To the best of my knowledge, Tower Air never had Tri-Stars. They had an all 747 classic fleet with some being freighters. They were based in JFK and went defunct around 2000. They did a lot of Hadj charters as well as leasing to companies like UPS. When TWA ceased their JFK-ATH service in 96, Tower took that over, as well as the Tel Aviv service. A few of my cousins flew Tower between LAX and JFK and said the interior was just attrocious. Another cousin who worked the ramp at LAX said their planes just looked old and run down. They did have one crash in 95 at JFK due to the plane sliding off an icy runway, but other than that, I don’t remember them being known as an ‘unsafe’ airline, moreso than just a plain $hitty one.
I’ve been to Australia enough times to know this.
Originally posted by chuck yeager
Thankx for the info he says he would prefer to fly over on a 777, he recons that the 767 is a bit cramped on his legs.
If it’s the same airline, then the seat pitch should be the same in both aircraft, therefore his argument is illogical. The only exception would be SQ in the case of their A345 having a better econo class cabin than the rest of their fleet. This is not the airline in question, however.
Originally posted by wysiwyg
Am I alone in thinking the Virgin Blue livery is awful?
I like the DJ livery!
That engine looks brand new.
Originally posted by Cyprioteagle
If you wish, I can present my results, once I complete the research.
That would be fantastic. I’m assuming the work force was cut drastically as the ‘old’ Olympic, from what I was told by my relatives that live in Greece, had way too many people doing the same thing.
‘Bluey’ means Redhead in Aussie lingo.
This is the only jet age UA livery that would have never worn the scheme. Very nice indeed.
What a nimrod!
Originally posted by B777
the worst has to be IAD, nothing to do when stuck there for over 6 hours,
I gotta’ disagree here, trip-seven. IAD has great terminal viewing, excellent facilities inside the terminals (TGIFridays amongst others, not unlike LHR), and it has a great model shop with a huge selection landside (used to be airside but they moved to expand http://www.airplanesuperstore.com). Not only can you move freely from terminal to terminal, but if you get really bored, you can just ride the terminal buses over and over again. Those get you really good viewing on the tarmac as they move about. Aside from the endless examples of United, there is a decent variety of other airlines, as well. Anyway, my favourite has to be HNL followed closely by SYD, SIN, AMS and SFO. I also like LAX, IAD, ORD, JFK, VIE and LHR. Even though connecting through LHR absolutely sucks, I enjoy the variety of aircraft while viewing in UA’s lounge in T3.
Originally posted by Jeanske_SN
This is boring. Look, your new here, first reply on threads untill you have 250 posts or so and then start your own. Questions like these passed many times here and aren’t very succesfull.
Jeanske, you obviously have no idea how to handle certain situations, and make far too many unnecessary comments. If you want to provide criticism, do so contructively. You are far from perfect, son. For instance, your handling of the Skylinerworld situation was totally unacceptable. You go and lambast the kid, when you’re only a couple of years older than he is. Grow some chest hair before you try and assert some authority, little man.
P.S. A little while back on one of your posts you commented to me, “You must be a newbie in aviation.” I’ve been an enthusiast six years longer than you’ve been alive, kid.
Is this THE Chuck Yeager?
That is very above average, Nasir. How about the Red tail livery?
That blue and black colour scheme is one of my favourites.
Re: Qantas staff concerned about air rage on Jetstar
Originally posted by steve rowell
“We are expecting air rage to go through the roof… we are expecting unhappy passengers because of the fairly strict conditions in Jetstar,” she told AAP.
What types of ‘strict’ conditions are they referring to?