Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
These Companies Are Laying Off & Have Jets  
User currently offlineBP1 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 593 posts, RR: 1
Posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 9618 times:

From 2008 National Business Aviation Association - Directory of Membership Companies

1. TEXAS INSTRUMENTS

2. HOME DEPOT

3. TARGET

N484T Citation 750
N585T Citation 750

4. SPRINT / NEXTEL

N96NX Falcon 900EX
N97NX Falcon 900EX
N98NX Falcon 900

5. CATERPILLAR

N385CT Challenger 604
N657CT Challenger 604
N793CT Challenger 604

6. GENERAL ELECTRIC

Challenger's and Bombardier Global Express's


7. HALLIBURTON

N5616 Gulfstream V
N854SD Gulfstream IVSP


8. WYETH

9. PFIZER

N201CP - Embraer Legacy (ERJ-135)
N202CP - Embraer Legacy (ERJ-135)

10. HARLEY DAVIDSON

N80HD - Hawker 800XP
N88HD - Hawker 800XP

These are just a few - again some hide under funky LLC's.


"First To Fly The A-380" / 26 October 2007 SYD-SIN Inaugural
50 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTb727 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1632 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 9576 times:

I am pretty sure the Pfizer planes are either gone or will be very soon. I think they stopped going to YIP on their shuttle not long ago. They flew AZO-YIP-MMU-GON and back for the past few years.


Too lazy to work, too scared to steal!
User currently offlineRFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 2, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 9572 times:

Yum Brands! (Kentucky Fried Chicken, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, Long John Silver's)
G-550
G-200
Challenger - 2


User currently offlinePHLstudent From United States of America, joined May 2006, 498 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 9442 times:

The company I work for is laying off, and currently owns 1 jet and leases 2 props. I work in our corporate audit department so my group goes over the planes usage along with a ton of other things. But it makes me kinda mad with what the execs get away with for purposes to use the planes yet then they claim our expenses are too high. Flying from PHL-NYC or to Washington, DC is not a very efficient use of our corporate planes. Our planes go out on average 20-25% filled. Even flying on paid first class has to be cheaper, but then they complain about wasted time. It seems to be a waste, word around the water cooler is that were getting rid of our 2 leased planes and keeping the jet we own, but who knows..

User currently offlineCrewchief From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9301 times:

I've heard the US government is about to run trillion dollar deficits for the next several years, yet several agencies have aircraft they use for their SES and congressional junkets, and the President has several aircraft at his disposal. Maybe Obama should demonstrate his commitment to use taxpayer dollars properly and give up his planes as well.

 Big grin


User currently offlineFlyinryan99 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 2025 posts, RR: 13
Reply 5, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9252 times:



Quoting BP1 (Thread starter):

The point of your post is????

Try flying commercial...time is money for most upper management and commercial flying wastes a ton of time. I understand a lot of companies are laying off but I guarantee it could be a lot more if upper management didn't have access to smaller airports in smaller cities around the US.


User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8956 posts, RR: 60
Reply 6, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9248 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR



Quoting BP1 (Thread starter):
These Companies Are Laying Off & Have Jets

What's your point? Corporate jets are not necessarily a luxury.

When utilized responsibly, corporate jets increase efficiency and productivity. This saves money.

2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21562 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9210 times:



Quoting 2H4 (Reply 6):
What's your point? Corporate jets are not necessarily a luxury.

His point is to demonstrate how absurd it is to jump down Citi's throat and ignore the others, and how it's a part of running a very large company.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 8, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9208 times:



Quoting BP1 (Thread starter):
9. PFIZER


N201CP - Embraer Legacy (ERJ-135)
N202CP - Embraer Legacy (ERJ-135)

The Pfizer jets departed mid summer last year....and they were not Legacy's.... just a standard E135LR's



"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineFlypig687 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 56 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9198 times:

Home Depots jets call Fulton County, GA (KFTY) home, which is also where my club calls home, just saying

User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8956 posts, RR: 60
Reply 10, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9166 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 7):
His point is to demonstrate how absurd it is to jump down Citi's throat and ignore the others

Unless someone can produce actual evidence of a company regularly utilizing their corporate aircraft in a wasteful manner, it's absurd to jump down any of their throats.

2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineYXXMIKE From Canada, joined Apr 2008, 310 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9130 times:

There seems to be a constant debate about the use of private jets and working on a GA ramp I can tell you that business is down and that flying habits of have changed. Having talked to many pilots that fly corporate machines they have said that their hours are way down and that they are starting to get worried about job security (something many corporate pilots haven't had to worry about for 10 years).

