitors to the flight deck before the ramifications of the 11th September incidents, it was not only good PR if they were passengers, but it helped allieviate some of the more boring moments of the flight especially on the long flights without a lot to do.
I Hope that eventually circumstances allow the return of the flight deck visitors be they there for the duration of the flight or just a brief visit. What is this world coming to!!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have to agree with JW411...let the el-cheapos buy tickets, and don't hound the operating crew. Nothing worse than a 200 pound aunt Martha who hasn't seen a bar of soap for two weeks brooding on the flight deck.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: England
Posts: 1,050
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look everyone,
For the nay sayers amongst you, you don't have to say yes.
Thats completely different from having somebody else tell you that you are not permitted to say yes.
Anything else that further erodes Pilots authority should be resisted, IMHO.
Its our call.
CPB
For the nay sayers amongst you, you don't have to say yes.
Thats completely different from having somebody else tell you that you are not permitted to say yes.
Anything else that further erodes Pilots authority should be resisted, IMHO.
Its our call.
CPB
Guest
Posts: n/a
As a (used to be regular) jump-seat passenger (204 in the last 4 years until 11th Sept, only 2 since), and having got to know a large number of pilots (Captains and F/Os), I have always found them most of them welcoming (those that weren't, didn't have jump-seat pax).
In my job, as a W&B software provider, it has proved useful to see what the crews require from their flight docs (aswell as the Flight Ops dept!).
As Foxmoth says, the JS passenger can prove useful, opening the door, providing a first line of defence against miscreants etc.
From a personal point of view, one or two Captains that I know have said that I am welcome to travel 'up front with them' whenever they are operating and I am on their flight.
I just hope that in the medium term (in the light of the current situation, certainly not short term), the opportunity to travel on the flight deck will be available again.
In my job, as a W&B software provider, it has proved useful to see what the crews require from their flight docs (aswell as the Flight Ops dept!).
As Foxmoth says, the JS passenger can prove useful, opening the door, providing a first line of defence against miscreants etc.
From a personal point of view, one or two Captains that I know have said that I am welcome to travel 'up front with them' whenever they are operating and I am on their flight.
I just hope that in the medium term (in the light of the current situation, certainly not short term), the opportunity to travel on the flight deck will be available again.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Swanwick
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am (UK )ATC staff at Swanwick and until 11th Sept I organised a Fam Flight scheme with a major UK carrier for UK ATC staff. I can only confirm what other people have commented on, that on post flight reports from both crews and the ATC staff themselves that they found the whole experience informative and enjoyable.
We reciproacted by showing crews around our ATC facility, a task which I personally undertook, and a comment by one visitor said that visits to ATC by airline crews should be a mandatory requirement. There was also a serious airmiss a few years ago where one of the recommendations was that ATC staff should have more Fam Flights as that lack of appreciation of "aeroplane type" things was a factor in the incident.
It would be a shame if for reasons of economy or "safety" that Fam Flights were discontinued as they were a genuine contribution to Flight Safety. ( Tony Fallows )
We reciproacted by showing crews around our ATC facility, a task which I personally undertook, and a comment by one visitor said that visits to ATC by airline crews should be a mandatory requirement. There was also a serious airmiss a few years ago where one of the recommendations was that ATC staff should have more Fam Flights as that lack of appreciation of "aeroplane type" things was a factor in the incident.
It would be a shame if for reasons of economy or "safety" that Fam Flights were discontinued as they were a genuine contribution to Flight Safety. ( Tony Fallows )
Cat O'Nine Tails:
"What happened to the courtesy of asking the other crew members "would you mind if I brought .......... along for a jolly?".
Well then, that all depends on who is asking the question and when! If you are a junior F/O and the person asking the question happens to be a senior training captain and you are about to get airborne in 45 minutes time and his wife is waiting outside - what do you think your response is likely to be?
That is one of the reasons why I would never put anyone in that situation.
Now, I also deeply regret that flight deck visits have gone down the pan. I have met some fascinating and wonderful people over the years and it was always nice to meet enthusiastic aviation-minded people.
That is not what I am talking about. All of them had a seat in the back of the aircraft that they could always return to or be invited to re-occupy.
