Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

I'm a Lynx Pilot and I'm working for a screwed Regional for a LCC Regional Airline.

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Stay, I respectfully disagree. The previous TA1 specifically had regional language in it for the purpose of putting Lynx onto property. It's all ancient history, yes, but lets not forget it stated that if we took a carrier with a regional, then it came with and would not be grown.

It was specifically removed for TA2 as a result of F9 not going through.

Have you also forgotten Carl's letter regarding the start of opening discussions with Lynx?

I have read a number of "Carl's Letters". If he is good at one thing, it is definitely poetry vs prose.

Allow me to ask you this. If excess FAPA pilots were to be represented by FAPA, who was going to represent the excess Lynx pilots?

Gup, you still owe me many beers.
 
Yes I do.

I'm not sure what you mean by "excess" FAPA pilots and Lynx pilots. Every pilot employed by that airline on Tower Road, even the furloughed ones, would have been Southwest Airlines pilots. It's just that simple.

Gup
 
SWAPA would've gladly represented the Lynx guys.....you too for that matter, but you didn't seem that eager to be part of our family. Let me know how Bedford's promises work out for ya.

Sorry Lynx dude.
 
Actually, it never said it could not be grown...

Not true. Although I can't find a copy of TA1...

"There have also been some questions about the language concerning the exception about the Company buying a carrier with a RJ codeshare contract in place. This exception was given for a specific situation concerning a potential acquisition by Southwest as a condition of sale for that carrier. The Company agreed that the codeshare would not be expanded or continued beyond the codeshare contract expiration date with the RJ carrier. "
 
I have read a number of "Carl's Letters". If he is good at one thing, it is definitely poetry vs prose.

That's interesting, because I haven't been able to read any of John Stemmler's letters. Do any even exist? Ever since last summer, you have been one of the loudest voices howling that SWAPA's version of who did what to who was pure fiction. And despite repeated requests, you have yet to provide any source for your version of events....other than your own keyboard.
 
Last edited:
That's interesting, because I haven't been able to read any of John Stemmler's letters. Do any even exist? Ever since last summer, you have been one of the loudest voices howling that SWAPA's version of who did what to who was pure fiction. And despite repeated requests, you have yet to provide any source for your version of events....other than your own keyboard.

Yeah... what he said.
 
I have read a number of "Carl's Letters". If he is good at one thing, it is definitely poetry vs prose.

Allow me to ask you this. If excess FAPA pilots were to be represented by FAPA, who was going to represent the excess Lynx pilots?

Gup, you still owe me many beers.


the cynicism of this career is hard to shake. you just couldn't believe that SWA would take care of you.
you'll be ok- i don't feel sorry for airline pilots- but ... it was a really good opportunity that you worked against.
 
Why doesn't Bedford buy Expressjet and put the airplanes in operation for CAL?


Don't speak of such things! We at CAL are going to do all we can to keep our flying where it belongs. IN HOUSE. They want to fly 170's and 190s over here at CAL thats fine. They can staff them with mainline pilots and pay mainline rates.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top