Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
06-03-2012 | 12:33 PM
Line Holder
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 643
Likes: 52
They could only operate them at the mainline if its on a cost competitive basis. We once again attempted to show that it could be done. We could not produce numbers even close. Thats the fallacy of the operate at the mainline concept. Unless you cost competitive you lose the flying completely and lose the existing mainline flying the feed generated.
This was a bit of a surprise to me since I felt we could be competitive on a 76 seater. It did not turn out to be the case. If it was the case then most managements would operate the aircraft at their mainline fleets. It would be a win win so to speak. Instead after looking at the numbers management teams fight almost to the death to keep the flying at lower cost providers. There is a reason.
This was a bit of a surprise to me since I felt we could be competitive on a 76 seater. It did not turn out to be the case. If it was the case then most managements would operate the aircraft at their mainline fleets. It would be a win win so to speak. Instead after looking at the numbers management teams fight almost to the death to keep the flying at lower cost providers. There is a reason.
06-03-2012 | 01:07 PM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
So it's 717 lease vs CR2 overhaul cost?
I don't buy it.
Imho, DAL just doesn't want to spend that money on airplanes they don't like and would prefer to have those they like, the big jumbo RJs.
But we don't have to agree any more than Bombardier has to accept a 1:1 swap vs a 2:1 swap or Boeing accept $10M for a new 739.
We all have our limits and 255 is a disgusting enough limit that should not be moved.
I don't buy it.
Imho, DAL just doesn't want to spend that money on airplanes they don't like and would prefer to have those they like, the big jumbo RJs.
And that the cheapest thing to do is swap CR2s for CRJ-900s as the wounded Bombardier would love the orders. So convince the pilots that the 717s are contingent on scope concessions even though DAL has been salivating over 717s since at least 2010 and has labored to achieve one hell of a deal after squeezing a cutthroat SWA and/or Boeing.
Man, from slot swaps to SWA/717s s to Bombardier to Boeing to the pilots, this company knows how to be opportunistic. More power to them. But we don't have to agree any more than Bombardier has to accept a 1:1 swap vs a 2:1 swap or Boeing accept $10M for a new 739.
We all have our limits and 255 is a disgusting enough limit that should not be moved.
FTB;
The "yes" voter is too afraid or too in denial to understand what you just wrote is the truth.
06-03-2012 | 01:08 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 0
From: maddoggy dog
Roar from 44 vice chairmans report from summer 2011 quote,
There have been various rumors about “pay raises for the 100-seater” or “trading XYZ for more 76 seaters.” The quick answer is, “Scope is not for sale.”
There have been various rumors about “pay raises for the 100-seater” or “trading XYZ for more 76 seaters.” The quick answer is, “Scope is not for sale.”
06-03-2012 | 01:31 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
The sad thing is, the spin-masters will argue that the net reduction of 50-seaters and improvements regarding block hour ratios are scope improvements. In spite of those new pesky 76-seaters.
06-03-2012 | 01:49 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 0
From: maddoggy dog
It's about time one of these showed up. FTB, is this your handiwork? If so, where are the graphs and charts?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4y21...e_gdata_player
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4y21...e_gdata_player
06-03-2012 | 02:40 PM
Line Holder
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
From: 737 FO
Heya folks, sorry to go off-topic from the TA discussions. New to MSP... anyone got a good AME south of the river? Need to do my Class I again this month and hoping to find a pilot friendly AME near home...
06-03-2012 | 02:49 PM
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,263
Likes: 105
From: DAL 330
They could only operate them at the mainline if its on a cost competitive basis. We once again attempted to show that it could be done. We could not produce numbers even close. Thats the fallacy of the operate at the mainline concept. Unless you cost competitive you lose the flying completely and lose the existing mainline flying the feed generated.
This was a bit of a surprise to me since I felt we could be competitive on a 76 seater. It did not turn out to be the case. If it was the case then most managements would operate the aircraft at their mainline fleets. It would be a win win so to speak. Instead after looking at the numbers management teams fight almost to the death to keep the flying at lower cost providers. There is a reason.
This was a bit of a surprise to me since I felt we could be competitive on a 76 seater. It did not turn out to be the case. If it was the case then most managements would operate the aircraft at their mainline fleets. It would be a win win so to speak. Instead after looking at the numbers management teams fight almost to the death to keep the flying at lower cost providers. There is a reason.
Sailing,
Interesting topic - numbers close to what? Do any of these Regionals fly the RJs profitably without FFD? If essentially the DCI carriers are not actually operating profitably without being subsidized by mainline I don't see how an economic analysis would show anything other than it was not possible.
I agree that 76 seaters being flown at mainline probably cannot compete economically with 76 seaters being flown at a connection carrier. But I also believe that a standalone RJ operator flying 76 seaters cannot compete economically with 76 seaters at DCI.
If this were not true - where are all the standalone RJ operators?
DCI carriers are operating at below a standalone profitability - if you take away mainline support. Comparing 76 seaters at mainline (without mainline subsidies) is not a valid comparison.
Scoop
06-03-2012 | 03:18 PM
Doing Nothing
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,316
Likes: 0
My reason to vote no. Tired of donating(unwillingly) to scope sales. We all have college degrees and are smart enough to know when we're not hearing the whole truth!
06-03-2012 | 03:18 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Flew with a captain recently who wondered what the big deal was about large RJs. He did not think they really affect our flying.
06-03-2012 | 03:40 PM
Line Holder
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
From: 737 FO
Are there forums of some type in the ALPA.org site?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
