They've gotten a new lease on life for now. However to your point, parking the 88s and 9s but adding 717s and allowing the 739 to be 100% replacement for 320s/757s/763s, yeah you could end up with a fleet about the size we are now which means we'd just meet the 1.56 ratio. There wouldn't really be a way for RJs to replace them.

But it doesn't look like that's the plan for the 88, but can I submit another idea for Delta 9000++?

What if you staffed all of the international airplanes with the same number of pilots we do the 330 and the domestic airplanes like we do the 88?

When I look at the 22.D.3 reports it certainly seems as if we're finding ways to reduce staffing per WB and NB.

So let's try this: It's a thought, assuming we don't grow above the number of jets we have now. If we end up netting a growth of 30-40 aircraft then it'd be somewhere slightly below 9400. If they still want to squeeze 400 more out, well, give us a TA to vote on!

The 88s are about half way through their life according to a document put out about 3-4 years ago. About 40% of the fleet will be 30 years or older at the end of the decade or 7 years though and they're all close in age. The 90s are younger. I know Bar has a list that's very long on the 88 but take it from me (a fan) the 88s engines are not as efficient, the 90s parts are scarce, the avionics in both are lacking in a lot of ways (namely the 90s don't even have some fixes and common alternate airports). Their fixing the latter. The other two could be crippling but I guess right now they feel the ROI is there and outweighs the risk but man it only took them about 3 years to push that upgrade through.

Where is that list Bar made on how decisions are made around here?

Okay I get confused. One second all of the RJ pilots will be furloughed and on the streets and the next there won't be any to hire.