Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
01-22-2013, 09:56 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
How about no autospoilers, no Autobrakes, no Autoland, no potable water, one main fuel pump out, and a loud drunk passenger arrested by airport police after our flight? (with everyone waiting around to write & sign official statements) That was my late night flight out of ATL.
01-22-2013, 09:58 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
How about no autospoilers, no Autobrakes, no Autoland, no potable water, one main fuel pump out, and a loud drunk passenger arrested by airport police after our flight? (with everyone waiting around to write & sign official statements) That was my late night flight out of ATL.
Cheers
George
Last edited by georgetg; 01-22-2013 at 09:59 PM. Reason: (or was the loud drunk guy the one who had his way with both and thus was out of line?)
01-22-2013, 10:14 PM
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
How about no autospoilers, no Autobrakes, no Autoland, no potable water, one main fuel pump out, and a loud drunk passenger arrested by airport police after our flight? (with everyone waiting around to write & sign official statements) That was my late night flight out of ATL.
01-22-2013, 10:18 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
01-22-2013, 10:34 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
You know, have you ever watched some of the people as they pass through first class and are looking for something to take? Saw a woman coming up from the back tonight take a red blanket from first class. As soon as she got to first she looked left and right, under the seats, pulled into 2B, stood there for a while for her friends to come up from the back and then hunched over and walked out like she stole something.
Which she did. You could see it under her arm as she walked away.
Which she did. You could see it under her arm as she walked away.
01-22-2013, 11:15 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,357
One document said that and that document was based upon plans at point in time blah blah blah....things change as you have seen Flight Ops do a big 180 after only 3 months...possible hiring 2012 to now what we are hearing MAYBE hiring in 2014 or beyond. Everything else continues to point in the direction of no hiring including words spoken directly by management. Better get a new route map to pin your hopes of advancement on.
01-22-2013, 11:45 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,357
The thing about growing to 800 mainline jets from where we are plus with DCI@450 jets (which we know it won't be below that number) is that it'd require capacity growth.
I mean 1%-1.5% per year in domestic growth maybe? I just don't see us doing it unless they just think the year after next will be better. Kind of like free beer tomorrow.
I think shrinking is what we've been doing for four years and what's in the cards for another few. I don't see any macroeconomic reason why we would change that vector. I think it's obvious their goal is not to be the biggest, just the best-ist at margin management.
What btw is the delivery schedule on the CRJ-900s? Because if we went to DCI@450 with the 70 increase in CRJ-900s, I could see how we would have a flat change or slight decrease in capacity this year without hitting mainline.
But if that DCI@450 is not happening this year, then I think the cuts will be on our side but I bet it's muddied. A 320 here or there, a couple 763 domestics, maybe an 88, maybe a few 757s... but hey look over there 3 717s and a 739!
I mean 1%-1.5% per year in domestic growth maybe? I just don't see us doing it unless they just think the year after next will be better. Kind of like free beer tomorrow.
I think shrinking is what we've been doing for four years and what's in the cards for another few. I don't see any macroeconomic reason why we would change that vector. I think it's obvious their goal is not to be the biggest, just the best-ist at margin management.
What btw is the delivery schedule on the CRJ-900s? Because if we went to DCI@450 with the 70 increase in CRJ-900s, I could see how we would have a flat change or slight decrease in capacity this year without hitting mainline.
But if that DCI@450 is not happening this year, then I think the cuts will be on our side but I bet it's muddied. A 320 here or there, a couple 763 domestics, maybe an 88, maybe a few 757s... but hey look over there 3 717s and a 739!
01-23-2013, 02:06 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,386
One document said that and that document was based upon plans at point in time blah blah blah....things change as you have seen Flight Ops do a big 180 after only 3 months...possible hiring 2012 to now what we are hearing MAYBE hiring in 2014 or beyond. Everything else continues to point in the direction of no hiring including words spoken directly by management. Better get a new route map to pin your hopes of advancement on.
The good news is that the aircraft promised are coming and the pilots who took the ER program were substantially younger then the target group. That means that while they were 105 short now in 2 years they will have more movement from the program then if they had hit their target group since the 59 to 61 year old pilots who took the ER program will still be gone and the 63 to 65 year old pilots they targeted who stayed will now be gone.
01-23-2013, 02:14 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,386
The thing about growing to 800 mainline jets from where we are plus with DCI@450 jets (which we know it won't be below that number) is that it'd require capacity growth.
I mean 1%-1.5% per year in domestic growth maybe? I just don't see us doing it unless they just think the year after next will be better. Kind of like free beer tomorrow.
I think shrinking is what we've been doing for four years and what's in the cards for another few. I don't see any macroeconomic reason why we would change that vector. I think it's obvious their goal is not to be the biggest, just the best-ist at margin management.
What btw is the delivery schedule on the CRJ-900s? Because if we went to DCI@450 with the 70 increase in CRJ-900s, I could see how we would have a flat change or slight decrease in capacity this year without hitting mainline.
But if that DCI@450 is not happening this year, then I think the cuts will be on our side but I bet it's muddied. A 320 here or there, a couple 763 domestics, maybe an 88, maybe a few 757s... but hey look over there 3 717s and a 739!
I mean 1%-1.5% per year in domestic growth maybe? I just don't see us doing it unless they just think the year after next will be better. Kind of like free beer tomorrow.
I think shrinking is what we've been doing for four years and what's in the cards for another few. I don't see any macroeconomic reason why we would change that vector. I think it's obvious their goal is not to be the biggest, just the best-ist at margin management.
What btw is the delivery schedule on the CRJ-900s? Because if we went to DCI@450 with the 70 increase in CRJ-900s, I could see how we would have a flat change or slight decrease in capacity this year without hitting mainline.
But if that DCI@450 is not happening this year, then I think the cuts will be on our side but I bet it's muddied. A 320 here or there, a couple 763 domestics, maybe an 88, maybe a few 757s... but hey look over there 3 717s and a 739!
We will have a excellent idea if your right in a month or so. In the March bid if the company intends to keep the mainline size flat or shrink will have a net loss to neutral in Captains positions. I think you will be find your wrong when the bid comes out. There will be a substantial net gain in Captains positions.
01-23-2013, 02:39 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: A330 First Officer
Posts: 1,465
I don't know what this statement is referring to, however SD put out his weekly message back in June 2012 stating that "IF we passed this contract that it allows the company to put it's plan in place and we could be hiring as soon as fall of this year (2012)" Now this is not an exact quote but pretty darn close. I find it hard to believe that he/the company could have been soooo far off on their hiring assessment.
Last edited by johnso29; 01-23-2013 at 07:38 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