Times are changing and just because the company you may work for still owns a private jet it doesn't mean that they are flying it just as much. It also doesn't make much sense to sell a bird in a market that is currently flooded with small and mid sized private jets. It'll still be cheaper to not fly and have them in the hangar rather than selling them at huge losses.


User currently offlinePHLstudent From United States of America, joined May 2006, 498 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9121 times:



Quoting 2H4 (Reply 10):
Unless someone can produce actual evidence of a company regularly utilizing their corporate aircraft in a wasteful manner, it's absurd to jump down any of their throats.

What do you call a wasteful manner and what do you call actual evidence. I have work papers at work proving our aircraft only go out 20-25% filled, that seems wasteful to me.


User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8956 posts, RR: 60
Reply 13, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9097 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR



Quoting YXXMIKE (Reply 11):
business is down

All the more reason to maximize the productivity and efficiency of your highest-paid employees. Corporate jets can do this.  yes 

Quoting YXXMIKE (Reply 11):
Having talked to many pilots that fly corporate machines they have said that their hours are way down and that they are starting to get worried about job security

With the sensationalism and uneducated reporting being shoveled out by the media and believed by the public (ie: shareholders), it's no surprise pilots are starting to become concerned about job security.

2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8956 posts, RR: 60
Reply 14, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 9062 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR



Quoting PHLstudent (Reply 12):
What do you call a wasteful manner and what do you call actual evidence.

Opinions will vary, but in general, using a corporate aircraft in a wasteful manner can take on many characteristics. Consistently using a larger aircraft than needed would seem wasteful. So would using one when doing so wouldn't save much time over the actual door-to-door time via the airlines. Using one for unnecessary trips would be wasteful. And I'd say it would be wasteful to use one simply as a 'perk' for an employee. The last thing that comes to mind off the top of my head is flying someplace and not using the time enroute to be productive. Playing solitaire, for example.

Actual evidence, to me, would be official records and first-hand accounts of this kind of utilization taking place.

Quoting PHLstudent (Reply 12):
I have work papers at work proving our aircraft only go out 20-25% filled, that seems wasteful to me.

Your particular operation might indeed have more aircraft than they need. It would be interesting to find out A) whether they expect loads to increase in the short to medium-term, and B) if they would come out ahead by downsizing.

And it's entirely possible that your company's business model simply doesn't lend itself to owning and operating a corporate aircraft. I've never said corporate aircraft work for every company, in every case. I simply maintain that corporate aircraft are not necessarily opulent luxuries. The media seems to have trouble understanding this.

2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineYXXMIKE From Canada, joined Apr 2008, 310 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 9044 times:



Quoting 2H4 (Reply 13):
All the more reason to maximize the productivity and efficiency of your highest-paid employees. Corporate jets can do this.

I am not saying that a private jet can't do this, there are more times than I can count where many execs are getting off a jet and are constantly working. One time I remember an exec that was working on a deal here at YVR, then closed it only to fly to SEA so he could deal with an issue there only to come back a day later to work on another deal. If he had spent time waiting for around for flights it certainly would have been very disruptive and wasteful.


User currently offlineGinger727 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 54 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 9010 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I know of numerous companies with a fleet of corporate aircraft that are used primarily to transport personnel of all levels, including the lowest ranking people, to job sites around the country. In many cases, the travelers are rarely the CEO and top management, but the folks who do the heavy lifting out in the field and can't get to their destinations quickly by commercial airlines. It is terribly unfair to lump all corporate aircraft into the notion of executive perks.

User currently offlinePHLstudent From United States of America, joined May 2006, 498 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 8985 times:

I work for a large Oil company based in Philadelphia, do a little research and it should be easy to figure out.

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 14):

Our CEO is required to travel using the corporate jet for any travel needs, both personal and business purposes. Any exec as far as I know uses the planes for business purposes. One of the main reasons the planes were purchased was for the time savings and ease of driving up boarding the plane, and taking off in give or take 20 minutes.

When we were purchasing a company in Pittsburgh many years ago, my mother who also works for this company said she heard that if 7 people are flying to the same place it is cheaper to use the company plane. So if usually our 7-10 seat planes are going out with 2-4 people we are losing thousands of dollars on every trip. We have plants/refineries/terminals all across the Midwest so trips out there happen very very often. I do not want to risk my job by providing support so unfortunately you'll have to take my word on the utilization.

