Originally Posted by
acl65pilot
Actually, it is and thanks for the correction. I was looking at the language as a stand alone, not in reference to what our fleet is or isnt, and those 717 would be SNB's that are "new" to us.
It being clear as mud is my concern. Probably not an issue, but one would never know.
Originally Posted by
shiznit
That is what I thought at first also, but there are NC notes to go with it and I reiterated the question to make sure.
Clear as mud for us, and clear as mud for lawyers are very different situations.
Ever want to have an attorney look at a Vol. 1 and see if he understands it?
I would think we could just rely on 1.B.43 and 1.B.16 alone and just say until SOC none of HAL's aircraft belong to the Company and therefore don't count.
But it's a moot point if they get all of the 76-seaters they're allowed through the FL B717s and probably at the production rate Bombardier is willing to put out.
Now, as far as I see once we are all one happy family then I don't see anything that stops them from being counted in the ratio so they'll more than beat the 1.56 ratio requirement. Which provides the Company the flexibility they'll need moving forward.