That's my point. None of this (dis)information gets out without management's approval. This smells a lot like sailings inside info from past contract cycles meant to keep the uninitiated enamored with a new "top man." I don't know HK nor do I have an opinion on his character or motivation but the last few pages sounded very middle school "I'll take my ball and go then." I don't care because even if he is genuine the plan will change tomorrow. HK this is not a personal attack just my observation from across the interweb and behind a keyboard. Make of it what you will.

 

Inbound HK temper tantrum in 3...2...1...

 

What I see when a certain poster claims he won't post anymore.

 

Questions for the masses. Has there been any indication SLC will see NH’s/upgrades during sims or is it going to be purely for CQ for the time being?

 

It's in the plan. The FTDs need to show up (the rooms are there).

350 fleet is doing training beyond CQ in SLC (300 series I believe)

It's all just a matter of time.

 

Regarding the 220, seems that more and more airlines around the world have given up and are dumping them.

https://aviationweek.com/air-transpo...r-gtf-problems

Air Austral Abandons Airbus A220 Fleet Over GTF Problems

 

“…The decision comes after four years of recurring reliability issues, with two of the airline’s three A220s currently grounded…”

I wouldn’t get too worried about DL. An operation with 3 aircraft can’t take the GTF inspection/repair hit that we can with 80 aircraft and another 65 on order. Even Egypt Air’s 12 “abandoned” aircraft are a unique story.

 

Delta is pretty committed to and is very happy with the 220. I wouldn't be concerned about an airline that most of us never heard of, until now, that would make us change our course. If anything if it lowers the asking price we might buy more.

 

I think it will definitely have a longer than planned "break in" period. Given the GTF issues with the NEO also, it will be a while before we operate them (all GTFs) as planned. This new engine concept is super efficient but I fear super maintenance intensive too. All that being said, there's no going backwards on engine technology. We will have to make operational adjustments like dwell time for warm up and shut down. More touches for MX and better parts distribution/availability will drive up some costs but we will have no choice but to adjust. It could be a tough slog though given management's reluctance to add these costs and accept lower utilization. I don't see the same dispatch reliability as legacy engines ever, but that will have to be accommodated or our famous metrics will suffer. Even the LEAP engines have their issues. As we get closer to squeezing all the energy out of a chemical reaction we will have more exotic ways to absorb and redirect it. There's just no way around adding complexity and that means more maintenance complexity and down time to operate them reliably and safely.

 

DL management top man shuffles past in an oversized hoodie, head down, mumbling incoherently to themselves “NO I’m Not going to DO THAT ANYMORE!”….as they look at an airplane trader magazine