InternationalShannon
Veteran
I think the call sign should be WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!
New Call Sign
- Thread starter Mtnman928
- Start date
lynyrdskynyrd
Veteran
- Apr 22, 2005
- 1,182
- 558
Sueing individual guys who made web board posts for seven figures of "damages" isn't exactly putting your money where your mouth is. Those are hollow words.
Phoenix
Veteran
- Apr 16, 2003
- 8,584
- 7,430
You guys don't get it because you don't want to. When you have something better than what you gave away you didn't loose.
phasersonstun2
Veteran
- May 1, 2003
- 560
- 4
On Sept. 1, Pilots A thru E use "Cactus".
Sept. 10, pilots F thru J
Sept. 21, pilots K thru S
Sept. 30, pilots T thru Z
Oct. 1, ALL pilots must use "cactus" on the radio.
Of course, there are other alternative call signs to "CACTUS":
Cholla, Ocotillo, Saguaro, Totem Pole, Barrel, Teddy Bear and others, but in the spirit of future cohesion, I like Agave.
BuffaloJoe
Veteran
- Aug 17, 2005
- 2,873
- 18
How about "Road Runner"? Or Better yet, "Beep-Beep"?
Both have alot to do with the Desert. Just as long it isn't Wile E. Coyote.
InternationalShannon
Veteran
FORESTBUGHow about "Road Runner"? Or Better yet, "Beep-Beep"?
Both have alot to do with the Desert. Just as long it isn't Wile E. Coyote.
InternationalShannon
Veteran
I know this isn't a call sign, but for some reason my jacked up train of thought realized that I don't see that Dornier land anymore. I liked to clap and go BLUE STREAK BLUE STREAK!
Why? Well, because I'm easily amused. I think it looks like an angry dash. But since I work at Wendy's I suppose I just might be missing it.
And just to keep it all on topic, I think CACTUS is a good call sign because CACTI like to stick you. It's their favorite.
Why? Well, because I'm easily amused. I think it looks like an angry dash. But since I work at Wendy's I suppose I just might be missing it.
And just to keep it all on topic, I think CACTUS is a good call sign because CACTI like to stick you. It's their favorite.
E
EastUS
Guest
Hmmm...fairly appropriate, but perhaps something a bit more socially subtle = Sand Fleas ?
No matter really, as cactus is cause for enough chuckles as it is. I can see where many will have some initial difficulties just saying that with a straight face 
Perhaps some west posters are right, and the east folks should be afforded sim sessions to practice it = "Now just stop it you guys!!...It's not supposed to be funny!...We're not kidding!...We're serious here!...That really IS the call sign now!" 
cltrat
Veteran
- Aug 29, 2007
- 5,481
- 3,051
Hmmm...fairly appropriate, but perhaps something a bit more socially subtle = Sand Fleas ?
I admit it's hard not to chuckle in the morning when the redeyes start landing and the radio is calling out Cactus123 is on the ground
E
EastUS
Guest
Hah!...See what I mean?
I don't doubt that some will be seriously irritated, but the overall grins component is hard to even fully imagine as yet. It should take the edge off of many that still "take things too seriously" at any level around here = "Today Cactus"...What's up for tomorrow?; perhaps "A Shrubbery!!"? The pursuit of cactus:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15tnqRGz9OA Involves graphic language. I'm guessing that these are some of the same callers that went after the USAPA phone lines
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWMGsBuBF2g
Obviously you stopped listening too...because you still believe the first part of your statement, even though Parker has repeatedly said the first part of your statement is incorrect. But, believe what you want, not what is fact....neither company would probably be here without the other. It is a good thing to have one call sign, but it should have been something entirely new so that the employee groups could niether gloat or complain. Like someone already said, management is playing the employees to get what they want....a group who will not stand together against management for what is deserved and right.
Dorf
Anyone suggested FUBAR considering all the problems being encountered?
But it appears time is running out according to the latest report in AvWeek where it estimates who has the money to last through the winter. USAir is vulnerable to yet another trip to the courts according to analysts and the article.
As for the CLT video, a friend showed it to me and I think it was like the fuel debate in the papers.. neither side came out looking very good, especially the chubby VP Ops guy.
Odd too the dancing on the verbiage for the training letter, 'ask' and then saying the pilots were asked to come to training and they had a choice of not attending. Amusing exchange. I had to laugh at the use of the term 're-education' though. Now there is a term that carries no baggage or inference.
I was just wondering about the spelling... is it 'out-liers' or is it 'out-liars'? <_<
exB717Flyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,106
- 599
There are facts and there are suppositions.
Fact: USAirways was facing liquidation in early 2005, possibly within days of the merger announcement. (The only people who try to deny this are a handful of USAirways employees.)
Fact: AWA was not only solvent but even slightly profitable in early 2005.
Fact: outside money funded the merger.
Supposition: AWA would've faced bankruptcy absent the merger.
Certainly possible but too far out to be considered likely or not. Parker was talking about a time frame of six months or more. The conclusion is best stated with a quote by George Nicolau:
The US Airways reliance on post-merger statements by America West's CEO, clearly made to assuage growing concerns of America West pilots who had seen a post-merger end to hiring, an increasing return of long-furloughed US Airways pilots and a flattening in their own advancement, is misplaced. Equally so is America West's insistence that US Airways was about to disappear. Yet, it cannot be disputed that there were differences in the financial condition of both carriers and that US Airways was the weaker. This necessarily means that career expectations differed and that US Airways pilots had more to gain from the merger than their new colleagues.
