SLC
11-23-2022, 06:51 AM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Position: LAX ER
Posts: 1,606
Originally Posted by boog123
SLc 330 doesn’t appear it would be a very big base regardless. I would think very close to LAX350 in size
11-23-2022, 06:57 AM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,458
Originally Posted by tcco94
Yes in SLC base meeting he said right now it looks that it will be around 50 captains/95 or 100 FO’s and growth from there will be limited based on networking. You have to account for west coast 330 route growth though as well considering LAX is getting a few more back and PDX. Will probably be shared by SEA/SLC crews I imagine. When they asked about 330 LAX they essentially said it’s not even in consideration for a base at the time. So I assume that will also help support some staffing numbers in both 330 west coast bases.
11-23-2022, 07:31 AM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Position: LAX ER
Posts: 1,606
Originally Posted by Gunfighter
.... so we are expecting LAX 330. From a layover standpoint, it's cheaper to fly SLC inside out and have local crews in LAX. The extra cost of having CA employees over UT employees could win the financial argument though.
11-23-2022, 09:19 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Posts: 270
Is there any chance SLC could be a 350 base instead of a 330? I ask this since we're getting a lot of 350's down the road and they need some place to put them. Delta may or may not have the ideal destinations for the 350 airframe and only so many are needed for the ultra-long haul. Could they put them in SLC? Is the performance of the 350 better than the 330 out of a high altitude field like that? Would it help eliminate the need for payload optimization or other limiting factors the 330 might have and free up the 330's for other markets in ATL or NYC or SEA? Honestly just asking the question to see if anyone has any answers on whether the 350 might be a better fit for the routes from SLC to LHR/AMS/CDG vs the 330.
11-23-2022, 09:24 AM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Position: Supreme Allied Commander
Posts: 1,055
Originally Posted by HTBH
Is there any chance SLC could be a 350 base instead of a 330? I ask this since we're getting a lot of 350's down the road and they need some place to put them. Delta may or may not have the ideal destinations for the 350 airframe and only so many are needed for the ultra-long haul. Could they put them in SLC? Is the performance of the 350 better than the 330 out of a high altitude field like that? Would it help eliminate the need for payload optimization or other limiting factors the 330 might have and free up the 330's for other markets in ATL or NYC or SEA? Honestly just asking the question to see if anyone has any answers on whether the 350 might be a better fit for the routes from SLC to LHR/AMS/CDG vs the 330.
11-23-2022, 09:25 AM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Position: Supreme Allied Commander
Posts: 1,055
Originally Posted by DWC CAP10 USAF
I wouldn’t say consistent.
At the NYF town hall, BS was asked about new categories and his answer was (paraphrasing) “the next 3 bases are SEA320, BOS320, then SLC330”
At the NYF town hall, BS was asked about new categories and his answer was (paraphrasing) “the next 3 bases are SEA320, BOS320, then SLC330”
11-23-2022, 10:11 AM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,174
Originally Posted by saturn
J Esposito and other network dudes have said SLC-ICN will happen at some point. And it was noted on the 350, not 330.
I wouldn’t bet on a SLC 350 base.
11-23-2022, 10:19 AM
#18
Has a furrowed brow
Joined APC: Dec 2019
Posts: 1,160
Originally Posted by FangsF15
True, but… BS from Crew Resources has said it’s not economical to have a pilot base on an airframe unless there are consistently 3 daily departures. They could simply DH crews in from LA indefinitely, or perhaps in a “W” pattern trip LAX-ICN-SLC-ICN-LAX.
I wouldn’t bet on a SLC 350 base.
I wouldn’t bet on a SLC 350 base.
What fangs said.
There simply isn’t enough “feed” into SLC to justify a 350 base. Not when you have LAX close by.
11-23-2022, 10:46 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Position: Supreme Allied Commander
Posts: 1,055
Originally Posted by FangsF15
True, but… BS from Crew Resources has said it’s not economical to have a pilot base on an airframe unless there are consistently 3 daily departures. They could simply DH crews in from LA indefinitely, or perhaps in a “W” pattern trip LAX-ICN-SLC-ICN-LAX.
I wouldn’t bet on a SLC 350 base.
I wouldn’t bet on a SLC 350 base.
11-23-2022, 04:21 PM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2016
Position: Looking left
Posts: 3,251
Originally Posted by saturn
SEA320 has been open since SEPT, offered on the May AE.
The original message from BS was SEA, then BOS, then SLC.
Now it’s being said SLC before BOS.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
