Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
02-16-2013 | 02:22 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 943
Likes: 0
From: Knuckle-dragging line pilot
The Tunguska event in 1908 is believed to have been an air burst of a 300ish-foot meteor that exploded with the force of up to 30 megatons. How durable are those dash cams??
02-16-2013 | 03:33 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
Concur. When someone posts the old "If you don't like it why don't you just leave?", it almost always pushes me away from whatever they are supporting. Dissent is good. Questioning and striving for improvement is good.
I've read all the TA, and have access to the published numbers, and have a degree in probability and statistics, and another in math. And I will tell you that I almost UNIVERSALLY DISAGREE with the interpretations on the numbers and usage that are posted by johnso, as well as sailingfun and slowplay. While I OFTEN agree with much of the content and almost always am glad to READ what sailing and slow post. However, in my opinion their interpretation of the statistics is almost always wrong and not properly characterized. Even when I might agree that the actual number itself is correct, how they interpret what that number means is wrong.
Average SC sat is an example. The company is not forced to increase pilot staffing on almost ANY average, it is in fact when operations bump up against the outliers of the data that flights are cancelled. It is the NON-AVERAGE high SC use data points in various months and various fleets that force increased staffing. When the company finds a way to spread unused pilot capacity from a low-average area into a high-use area, such as making critical months 1 day shorter, that is when the need for additional pilots is terminated.
By quoting averages, particularly low ones and in areas where we absolutely know that seniority ensures that junior pilots don't see "average" use because they don't have the ability to successfully bid in such a way that they are unused, these guys are like magicians moving your eye away from the REAL critical areas and fooling you with meaningless data that just SOUNDS applicable.
Staffing problems in a scenario where under-staffing and thus cancellation of operations is not an allowable option are driven by "limiting factors" which exist on the outlying edges a standard dev out or so on the applicable probability curves. These "limfacs" are usually caused by usage limitations that SOUND like they won't generally apply (such as 7 SC or ALV +15), and in fact generally WON'T be seen by most pilots... but they are nevertheless the critical limfac that is driving the staffing decision.
I've read all the TA, and have access to the published numbers, and have a degree in probability and statistics, and another in math. And I will tell you that I almost UNIVERSALLY DISAGREE with the interpretations on the numbers and usage that are posted by johnso, as well as sailingfun and slowplay. While I OFTEN agree with much of the content and almost always am glad to READ what sailing and slow post. However, in my opinion their interpretation of the statistics is almost always wrong and not properly characterized. Even when I might agree that the actual number itself is correct, how they interpret what that number means is wrong.
Average SC sat is an example. The company is not forced to increase pilot staffing on almost ANY average, it is in fact when operations bump up against the outliers of the data that flights are cancelled. It is the NON-AVERAGE high SC use data points in various months and various fleets that force increased staffing. When the company finds a way to spread unused pilot capacity from a low-average area into a high-use area, such as making critical months 1 day shorter, that is when the need for additional pilots is terminated.
By quoting averages, particularly low ones and in areas where we absolutely know that seniority ensures that junior pilots don't see "average" use because they don't have the ability to successfully bid in such a way that they are unused, these guys are like magicians moving your eye away from the REAL critical areas and fooling you with meaningless data that just SOUNDS applicable.
Staffing problems in a scenario where under-staffing and thus cancellation of operations is not an allowable option are driven by "limiting factors" which exist on the outlying edges a standard dev out or so on the applicable probability curves. These "limfacs" are usually caused by usage limitations that SOUND like they won't generally apply (such as 7 SC or ALV +15), and in fact generally WON'T be seen by most pilots... but they are nevertheless the critical limfac that is driving the staffing decision.
02-16-2013 | 04:20 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
02-16-2013 | 05:05 AM
Line Holder
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,281
Likes: 0
From: C560XL/XLS/XLS+
So, as I sit here deviating from deadhead to SXM, in my economy comfort seat, I want to relate something. When I looked up my PSUP status this am, to my surprise there where four PSUPs ahead of me. With a hire date of 1-1-40. I thought, that guy has to be 91 if he was hired at age 18. Turns out it's none other than our own SVP for Labor Relations. So they get pos space for themselves and their family, huh?
02-16-2013 | 05:07 AM
Line Holder
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,281
Likes: 0
From: C560XL/XLS/XLS+
Don't hold your breath here, but from what I've heard is that the code share with AS could be falling like a house of cards over their agreement with AMR. If you want to talk to a po'ed pilot group, it's the AS pilots over all the code sharing.
02-16-2013 | 05:26 AM
ATL A320 B
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
From: No longer MEM or 9, but still a guy.
If the 320b category is so fat, why did we have the second highest FO ALV in the fleet?
02-16-2013 | 05:30 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
Can you put us in the shoes of an AS pilot and explain what they are POed about?
02-16-2013 | 05:33 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Likes: 0
That is one of the more amusing yet sad things about union politics.
"I don't like what's going on with x"
"WELL YOU NEED TO GET INVOLVED.. QUITE WHINING"
"I am involved- I proposed to do y, z, b, and a about it"
"Oh... well none of those will work, because they don't fit my set of politics."
"I don't like what's going on with x"
"WELL YOU NEED TO GET INVOLVED.. QUITE WHINING"
"I am involved- I proposed to do y, z, b, and a about it"
"Oh... well none of those will work, because they don't fit my set of politics."
In the last 4 months the MEC elected a new MEC Chairman. Several major committees and appointed positions turned over. The negotiating committee went from 4 to 3. The EVP changed. There are 9 new voting reps out of 19 votes taking office March 1.
You whine because the results don't fit YOUR set of politics.
02-16-2013 | 05:36 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,058
Likes: 2
From: Capt
Makes for good school house rumors and rah rah talk to a bunch of guys that drool over the smallest tidbit of growth. Watch the feet.
02-16-2013 | 05:40 AM
Line Holder
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,281
Likes: 0
From: C560XL/XLS/XLS+
I talked to a couple of them at LAX last month and they feel the sameway as we do about the code sharing. The FO said something about no growth there either. Also, their lucrative mail contract to the islands is coming to an end, they said some island cut backs may be coming.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
