forgot to bid

Speaking of whipsaw, I'd love to see DALPA's numbers but frankly, I'd toss them aside hoping to see the real numbers from the company. And if I got to see those numbers, I'd toss them aside. Because i think when you get to figuring out DCI costs it becomes subjective. Because how do you quantify the success of a whipsaw when some of the success was strictly up to a pilot vote?

So honestly, looking at the hard numbers I have to still say the CRJ-900 is a heck of a threat to mainline aircraft like the 88 or 319 just as much as the 737-900 is to the 767-300, some old 757s and old A320s but as we know from the press release, not MD88s.

Or wait, did someone mention they're now telling us the 739 is a growth aircraft?

forgot to bid

vs






I was going to say whereas some throw mud, I throw love, but then I saw that old pic in the library and just wanted to run it again. So I guess that's throwing mud.

ya'll have a good night.

gloopy

We are hearing 300 positions lost instantly and forever in work rule changes and maybe 250-300 early outs...all of which would be leaving in the next few years anyway, yet the 300 lost positions in work rules will last forever. Dumbest trade off in history.

Carl Spackler

I understand you're upset and emotional. It happens. But I won't subject this thread anymore to your need for self-affirmation. You can continue your little war via PM if you like, but I'll be sparing the thread any more of this.

Carl

forgot to bid

Oh by the way this:



came from here... Random Thoughts on Delta and the MD-90 - Things in the Sky

Don't want to be accused of making stuff up.

Carl Spackler

Later man...you freakin crack me up!

Carl

Kargo

Hey Gang,

Does anyone know what the life span of the 88 is? I.e. when will that fateful "heavycheck" park it in the desert. I saw in section one where they get to run the 76 seaters up to 223 for 1.25 mainline narrow bodies, but didn't see anything about those 76 seaters being parked if we lose other narrow bodies. Like the 9s they'll park as soon as we get the 717s.

I did read the block hour thing, but IMO the RJs should be tied to our narrow body fleet.

Another thing thats probably already been talked about; I read that if they acquire another airline we have to combine our lists if we want them to operate as a single carrier. Doesn't this mean they can buy whoever they want and we can't do much to discourage it? Isn't merging with another really young pilot group going to hamper our carriers more than anything else?

Thanks

slowplay

Your tucking your tail and running away noted. Typical of the cowardly keyboard kommando.

You've made plain your lack of integrity on this exchange. Have a nice life, and hopefully enjoy the early retirement, sans any Tanksley monies.

You can't handle the truth.

scambo1

ALFA and Slow;

I'll go with FTBs numbers - unless you show us the "real" numbers...Oh yeah, you signed a non-disclosure agreement. Put the numbers up or stay distanced from those you are supposed to represent. We already know how you chose. FTBs numbers are certainly close enough for real comparison and we all know it...so please quit saying we don't.

A vote to outsource 70 more 76 seat jets is a vote to outsource 2 more Compass sized airlines...or its also a vote to outsource 35 737-800s (based on size and economics).

The only reason to further outsource them is that DAL wants zero seniority guys in the seats to further whipsaw other companies (and us). Most of the regionals are getting kinda senior. Just talked to an ASA (expressjet) guy the other day, 11 year 76 seat Capt, made $115K last two years...and we cant fly them competitively at mainline...really?

More outsourcing, RAH carveout, Alaska loophole continued, mandated hiring of ALPA represented DCI...promises and more loopholes. Do I really need to read past section 1 to vote?

Carl Spackler

Man is that ever a troubling comparison.

Carl