Nor do I mind in the slightest people on the jumpseat who have been authorised by the company such as deadheading crew, air trafficers, engineers, ground staff etc. etc. What I am talking about are the ones who are not on company-related business and are just there on "squatter's rights".
Capt Pit Bull:
"Anything else that further erodes Pilots (sic) authority should be resisted, IMHO". Its (sic) our call.
Are you suggesting that us pilots should have complete control of our jumpseats? Believe me, this is not a great idea.
I once worked for such a company and I thought it was a lovely concept to start with.
Sadly it didn't last very long!
Eventually you will find yourself with the old chesnut; there is only one jumpseat available. The three contenders are:
1. Your own wife (who doesn't work for the company but who has you for rather longer than the company concerned is likely to last).
2. The Chief Accountant's wife (and you didn't get paid promptly last month).
3. A really hard-working flight attendant who is payed in local currency and has saved for years and years just to manage a holiday for a few days in an expensive country. He/she actually DOES work for the company but knows that No.2's husband could have her wiped out when he/she gets back to base.
On the other hand, you as the captain, realise that if he/she was left behind they would be wiped out financially whereas the other two could afford another night in hotac.
Tell me Capt Pit Bull, which one are you going to choose or would it not be better to concentrate on your flight-planning and let the agents sort it out?
Thank God for a buffer!
"What happened to the courtesy of asking the other crew members "would you mind if I brought .......... along for a jolly?".
Well then, that all depends on who is asking the question and when! If you are a junior F/O and the person asking the question happens to be a senior training captain and you are about to get airborne in 45 minutes time and his wife is waiting outside - what do you think your response is likely to be?
That is one of the reasons why I would never put anyone in that situation.
Now, I also deeply regret that flight deck visits have gone down the pan. I have met some fascinating and wonderful people over the years and it was always nice to meet enthusiastic aviation-minded people.
That is not what I am talking about. All of them had a seat in the back of the aircraft that they could always return to or be invited to re-occupy.
Nor do I mind in the slightest people on the jumpseat who have been authorised by the company such as deadheading crew, air trafficers, engineers, ground staff etc. etc. What I am talking about are the ones who are not on company-related business and are just there on "squatter's rights".
Capt Pit Bull:
"Anything else that further erodes Pilots (sic) authority should be resisted, IMHO". Its (sic) our call.
Are you suggesting that us pilots should have complete control of our jumpseats? Believe me, this is not a great idea.
I once worked for such a company and I thought it was a lovely concept to start with.
Sadly it didn't last very long!
Eventually you will find yourself with the old chesnut; there is only one jumpseat available. The three contenders are:
1. Your own wife (who doesn't work for the company but who has you for rather longer than the company concerned is likely to last).
2. The Chief Accountant's wife (and you didn't get paid promptly last month).
3. A really hard-working flight attendant who is payed in local currency and has saved for years and years just to manage a holiday for a few days in an expensive country. He/she actually DOES work for the company but knows that No.2's husband could have her wiped out when he/she gets back to base.
On the other hand, you as the captain, realise that if he/she was left behind they would be wiped out financially whereas the other two could afford another night in hotac.
Tell me Capt Pit Bull, which one are you going to choose or would it not be better to concentrate on your flight-planning and let the agents sort it out?
Thank God for a buffer!
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Inflammatory posting from BigMouth(did I get your name right?).Yes,the US is the land of the free and the greatest country on the face of this planet.But we're not going to be so free from now on and if this means pilots lose a few perquisites,so be it.Not only do I find your anti-American remark truly disgusting(and racist) and so typical of the whingeing Brit,but your airlines have had a terrible reputation for extending the courtesy of a j/s ride to legit aircrew pre 911.Usually found that it was left up to the check-in agent or one of the flight attendants,not the Captain!What kind of a system is that? Access to the j/s for commuting pilots has always been an American tradition;used to work like a treat until things started to tighten up after the Fedex incident and now 911.The only Euro airline that was always courteous and helpful in j/s rides pre 911 was Iberia,and the girls were prettier too.
Rananim:
Just on a point of accuracy; I had it in my mind that when I flew for three years in the USA some 20 years ago, you could not get into the flighdeck legally unless you were the holder of an FAA licence. Have the rules changed?
If the rules have not changed then that means that any pilot who does not hold an FAA licence cannot receive jumpseat privileges.
