AVweb

« Back to Full Story

AVmail: December 8, 2008

  • E-Mail this Article
  • View Printable Article
  • Text size:

    • A
    • A
    • A
Each week, we run a sampling of the letters received to our editorial inbox here in AVmail. One letter that's particularly relevant, informative, or otherwise compelling will headline this section as our "Letter of the Week," and we'll send the author an official AVweb baseball cap as a "thank you" for interacting with us (and the rest of our readership). Send us your comments and questions using this form. Please include your mailing address in your e-mail (just in case your letter is our "Letter of the Week"); by the same token, please let us know if your message is not intended for publication.

Letter of the Week

Perhaps selling off senior managment and keeping the jets would make more sense. The time of a senior executive that is effectively managing a company is very valuable. The vision shown by GM and Ford (Chrysler is privately held, kind of) would indicate that the transportation they used for the latest visit was just about right.

Richard Jenkins


Big Three Travel Plans

Why has no one stepped up to defend why it is useful for a CEO of major company to use a corporate jet. Do companies really want their $1000 per hour CEO's waiting in airline termianals waiting for commercial flights and possibly sitting for hours because flight was canceled or have to leave one day early because there is a 10 AM meeting in another city and no flights early enough for him to make it, then maybe stay another day because there is no flight out after the meeting. I think the flap about the CEOs going to D.C. in private jets was grossly misunderstood. It again shows that John Q. Public does not understand corporate aviation and its contribution to the American way of life.

Albert Ricciardi

Nancy Pelosi wasn't happy with the small private jet that comes with the Speaker's job. No, she was aggravated that this little jet had to stop to refuel, so she ordered a Big Fat 200 seat jet that could get her back to California without stopping! Since she only works three days a week, this gas guzzling jet gets fueled and she flies home to California with a cost to the taxpayers of about $60,000, one way! Pelosi wants you and I to [reduce] our carbon footprint. She wants us to buy smaller cars, and Obama wants us to get a bicycle pump and air up our tires. Some of these people are hypocrites.

Edward Toner

AVweb Replies:

Actually Ed, as we reported at the time, Pelosi said she didn't need any kind of government jet and that she was happy to fly commercial. However, the administration decided that for security and communications reasons, as third in line for the presidency should anything happen to the president and the vice president, she needed non-stop transportation to and from her San Francisco home in a government aircraft. Only the Gulfstream and C-32 (757) fill that bill.

Russ Niles
Editor-in-Chief

Google's New Jet

Regarding Google's claim that a certified aircraft cannot be modified with test electronic equipment and still carry passengers (Google Adds Military Trainer To Fleet): That is an inaccurate statement. I have personally been involved in acquiring FAA certification of testbed aircraft that were also certified in Normal Category to carry passengers, without de-modding.

Ian Hollingsworth


Speed Control

Regarding Short Final on Dec. 1: I thought all (civil) aircraft were limited to max 250 KIAS below 10,000MSL. Why would the pilot expect no speed restriction at 8,000?

Don Desfosse


Read AVmail from other weeks here, and submit your own Letter to the Editor with this form.

« Back to Full Story