To me though, it just seems ironic that we are being forced to cut back, and people are going to lose their jobs, yet we have 3 planes flying all over the east coast/mid west. We are alleged getting rid of 2 of our leased planes, which should hopefully cut back on some costs.


User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8956 posts, RR: 60
Reply 18, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 8941 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR



Quoting YXXMIKE (Reply 15):

Great example! If anything good is coming from the current media witch-hunt that's going on, it's that many companies are making darn sure their assets are being utilized in a responsible manner, like the example you provided.  yes 

Quoting Ginger727 (Reply 16):
It is terribly unfair to lump all corporate aircraft into the notion of executive perks.

 checkmark  checkmark  checkmark 

It's a shame that doing so generates entertaining and sensational news stories, and an even bigger shame that the general public buys every bit of it.

Quoting PHLstudent (Reply 17):
Our CEO is required to travel using the corporate jet for any travel needs, both personal and business purposes.

This could be an example of an outdated or unnecessary policy that's making the ownership and utilization of the aircraft less efficient than it could be.

Quoting PHLstudent (Reply 17):
One of the main reasons the planes were purchased was for the time savings and ease of driving up boarding the plane, and taking off in give or take 20 minutes.

Understandable. If you're transporting several very highly-paid people, the time saved could easily be worth more than the expense incurred.

Quoting PHLstudent (Reply 17):
you'll have to take my word on the utilization.

I will. You seem to be examining things in a very logical and well-balanced manner. And it doesn't seem that we disagree on any fundamentals. If your company isn't using the aircraft in a responsible, efficient manner, they probably should go.

2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineN353SK From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 829 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 8870 times:

These companies also are laying off & have jets:

CONTINENTAL
UNITED
AMERICAN
AIR CANADA
MIDWEST
ALASKA

I fail to see the relevance of this witch hunt .... whoops, i meant to say thread!


User currently offlineFlyinryan99 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 2025 posts, RR: 13
Reply 20, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 8871 times:



Quoting PHLstudent (Reply 17):
I work for a large Oil company based in Philadelphia, do a little research and it should be easy to figure out.

Sunoco right? If that's the case then I'll use one example because I know they fly it at least once a month. If it's not Sunoco then I'm sorry. I know they fly quite often ILG - TOL to do their business around here. Can they fly PHL-TOL nonstop? Nope. Can they fly PHL-DTW? Yep. However, that would require going through TSA security twice, renting a car, dropping the car off, driving at least 60 minutes each way (maybe more due to weather or traffic) and oh yeah ATC delays due to PHL. ILG doesn't have delays and TOL will bend over backwards for the bizjet traffic. Which is more economical?

Quoting PHLstudent (Reply 17):
To me though, it just seems ironic that we are being forced to cut back, and people are going to lose their jobs, yet we have 3 planes flying all over the east coast/mid west.

Don't blame the CEO, blame the BOD and shareholders demanding more profits.


User currently offlineBDL2STL2PVG From China, joined Jun 2006, 151 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8834 times:

I think that even in down times, a corporate jet or jets can be justified easily. But, it really needs to be on a case by case basis. I'll use my old STL company as an example......manufacturing facilities scattered throughout the country. Some years back the decision was made to move manufacturing out of STL and take advantage of the lower costs of operating in the South and then later Mexico, and then later China. The folklore has it that when they wanted to site a new facility they flew into a city, drove away from the airport and when they lost the AM radio signal from that city - well, then they could look for a site for the plant. Now they have facilities hours away from major airports. A good number of them average 1.5 hours from a commercial airport. Having a few Citation Vs to get a team of up to 7 people in and out in a workday pays for itself. A lot of these trips could not be accomplished in a day. Of course there is the cost of flights, some of which require connections, eating up additional time. Add the cost of rental cars and hotels and meals, and the formula works. Getting people there in person for reviews and addressing issues, it works to. So, I think it is case by case and unfortunately, the automotive guys started a firestorm that will make all corporate aircraft be subject to the same brush. Even if a company is laying off, if there is still a cost savings or efficiency benefit that exceeds the a/c costs, it is still a sound business decision.

