I picked up a 1989 book in our local swap shop called "Unfriendly Skies" by
Captain "X" and Reynolds Dodson. It's an "as told to" about the deregulated
airline industry and a pretty good read. It sounds like not much has
changed in the last 10 years except the airlines are losing even more money.
Some good almost crashing stories by the Captain.

Boy, does this guy hate AOPA and little airplanes! He makes a big deal
about the then recent fight over the creation of Class B and C airspace and
how AOPA fought the transponder requirement. I'm a little shocked to hear
this. I like crossing that invisible magenta line and knowing the everyone
I meet for the next few miles will probably have one and be talking.

Has anybody else read this book?

--
Roger Long

Roger Long wrote:
>
> Has anybody else read this book?

Yeah. It's one of the very few books I've read that I threw away.

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

Do you like airline stories?
If so, you might want to look for a book called:
Debunking the Myth.
It was written by an ex-Delta VP that was at the
time breaking the silence on how Delta was no
longer a happy family run business.
But as we all know, none of the airlines are happy
families anymore.

David

In article >,
"Roger Long" m>
wrote:

> I picked up a 1989 book in our local swap shop called "Unfriendly Skies" by
> Captain "X" and Reynolds Dodson. It's an "as told to" about the deregulated
> airline industry and a pretty good read. It sounds like not much has
> changed in the last 10 years except the airlines are losing even more money.
> Some good almost crashing stories by the Captain.
>
> Boy, does this guy hate AOPA and little airplanes! He makes a big deal
> about the then recent fight over the creation of Class B and C airspace and
> how AOPA fought the transponder requirement. I'm a little shocked to hear
> this. I like crossing that invisible magenta line and knowing the everyone
> I meet for the next few miles will probably have one and be talking.
>
> Has anybody else read this book?
>
> --
> Roger Long
>
>

I am a veteran of that battle -- its intent was to put everybody under
"positive control," which the system could never handle. At that time,
there was a coterie of seven who ruled FAA -- two of whom were Keith
Potts, then head of ATC and Herman McClure, then head of FAA Western
Div. They had no use for the Little Guy, and wanted to push us off the
map.

Eventually, we formed a petition to reassign Potts -- McCluire was also
reassigned.

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message >...
> Roger Long wrote:
> > Has anybody else read this book?

> Yeah. It's one of the very few books I've read that I threw away.

George,

Why so?

Sydney

Snowbird wrote:
>
> Why so?

I don't remember all of the details, but there was a general attitude of "what
a great pilot I am" exemplified by the story in which ATC tells him he can have
any altitude he wants 'cause the weather's so bad nobody else is flying. There's
the outright hatred for GA exemplified by the statement that everyone calls the
lower sky "Indian Country" 'cause we're all out to get people like him. And there's
the fact that I really despise anonymous authors.

Normally I will give a book away if I simply don't intend to read it again. I
found this one poisonous enough to send it to the landfill.

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>.... There's
> the outright hatred for GA exemplified by the statement that everyone
calls the
> lower sky "Indian Country" 'cause we're all out to get people like him.

I thought "Indian Country" was a reference to all the little
planes being named after tribes. Well, the Piper planes
anyway. Oh well. Live and learn.

I agree with George, the book was anti-GA in a big way. The impression was that
airline pilots in general feel the same but that is not the case. Most have
some experience and many own light planes and are very pro- GA.

Orval Fairbairn wrote:
>
> At that time,
> there was a coterie of seven who ruled FAA -- two of whom were Keith
> Potts, then head of ATC and Herman McClure, then head of FAA Western
> Div. They had no use for the Little Guy, and wanted to push us off the
> map.

It would not surprise me at all to find that this book is a collection of
anecdotes assembled by one of these guys masquerading as a pilot.

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

My Hat's off to you Orval, if you fought the "keep little airplanes
away from the airports their fuel taxes paid for" war. IIRC, airlines
in the past were nearly exempt from fuel tax, so most inter-city
airports were largely funded and built by General Aviation. But
airline management with the FAA nodding along, wanted to ban GA
entirely from those airports. I remember that AOPA was fighting
against the expense aspect that a transponder and later mode C would
impact on its members. (remember Roger, traffic was not as dense in
many areas as it is today, the need for ATC seperation was not as
obvious as it is today.)

