From: Peter on
"nospam" <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:180520102038511950%nospam(a)nospam.invalid...
> In article <4bf32c42$1$27744$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, Peter
> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote:
>
>> >> US law does not apply to Chinese airlines doing business in the Far
>> >> East.
>> >
>> > neither does the opinion of a lawyer from the uk.
>>
>> Assuming that one really exists.
>
> i'm sure there are lawyers in the uk :)


I think they are called barristers and solicitors.

Thinking about the female barrister who dropped her briefs and became a
solicitor. <duck>

--
Peter

From: nospam on
In article <4bf33f5b$0$27773$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, Peter
<peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote:

> Concord had been running at a loss and the airfare was quite high. I only
> flew because the client, who was paying for my flight, needed me at a
> particular meeting.

actually it was profitable prior to its only crash.

after being redesigned, it returned to flight just after sept 11, 2001,
when few people wanted to fly and even fewer wanted to pay top dollar.
another factor was that a significant number of regular passengers were
killed in the two towers. it never recovered and was retired.
From: C J Campbell on
On 2010-05-18 17:38:12 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> said:

> In article <4bf32972$0$30201$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, Peter
> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote:
>
>> In the mid- 70s cockpit doors were usually shut. The one exception I
>> remember was flying Concord. I was permitted to stand at the entrance, with
>> the door open. I could not take any pictures, not because of regulations,
>> but because I had no film in my camera.
>
> concorde didn't have a cockpit door. that was one of the reasons for
> its retirement post-911, where a reinforced cockpit door was mandated.
> retrofitting it would have cost quite a bit.

More than the value of a Concorde?

<sigh> There was a day when pilots could afford to be friendly to passengers.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

From: Neil Harrington on

"C J Campbell" <christophercampbellremovethis(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2010051819271316807-christophercampbellremovethis(a)hotmailcom...
> On 2010-05-18 17:38:12 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> said:
>
>> In article <4bf32972$0$30201$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, Peter
>> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>> In the mid- 70s cockpit doors were usually shut. The one exception I
>>> remember was flying Concord. I was permitted to stand at the entrance,
>>> with
>>> the door open. I could not take any pictures, not because of
>>> regulations,
>>> but because I had no film in my camera.
>>
>> concorde didn't have a cockpit door. that was one of the reasons for
>> its retirement post-911, where a reinforced cockpit door was mandated.
>> retrofitting it would have cost quite a bit.
>
> More than the value of a Concorde?
>
> <sigh> There was a day when pilots could afford to be friendly to
> passengers.
>
> --
> Waddling Eagle
> World Famous Flight Instructor

Just curious, C J: Are you really a flight instructor?


From: MC on
nospam wrote:

> In article <b8h4v5lslqnpcd6fvrs1m9vn2u5m8ok288(a)4ax.com>, Bruce
> <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > But I don't think the OP is from the USA. I think he wants to
> > > take pictures on Cathay Pacific flights. I think if I wanted to
> > > take pictures on a Cathay Pacific flight, I would just take
> > > pictures until a crew member asked me to stop.
> >
> > Only a complete fool would do that.
>
> why?

There is no answer to his comment.

I travel a tremendous amount and I have seen many of these so called
"fools" (tourists) do it, on many different airlines. Nobody has ever
so much as sighed. Unless you are going to set up tripods and lighting
rigs, or take many flash pictures over and over, nobody on board will
give a damn.

MC