Originally Posted by
NeverFlexTO
from the base meeting...AE will be coming out more than likely in November....
Hiring 1350 next year...expect 3% growth every year for awhile, expect to be a net gain of 400 pilots a year, this includes growth, retirement, and attrition
2 New 350's coming in Q1 and Q2....LATAM jets are still up in air (need seat configure and cabin overhaul, will take approximately 2 years for cabin mod (marketing may put jets in as is Q4 of 2020 or Q1 of 2021
Opening 717 Base in MSP (30 crews) but removing 30-40 crews/FOs off 7ER on this next AE
Still looking at BOS as 320/7ER base with the growth there, surprisingly also looking at AUS as 320 base. MCO in mix as well...
757's to be redeployed into more shorthaul markets from ATL due to lower NPS scores than the 321 and believe it or not, quicker turnaround time from the 321 by about 5-10 minutes. 757 will be mainly going to a domestic market in the next 1-2 years. A321 NEOs will be doing transcons to start and Hawaii eventually
88's going away end of 2020, keeping around 15 MD90's for unknown time...
717's will stay at least till 2024 with potential till 2031 (life cycle ends in 2031)
7ER replacement still looking at NMA with Boeing but need to make decision soon
Airbus is having a quality control problem with jets out of Hamburg, which is pushing back some of our 321 deliveries 8-9-10 months
330-900NEO having some issues as well with certification of certain systems...
most new 350's will be deployed to DTW
No issues with A220 engines as ours are have lower thrust rating than Swiss and Baltic, buuuuuut, still having some growing pains with some of the quality coming out of Mirabel...
Interesting how you could get on here and relay the info like that. The “possible new bases” 🤦*♂️ was nothing more than a response to a pilot asking “if we were to add new bases, what would they be?” The usual names were thrown out, Boston, Austin, etc. Which was followed by Bob stating all the reasons we won’t be adding any......
The hiring # was 850 - 1,350. 1,350 sounded unlikely as it was the number if they decided to “full kit” some of the pairings (pilots stay with the flight attendants throughout the day).
Interesting how two people can attend the same meeting and come away with very different impressions.
Ps. PB was explaining the different optimizers and admitted that in a perfect world they’d like to run the schedule just as the pre-month optimizer suggests (lowest pre month credit). The only reason they are backing it off now is they have realized they should really be trying to reduce “end of month” credit. This requires more buffers in the original schedule. Not because they really care about our QOL. It’s 100% about the numbers to them, as most of us know.