Click here to close
New Message Alert
List Entire Thread
Msg ID: 2691672 Flyable vs airworthy  +5/-12     
Author:Real talk New Jersey
6/6/2021 5:17:29 PM

Sick of all the bureakracy behind right  ups! 

 

if it flew n it will fly out! Go get that patient and fly her to the hospital. You don't need all that much to fly vfr. Let's get real here. Attitude indicators, rotor brakes, funny sounds, 30 minute fuel reserves, etc not needed to fly vfr. HAA is such a whiny sector of the industry. Go fly. If it's flyable git r done 

zed 



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2691676 Flyable vs airworthy  +3/-1     
Author:It Flew In With A Low Fuel
6/6/2021 6:14:26 PM

Reply to: 2691672

Annunciator.



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2691678 Flyable vs airworthy  +6/-1     
Author:Rebuilt
6/6/2021 6:25:56 PM

Reply to: 2691676

Ah the ole PHI

"It flew in, I've seen worst, I wouldn't Fv(k with it, It'll Fly out"

Yep the good old days!??? Fly & Die W/PHI



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2691697 Flyable vs airworthy  +3/-4     
Author:Hmmm
6/6/2021 7:30:07 PM

Reply to: 2691678

Phi still won't hire you.  That has to hurt.



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2691734 Flyable vs airworthy  +2/-0     
Author:Rebuilt
6/7/2021 7:49:26 AM

Reply to: 2691697

Nah was there from 84-86 Laf/Moron City/Houmo.



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2691701 Flyable vs airworthy  +1/-0     
Author:Anonymous
6/6/2021 7:55:32 PM

Reply to: 2691672

"Real talk" is what keeps this business on the bottom tier of aviation. 



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2691779 Flyable vs airworthy (NT) +1/-0     
Author:If you don't like aviation go by ground
6/7/2021 2:09:57 PM

Reply to: 2691701


Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2691815 Flyable vs airworthy  +0/-3     
Author:lets get real
6/7/2021 8:28:29 PM

Reply to: 2691672

The real issue is that humans want to find any way around writing up a discrepancy on an aircraft.    Its really easy.  take a crayon on scribble things down.  



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2691951 Flyable vs airworthy (NT) +0/-0     
Author:Naive
6/8/2021 8:49:34 PM

Reply to: 2691672


Return-To-Index