FRA_to_usa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (15 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 609 times:
Having recently left the military, I am so glad that the days of flying on contract airlines are over.
How do airlines like Tower and Rich stay in business? I remember a Rich Intl flight in 1994 that was so bad I would rather have walked home. I think they are out of business now though. Tower is just waiting for a crash. Hopefully guys like these will be shut down or have financial difficulties before a plane load of military members and their families are lost.
Incidentally, I flew on a Tower flight where the pilot was making jokes about the Valuejet crash in front of passengers not more than 3 weeks after it happened. The 747 shut down two engines over the North Atlantic, and the flight was met by fire trucks at the airport. No explanation was ever made.
We here on the forum complain about service from Delta and US Airways, etc..., but THESE ARE YOUR TAX DOLLARS AND YOUR SONS AND DAUGHTERS being flown on disasters waiting to happen.
DC-10MAN From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (15 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 609 times:
FYI It's a lot cheaper for the military to contract companies rather than purchase and operate their own "Military Airline". Tower and Rich aren't the only airlines that fly the military, ATA, ATI, World, DAL and a few others also fly for them. Each airline authorized to fly for the govt. goes through a strict and thurough evaluation before they can carry one GI or dependant; proving runs are performed, the maintainance program and history is evaluated, just to cite a couple of examples. If anyone is at fault for authorizing a sub-standard carrier to fly troops, then its the govt who authorized them in the first place.ADIOS