63%, why do you even have to ask?

Only if it's 2-4-2-2 or less.

Any predictions over 5 years out in this industry are entirely irrelevant. Far too much can change. Age 6_ anyone? Those retirements causing advancement also assumes an expanding (or even status quo) seniority list. No hiring means you are still the same % from the bottom.

Personnaly, I do not think there is that much of a concern about any training/retirement bubble. There are probably enough solutions in the works, things being put in place or already in place, to mitigate them, or at the least significantly dampen the effects. EDIT: Next contract negotiations will probably reveal some of them.

I would love for any and every great prediction to come true. But based on 12 years of predictions and projections (more considering previous life) that just never quite seem to materialize as advertised (300+ early outs, etc for a recent one), followed by excuses, color me skeptical. "Watch their feet."

And then there is age 73

It will be called 5 for 5 for 5. A 5 year seat lock for a 5% raise over 5 years. It will pass by 65%.

Weak argument. I could say the same for 2 years or 6 months. If you're going to consider the numbers for the next 5 years as solid, then you have to accept beyond that as well. As far a Age 65 being changed, what's your source? What is the drive behind changing it? Also, how can all those people retire with no hiring to replace them? How small do you think Delta well become? Aren't these predictions beyond 5 years from now that you yourself said are "entirely irrelevant"?

Here's a little food for thought, before we all start to strain the brain analyzing this AE, and future AE's: maybe we just can't?

This company is now set up for instant growth and contraction, on demand. With a stream of aircraft deliveries, and the ability to vary aircraft retirements, this airline can now turn on a dime. Even RA might not be able to tell you exactly where the plan is taking us, because he's in the enviable position where he doesn't need to know, exactly. He can just have the team look at demand, and effect changes a couple of quarters out.

This is going to drive us APC'ers batty. As fast as we can analyze a few pieces to the puzzle, others will get moved around. Ftb won't be able to graph fast enough. He'll either pull a brain muscle, or wear out his Excel.

I have to look back at the TA, to see how the 717 piece and associated ratios backstops the number of TOTAL mainline airframes, not just the 717 fleet. If it does, this TA was a stroke of genius. If it doesn't we can take rumors of fleet growth, analysis and forecasts, notes from lounge visits that are already obsolete, and flush them, for they are meaningless.

Bar/Sailing... Do you know offhand if the TA mandates a total mainline fleet size?

The PWA does not mandate any fleet size, just limits aspects of DCI per section 1.

You saved yourself...

...this time.

Bingo. If you're going to drop the utilization of the mainline domestic fleet, you have to do the same for the Jumbo RJ fleet.