Why then as an FAA licence holder would you expect to get on the jumpseat of a non-N registered aircraft unless you also hold the requisite national licence?
Just on a point of accuracy; I had it in my mind that when I flew for three years in the USA some 20 years ago, you could not get into the flighdeck legally unless you were the holder of an FAA licence. Have the rules changed?
If the rules have not changed then that means that any pilot who does not hold an FAA licence cannot receive jumpseat privileges.
Why then as an FAA licence holder would you expect to get on the jumpseat of a non-N registered aircraft unless you also hold the requisite national licence?
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't agree with my mouth! 
JW411 has a very good point.
Rananim has chosen to tar all with their typecasting of Brits as being anti-American and whingeing. Not a smart move, and quite untrue- although we do despair of the insular attitude Americans have at times, we do tend to agree on most points and are their best ally- and proud of it.
JW411 has a very good point.
Rananim has chosen to tar all with their typecasting of Brits as being anti-American and whingeing. Not a smart move, and quite untrue- although we do despair of the insular attitude Americans have at times, we do tend to agree on most points and are their best ally- and proud of it.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ranamin,
I am could also think of many ways to change your screenname into a personal insult, but I do not believe this is the way to discuss the issue. I am sorry if you find my comments offend you, but I know that many Americans also firmly believe in guarding personal freedom and that any reductions in this by legislation should be guarded against, then you CAN claim to be the land of the free, at the moment though, a lot of knee jerk reactions seem to be going on, it is easy to make a claim like this, but to guard these freedoms needs MORE than just saying something is so,and just pointing out that things are worse in other countries is not a valid response IMHO. I also feel that if there were still the j.s. priveleges in the US there may have been a different reaction back. You may see this as whinging - I think defending my freedom is far more important than that!
Whilst there may be many reasons for having/not having known family members/ company staff on the jumpseat, I still do NOT see this as a real security threat, in fact I would prefer to have someone I could trust sitting on the seat who could then, if neccessary, act as a barrier while I fly the aircraft, that person is sitting in the best position to do so, rather than either of the pilots, who have to get out of their seats before they can be effective.
I am could also think of many ways to change your screenname into a personal insult, but I do not believe this is the way to discuss the issue. I am sorry if you find my comments offend you, but I know that many Americans also firmly believe in guarding personal freedom and that any reductions in this by legislation should be guarded against, then you CAN claim to be the land of the free, at the moment though, a lot of knee jerk reactions seem to be going on, it is easy to make a claim like this, but to guard these freedoms needs MORE than just saying something is so,and just pointing out that things are worse in other countries is not a valid response IMHO. I also feel that if there were still the j.s. priveleges in the US there may have been a different reaction back. You may see this as whinging - I think defending my freedom is far more important than that!
Whilst there may be many reasons for having/not having known family members/ company staff on the jumpseat, I still do NOT see this as a real security threat, in fact I would prefer to have someone I could trust sitting on the seat who could then, if neccessary, act as a barrier while I fly the aircraft, that person is sitting in the best position to do so, rather than either of the pilots, who have to get out of their seats before they can be effective.
Last edited by foxmoth; 11th Jul 2002 at 15:31.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: England
Posts: 1,050
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JW411,
No, I'm not suggesting that we should have "complete" control of the jumpseat. That is your inference, I simply do not see the need to lose the control that we do have.
Let me get this straight. Your arguement seems to be that just in case more than 1 person wants it, we shouldn't make it available at all.
Let us not forget that J/S pax actually generate revenue for the company, so in these testing times it seems silly to lose any potential source of income.
To those that say crew who carry family members on standby are "too cheap to buy a full fare ticket", what planet are you on?
All trades get discounts in their own business. Or is the car salesman who gets a car at cost for his wife "too cheap" to pay the forecourt price.
In my own case, I have a wife and young sprog, so j/s use is not an option. Pre child, I did take Mrs Pit Bull down route a few times, and it was very straight forward.
The company just kept a large diary, and if you wanted the J/S you checked the diary to see if the flight number had already been taken by someone else (or prebooked for crew).
If not, you just got one of various managers to authorise the jumpseat (which would universally be given for adult family members) and then wrote in the flight number and your name. F/Os, as a courtesy, would generally drop a note in the skippers pigeonhole as well.
Problem solved.
No need for arguements at the gate.