User currently offlineAvt007 From Canada, joined Jul 2000, 2132 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8805 times:

I'll guarantee you one thing- getting rid of corporate aircraft will directly cause more job losses-pilots , FAs, maintenance, purchasing, independant businesses like avionics shops, component overhaul companies, etc. All of these people will be impacted by those choices. I know, I've been laid off when corporate aircraft are dropped.

User currently offlineAcey559 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1542 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8669 times:

John Deere has two C750s, 1 C680 and one (I've heard that it is going to be two by July) Gulfstream V based at MLI and one King Air 350 down in Porto Alegre, Brazil and they are also laying people off. However, they still fly internationally almost every week and it would be ridiculous to send all of the people they normally fly on the Gulfstream V on the airlines. For one, they usually fly into more obscure international markets and it would cost them a fortune to send their execs to those places. Combine that with the fact that I can't see a Fortune 100 company CEO stuck in the middle seat in Y class all the way to Africa or India or Russia or China. While they seem frivolous, biz jets DO serve a purpose and actually SAVE money!!! I took a corporate aviation class last semester and we talked not only about actual money saved, but intangible benefits such as less time overseas and more time with families at home which equates to more productivity which equates to more money made for the company. I think these companies are smart for having corporate jets because they are very large corporations. Next, please.

User currently offlineB707forever From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 459 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (5 years 10 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 7931 times:

If these corporate executives aren't carefull they'll find themselves like Marie Antoinette!