The Deregulation act of 78', however, has turned the Orient Express of
the skies into Amtrack. The golden years are over as long as long as
gov looks at aviation purely as a money-getter. And that's a foolish
outlook when you consider that all of aviation (including aerospace)
has only returned 2% on investment, historically. You wouldn't put
your money in a S&L with that kind of dismal return. This country's
big enough to build new reliever airports everywhere. But every time
we put our hard-earned dollars into an aviation trust fund or Soc Sec
system it just gets raided by the political flakes. Scotty, please
beam me back to the thirties...

pacplyer - out


Orval Fairbairn > wrote in message >...
> In article >,
> "Roger Long" m>
> wrote:
>
> > I picked up a 1989 book in our local swap shop called "Unfriendly Skies" by
> > Captain "X" and Reynolds Dodson. It's an "as told to" about the deregulated
> > airline industry and a pretty good read. It sounds like not much has
> > changed in the last 10 years except the airlines are losing even more money.
> > Some good almost crashing stories by the Captain.
> >
> > Boy, does this guy hate AOPA and little airplanes! He makes a big deal
> > about the then recent fight over the creation of Class B and C airspace and
> > how AOPA fought the transponder requirement. I'm a little shocked to hear
> > this. I like crossing that invisible magenta line and knowing the everyone
> > I meet for the next few miles will probably have one and be talking.
> >
> > Has anybody else read this book?
> >
> > --
> > Roger Long
> >
> >
>
> I am a veteran of that battle -- its intent was to put everybody under
> "positive control," which the system could never handle. At that time,
> there was a coterie of seven who ruled FAA -- two of whom were Keith
> Potts, then head of ATC and Herman McClure, then head of FAA Western
> Div. They had no use for the Little Guy, and wanted to push us off the
> map.
>
> Eventually, we formed a petition to reassign Potts -- McCluire was also
> reassigned.

In article >,
(pacplyer) wrote:

> My Hat's off to you Orval, if you fought the "keep little airplanes
> away from the airports their fuel taxes paid for" war. IIRC, airlines
> in the past were nearly exempt from fuel tax, so most inter-city
> airports were largely funded and built by General Aviation. But
> airline management with the FAA nodding along, wanted to ban GA
> entirely from those airports. I remember that AOPA was fighting
> against the expense aspect that a transponder and later mode C would
> impact on its members. (remember Roger, traffic was not as dense in
> many areas as it is today, the need for ATC seperation was not as
> obvious as it is today.)
>
> The Deregulation act of 78', however, has turned the Orient Express of
> the skies into Amtrack. The golden years are over as long as long as
> gov looks at aviation purely as a money-getter. And that's a foolish
> outlook when you consider that all of aviation (including aerospace)
> has only returned 2% on investment, historically. You wouldn't put
> your money in a S&L with that kind of dismal return. This country's
> big enough to build new reliever airports everywhere. But every time
> we put our hard-earned dollars into an aviation trust fund or Soc Sec
> system it just gets raided by the political flakes. Scotty, please
> beam me back to the thirties...
>
> pacplyer - out
>
>
> Orval Fairbairn > wrote in message
> >..
> .
> > In article >,
> > "Roger Long" m>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I picked up a 1989 book in our local swap shop called "Unfriendly Skies"
> > > by
> > > Captain "X" and Reynolds Dodson. It's an "as told to" about the
> > > deregulated
> > > airline industry and a pretty good read. It sounds like not much has
> > > changed in the last 10 years except the airlines are losing even more
> > > money.
> > > Some good almost crashing stories by the Captain.
> > >
> > > Boy, does this guy hate AOPA and little airplanes! He makes a big deal
> > > about the then recent fight over the creation of Class B and C airspace
> > > and
> > > how AOPA fought the transponder requirement. I'm a little shocked to
> > > hear
> > > this. I like crossing that invisible magenta line and knowing the
> > > everyone
> > > I meet for the next few miles will probably have one and be talking.
> > >
> > > Has anybody else read this book?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Roger Long
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I am a veteran of that battle -- its intent was to put everybody under
> > "positive control," which the system could never handle. At that time,
> > there was a coterie of seven who ruled FAA -- two of whom were Keith
> > Potts, then head of ATC and Herman McClure, then head of FAA Western
> > Div. They had no use for the Little Guy, and wanted to push us off the
> > map.
> >
> > Eventually, we formed a petition to reassign Potts -- McCluire was also
> > reassigned.

My favorite was then AA CEO Bob Crandall's articles in several magazines
(Fortune comes to mind) stating that "nearly 70% of our near-misses are
with private planes."

Ed WIschmeyer and I wrote letters to Fortune telling them that what
Crandall REALLY said is that "more than 30% of our near-misses are with
other airliners, flown by multi-pilot, professional crews under positive
control" and that, since AA had 10% of the airliner fleet, more than 3%
of their near-misses were probably with their own planes.

In addition, since GA makes up more than 90% of the total number of
planes, AA was having "more than 30% of their near-misses" with less
than 10% of the planes out there.

That part was never published, but Crandall shortly thereafter contacted
AOPA t work on a "partnership."

I hope that some lower-level AA exec got his wings clipped on that one!