Just a simple, straightforward, pen and paper solution.
CPB
No, I'm not suggesting that we should have "complete" control of the jumpseat. That is your inference, I simply do not see the need to lose the control that we do have.
Let me get this straight. Your arguement seems to be that just in case more than 1 person wants it, we shouldn't make it available at all.
Let us not forget that J/S pax actually generate revenue for the company, so in these testing times it seems silly to lose any potential source of income.
To those that say crew who carry family members on standby are "too cheap to buy a full fare ticket", what planet are you on?
All trades get discounts in their own business. Or is the car salesman who gets a car at cost for his wife "too cheap" to pay the forecourt price.
In my own case, I have a wife and young sprog, so j/s use is not an option. Pre child, I did take Mrs Pit Bull down route a few times, and it was very straight forward.
The company just kept a large diary, and if you wanted the J/S you checked the diary to see if the flight number had already been taken by someone else (or prebooked for crew).
If not, you just got one of various managers to authorise the jumpseat (which would universally be given for adult family members) and then wrote in the flight number and your name. F/Os, as a courtesy, would generally drop a note in the skippers pigeonhole as well.
Problem solved.
No need for arguements at the gate.
Just a simple, straightforward, pen and paper solution.
CPB
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rananim
I know it's difficult but, if you can, it's much better to ignore silly anti-American comments and treat them with the contempt they deserve. If you respond with generalisations, the problem escalates. All governments are prone to to knee-jerk reactions - and the UK is no exception!
foxmoth
Your attempt (in your most recent post) to gain the moral high ground is unconvincing but, I hope, a good sign. You made provocative remarks about America in your post which originated this discussion, and have repeated anti-American comments subsequently despite a warning earlier in the thread. If you make provocative remarks, people tend to be provoked - that phenomenon is often called 'human nature'.
Which do you want?
A discussion about whether there is any necessity to add further restrictions when the existing FAA j/s rule was already so restrictive? (Absurdly restrictive many would say, including me.)
Or perhaps a discussion about which aviation authority, the CAA or the FAA, generally gives pilots more freedom to use discretion? I suspect you might not like the answer to that question. Your first post suggests you are not very familiar with FAA Regs - TowerDog corrected your mistake.
Or even whether America truly is the 'Land of the Free'? (But start that topic on JetBlast, not here.)
Sweeping generalisations about countries, race or nationality are not conducive to good discussion and, as has already been pointed out by another Administrator, will not be permitted.
Let's all keep to the topic - it's a good one!
Heliport
Administrator
I know it's difficult but, if you can, it's much better to ignore silly anti-American comments and treat them with the contempt they deserve. If you respond with generalisations, the problem escalates. All governments are prone to to knee-jerk reactions - and the UK is no exception!
foxmoth
Your attempt (in your most recent post) to gain the moral high ground is unconvincing but, I hope, a good sign. You made provocative remarks about America in your post which originated this discussion, and have repeated anti-American comments subsequently despite a warning earlier in the thread. If you make provocative remarks, people tend to be provoked - that phenomenon is often called 'human nature'.
Which do you want?
A discussion about whether there is any necessity to add further restrictions when the existing FAA j/s rule was already so restrictive? (Absurdly restrictive many would say, including me.)
Or perhaps a discussion about which aviation authority, the CAA or the FAA, generally gives pilots more freedom to use discretion? I suspect you might not like the answer to that question. Your first post suggests you are not very familiar with FAA Regs - TowerDog corrected your mistake.
Or even whether America truly is the 'Land of the Free'? (But start that topic on JetBlast, not here.)
Sweeping generalisations about countries, race or nationality are not conducive to good discussion and, as has already been pointed out by another Administrator, will not be permitted.
Let's all keep to the topic - it's a good one!
Heliport
Administrator
Last edited by Heliport; 11th Jul 2002 at 20:29.
Capt Pit Bull:
"Your arguement (sic) seems to be that just in case more than 1 person wants it, we shouldn't make it available at all".
No dear boy, I am merely suggesting that my 40-odd years of flying experience has taught me that I really do not want to have anything to do with the allocation of jumpseats for my job is to operate the aeroplane and not to get involved in company politics.