25 Wjcandee : This presumption that corporate jets are a wasteful luxury is idiotic. In some cases, they are misused, of course. But in others, they allow a CEO to
26 RafflesKing : Obviously - companies need to responsibly evaluate their uses of corporate jets. My company is a Fortune 20 and is very diligent about plane usage. O
27 FlyDreamliner : I dunno, looking at some of these corporations current leadership, they don't seem to be very useful anyway, I'm not sure their time is worth that mu
28 YULWinterSkies : The sacrifice of thousands of "average americans" ' jobs in order to keep operating corp jets. They must be aviation geeks in a way, right? Not a lux
29 Sean-SAN- : I used to consult at Pfizer.. those E135s were basically shuttle buses for employees working at different sites. Quite often people would fly back and
30 BP1 : Everyone - I added this thread to get the talk going and to hear you thoughts about all this. I work in the corporate aviation industry and am one of
31 BP1 : Why was my thread deleted about the companies that have my tax payer $ with corporate fleets deleted? BP1
32 Spudsmac : We kinda need them, imagine the security nightmare without them. The expense of AF1 is probably pocket change compared to what is used on security. P
33 Captaintim : from the same place you found this info, NBAA also issues an annual white paper that calculates the amount of money and time saved for using a busine
34 SPREE34 : And Pelosi, and Reid, and................... Hypocrites of the 1st magnitude. And fly into places nowhere near airline service. I used to fly into nu
35 Tugger : Don't forget Starbucks! They only just got their Gulfstream 550, early in January 2009. And they have recently shuttered over 600 stores and cut the
36 Slimshady : I can personally see all counts. Also, with regards to corporate flying, yes, I have an issue with a major coroporation flying in Gulfstreams and "wid
37 ConvairNut : Absolutely. And let's not forget security; CEO's, CFO's, COO's etc. are high profile folks who don't need to be out in public as much as one of us "o
38 Theoden : A leader can only be in one place at a time, and their time is very valuable. If using a private aircraft saves enough time compared to alternatives,
39 BlueFlyer : But you need to take into account the cost of not having a Gulfstream handy when the mission calls for one. It may make sense to fly 1,000 miles in a
40 Max777geek : Pfizer got the biggest
41 YXXMIKE : Some interesting and mixed responses in this post, pretty good feedback from everyone. I know that this is a very sensitive topic and for many of us t
42 Post contains links BP1 : Was Tim Horton"s brand new Global Express destroyed a few years ago when landing on his private island in Northern Canada? The link to pictures of his
43 2H4 : This underscores the importance of regular communication between management and the workforce/shareholders. If those groups are informed, and underst
44 YXXMIKE : Well put, this is basically the underlying problem that exists with every other problem in the business world....Communication!!! How a CEO communica
45 AC788 : I fully agree with 2H4. As soon as the Big 3 automaker execs were scolded in front of the entire world for flying corporate jets into D.C, the media
46 Dazed767 : Some of these crews seem more spoiled then the these CEO's (and if you have worked in the industry before, you know what I'm talking about).
47 FLALEFTY : Tools or Toys? When used correctly, corporate jets can help make for more jobs in places where regular airline service is rare, or has disappeared. Ki
48 Brilondon : If you are a commercial airline it would be, but as a person who use to own his own aircraft because it made economical sense for me to fly to my cli
49 Acey559 : They ordered that plane years ago when the economy wasn't bad, and I think they got rid of their old Gulfstream, so in reality they replaced an older
50 Gr8Circle : Can you imagine the turmoil that would create if the President of the USA started flying on commercial flights....? The cost of security, the inconve
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Eclipse Aviation Laying-off 100+ Employees posted Fri Oct 19 2007 17:41:50 by ABQ747
How Are AA's Terminals 8 & 9 Coming Along At JFK? posted Tue Nov 28 2006 07:45:17 by BALAX
Does P&W Have A Chance For Future Airliners? posted Thu Nov 23 2006 02:14:12 by 1337Delta764
Would Anyone Compete W/ AF & Have A Hub In Paris? posted Sat Sep 9 2006 00:58:26 by B777A340Fan
Are Power-off Landings Done In Today's Heavies? posted Fri Jun 2 2006 08:49:42 by Scoliodon
RSKs, ASKs, Etc - How Are They Calculated & Used? posted Wed Apr 26 2006 12:28:44 by Fly2CHC
DL Laying Off Up To 9000 Employees posted Thu Sep 22 2005 15:18:52 by 1MillionFlyer
USAirways Laying Off Workers In Philadelphia posted Thu Jul 7 2005 21:13:42 by KarlB737
Any Ideas What These Markings Are For? posted Wed Mar 30 2005 00:28:12 by PMN
Where Are AR's 3rd & 4th B747-400s? posted Sun Feb 27 2005 14:05:24 by LVZXV
DL Laying Off Up To 9000 Employees posted Thu Sep 22 2005 15:18:52 by 1MillionFlyer
USAirways Laying Off Workers In Philadelphia posted Thu Jul 7 2005 21:13:42 by KarlB737
Any Ideas What These Markings Are For? posted Wed Mar 30 2005 00:28:12 by PMN
Where Are AR's 3rd & 4th B747-400s? posted Sun Feb 27 2005 14:05:24 by LVZXV
Are Power-off Landings Done In Today's Heavies? posted Fri Jun 2 2006 08:49:42 by Scoliodon
RSKs, ASKs, Etc - How Are They Calculated & Used? posted Wed Apr 26 2006 12:28:44 by Fly2CHC
DL Laying Off Up To 9000 Employees posted Thu Sep 22 2005 15:18:52 by 1MillionFlyer
USAirways Laying Off Workers In Philadelphia posted Thu Jul 7 2005 21:13:42 by KarlB737
Any Ideas What These Markings Are For? posted Wed Mar 30 2005 00:28:12 by PMN
Where Are AR's 3rd & 4th B747-400s? posted Sun Feb 27 2005 14:05:24 by LVZXV
How Are AA's Terminals 8 & 9 Coming Along At JFK? posted Tue Nov 28 2006 07:45:17 by BALAX
Does P&W Have A Chance For Future Airliners? posted Thu Nov 23 2006 02:14:12 by 1337Delta764
Would Anyone Compete W/ AF & Have A Hub In Paris? posted Sat Sep 9 2006 00:58:26 by B777A340Fan
Are Power-off Landings Done In Today's Heavies? posted Fri Jun 2 2006 08:49:42 by Scoliodon
RSKs, ASKs, Etc - How Are They Calculated & Used? posted Wed Apr 26 2006 12:28:44 by Fly2CHC
DL Laying Off Up To 9000 Employees posted Thu Sep 22 2005 15:18:52 by 1MillionFlyer
USAirways Laying Off Workers In Philadelphia posted Thu Jul 7 2005 21:13:42 by KarlB737
Any Ideas What These Markings Are For? posted Wed Mar 30 2005 00:28:12 by PMN
Where Are AR's 3rd & 4th B747-400s? posted Sun Feb 27 2005 14:05:24 by LVZXV
DL Laying Off Up To 9000 Employees posted Thu Sep 22 2005 15:18:52 by 1MillionFlyer
USAirways Laying Off Workers In Philadelphia posted Thu Jul 7 2005 21:13:42 by KarlB737
Any Ideas What These Markings Are For? posted Wed Mar 30 2005 00:28:12 by PMN
Where Are AR's 3rd & 4th B747-400s? posted Sun Feb 27 2005 14:05:24 by LVZXV