"Orval Fairbairn" > wrote in message
...
>
> My favorite was then AA CEO Bob Crandall's articles in several magazines
> (Fortune comes to mind) stating that "nearly 70% of our near-misses are
> with private planes."
>
> Ed WIschmeyer and I wrote letters to Fortune telling them that what
> Crandall REALLY said is that "more than 30% of our near-misses are with
> other airliners, flown by multi-pilot, professional crews under positive
> control" and that, since AA had 10% of the airliner fleet, more than 3%
> of their near-misses were probably with their own planes.
>
> In addition, since GA makes up more than 90% of the total number of
> planes, AA was having "more than 30% of their near-misses" with less
> than 10% of the planes out there.
>
> That part was never published, but Crandall shortly thereafter contacted
> AOPA t work on a "partnership."
>
> I hope that some lower-level AA exec got his wings clipped on that one!

Probably -- I'd bet Crandall didn't accept blame for it.

When was the last time (if ever) you heard a corporate exec take
responsibility for some screw-up? Anyone? You don't get to the top of the
heap in corporate America by falling on your sword; you get there by shoving
other people onto theirs, or impaling them on yours.

"Orval Fairbairn" > wrote in message
...
>
> My favorite was then AA CEO Bob Crandall's articles in several magazines
> (Fortune comes to mind) stating that "nearly 70% of our near-misses are
> with private planes."
>
> Ed WIschmeyer and I wrote letters to Fortune telling them that what
> Crandall REALLY said is that "more than 30% of our near-misses are with
> other airliners, flown by multi-pilot, professional crews under positive
> control" and that, since AA had 10% of the airliner fleet, more than 3%
> of their near-misses were probably with their own planes.
>
> In addition, since GA makes up more than 90% of the total number of
> planes, AA was having "more than 30% of their near-misses" with less
> than 10% of the planes out there.
>
> That part was never published, but Crandall shortly thereafter contacted
> AOPA t work on a "partnership."
>
> I hope that some lower-level AA exec got his wings clipped on that one!

Probably -- I'd bet Crandall didn't accept blame for it.

When was the last time (if ever) you heard a corporate exec take
responsibility for some screw-up? Anyone? You don't get to the top of the
heap in corporate America by falling on your sword; you get there by shoving
other people onto theirs, or impaling them on yours.

(PS2727) wrote in message >...
> I agree with George, the book was anti-GA in a big way. The impression was that
> airline pilots in general feel the same but that is not the case. Most have
> some experience and many own light planes and are very pro- GA.

I agree. Most guys like GA. But every outfit has a few sour notes in
it. Too bad this butt head got published. "Unfriendly Skies" kinda
sounds like old United. The current guys are great, but we used to
say: "All United pilots have been through asshole school," refering to
their cavalier attitudes on the radio, particularly in Denver. That
ceased once they became number two in size.

Ps2727 psa three-holer? If that's the case: thanks for the old JS's.
:-)

pacplyer

Not PSA but AA and definitely pro GA where I got my start and still enjoy
flying for fun. According to the author pilots with a civilian background
should never have been allowed to fly for the airlines. Sure is nice that the
grumpy old farts are retired and I get to be one for a while.

(PS2727) wrote in message >...
> Not PSA but AA and definitely pro GA where I got my start and still enjoy
> flying for fun. According to the author pilots with a civilian background
> should never have been allowed to fly for the airlines.

Now I know I dislike this "Unfriendly Skies" dickhead. Half of my
original outfit was civilian. It was a smart move to add diversity to
an outfit that transversed time zones constantly (FTL.) Now I'm
called a FLAP (****ing light airplane pilot) so I retort by calling
them PIMPS (pompous incompetent military pukes!) ;-) All in good
humor of course.

>Sure is nice that the
> grumpy old farts are retired and I get to be one for a while.

Man you said it. Never thought it would happen to me. :-)

Keep the pointed end forward and the shiny side down,

pacplyer

In article
>,
Orval Fairbairn > wrote:

> >
>
> I am a veteran of that battle -- its intent was to put everybody under
> "positive control," which the system could never handle. At that time,
> there was a coterie of seven who ruled FAA -- two of whom were Keith
> Potts, then head of ATC and Herman McClure, then head of FAA Western
> Div. They had no use for the Little Guy, and wanted to push us off the
> map.
>
> Eventually, we formed a petition to reassign Potts -- McCluire was also
> reassigned.

Sorry about the mixup -- but it was Homer McClure -- not Herman McClure.


An old friend who used to work at Douglas told me a Homer story about
"Dr. McClure" coming in for a factory visit. Someone asked him if he was
an MD or a dentist, to which Homer replied; "PhD."

The Douglas people said "Oh, then you're Homer -- we only refer to MDs
and dentists as "Dr" around here."