My illustration of the three "hopefulls" trying to occupy the "last" jumpseat is, in this particular case, slightly (but only slightly) fictitious. It was rather like one of the first questions asked in my RAF aircrew initial interview:
"You have an MG TF: it is pouring with rain and you find yourself by a bus stop. Three people are getting soaked to the skin awaiting a bus":
1. A lovely dollybird that you have been hoping to date for years.
2. A lady that has been looking after your disabled mother for years.
3. An asthmatic 80 year-old man who is probably going to die if you don't take him straight to hospital.
Which one do you pick up? Of course, there is no answer and that is the point I was trying to make; so why do you want to get involved in the first place?
I am fascinated by your statement that jump seat passengers generate revenue. Visitors to the flightdeck (who have bought a seat in the back) might well do so but is your company now selling jump seats per se? (Bin Laden please note).
Anyway, it is good to see that you are always up for a discount, my boy. However, I detect that now that you have a sprog, you might just be beginning to realise that your family deserves 100% and not an ID90. Your family is the most valuable part of your life.
P.S. With the exception of one, all the big aircraft that I have ever flown have had two jumpseats.
"Your arguement (sic) seems to be that just in case more than 1 person wants it, we shouldn't make it available at all".
No dear boy, I am merely suggesting that my 40-odd years of flying experience has taught me that I really do not want to have anything to do with the allocation of jumpseats for my job is to operate the aeroplane and not to get involved in company politics.
My illustration of the three "hopefulls" trying to occupy the "last" jumpseat is, in this particular case, slightly (but only slightly) fictitious. It was rather like one of the first questions asked in my RAF aircrew initial interview:
"You have an MG TF: it is pouring with rain and you find yourself by a bus stop. Three people are getting soaked to the skin awaiting a bus":
1. A lovely dollybird that you have been hoping to date for years.
2. A lady that has been looking after your disabled mother for years.
3. An asthmatic 80 year-old man who is probably going to die if you don't take him straight to hospital.
Which one do you pick up? Of course, there is no answer and that is the point I was trying to make; so why do you want to get involved in the first place?
I am fascinated by your statement that jump seat passengers generate revenue. Visitors to the flightdeck (who have bought a seat in the back) might well do so but is your company now selling jump seats per se? (Bin Laden please note).
Anyway, it is good to see that you are always up for a discount, my boy. However, I detect that now that you have a sprog, you might just be beginning to realise that your family deserves 100% and not an ID90. Your family is the most valuable part of your life.
P.S. With the exception of one, all the big aircraft that I have ever flown have had two jumpseats.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now we have reach the level of 'personal abuse' perhaps we have lost sight of the original topic.
The regulations being discussed here are those that the FAA are going to apply. These regulations only allow jump seat occupants on Part 129 operators (non-US carriers) that have the approval of the local administrative authority (CAA in our case). The CAA will decide who can and cannot occupy the jump seat with a Commander's veto.
The US carriers already have restrictions in place.
It will probably apply globally (to domestic UK flights as well as trans-Atlantic) and it will probably be more restrictive than any present regimes
Not happy times ahead.
(typo edit)
The regulations being discussed here are those that the FAA are going to apply. These regulations only allow jump seat occupants on Part 129 operators (non-US carriers) that have the approval of the local administrative authority (CAA in our case). The CAA will decide who can and cannot occupy the jump seat with a Commander's veto.
The US carriers already have restrictions in place.
It will probably apply globally (to domestic UK flights as well as trans-Atlantic) and it will probably be more restrictive than any present regimes
Not happy times ahead.
(typo edit)
Last edited by Anne.Nonymous; 11th Jul 2002 at 21:38.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heliport
I agree I probably should not have the "land of the free" remark in my origional post as it has diverted the discusion onto silly sidetracks, just exasperation i'm afraid, as a job that I once enjoyed is becomming more & more restricted, and personal insults do not help me avoid trying to justify my remarks. Subject dropped by me, could others please follow suit and just address the main part of the thread - preferably with relavence to the SECURITY aspect.
I agree I probably should not have the "land of the free" remark in my origional post as it has diverted the discusion onto silly sidetracks, just exasperation i'm afraid, as a job that I once enjoyed is becomming more & more restricted, and personal insults do not help me avoid trying to justify my remarks. Subject dropped by me, could others please follow suit and just address the main part of the thread - preferably with relavence to the SECURITY aspect.