Thanks for sharing. Well written...particularly in light of what passes for writing on internet message boards by people who claim to be pilots.

I personally would have left out the part about passengers getting off Comair, Mesa, etc. aircraft thinking they just flew on Delta. That's the whole point of the smokescreen brand that is DCI...and it doesn't help our case any that passengers can't easily identify what airline they're actually flying on.

Mr. Anderson's response was also very well written, and seemed candid. I do not agree with the line about opportunities for growth being missed due to Comair management and the union not agreeing. There were two concessionary packages during that time...one of which "guaranteed" the pilots growth...which Delta then dishonored. Had Delta honored the agreement they made at their Comair division, Comair would have had well over 170 airframes on property. Instead, they took the easy way out and declared bankruptcy to nullify their obligation to grow Comair.

I believe RA's response pretty much sums up the future for Comair. It's pretty much a no-win situation as far as a positive future for the company.

I'm curious what we're charging Chautauqua, Mesa, Pinnacle etc. for ground handling services? Of course our expenses are higher, since none of those carriers are capable of turning their own airplanes.

I find it perpetually amusing that the focus in any message from management is always about cost...and never about increasing revenue generation. There is more to operating a business than controlling costs.

We're saving a lot of money on fuel by not operating thirty airplanes that are sitting on the ground at CVG any given day. Way to cut costs guys!