![]() |
|
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1416728)
Why don't you tell us what you think the fleet plan will be. The orders are well known as well as the RFP's. tell us what you think the retirements will be over the next 4 years.
There is nowhere left to expand to. We've done gone and codeshared/JV'ed our international growth out of existence. If ALPA gets its way, we'll outsource our heavy international growth, and take our Williston-MSP x15/day on the 717/739 for a COLA -1.2% contract (along with the usual givebacks, of course). Say it with me: "Obamacare exchange." And we'll like it. Because "that's what the survey said" we wanted. |
For MD 90 numbers, as of the official fleet count on April 1, 54 of a planned 65 were in service.
|
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1416774)
Say it with me: "Obamacare exchange." And we'll like it.
Because "that's what the survey said" we wanted. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1416728)
Why don't you tell us what you think the fleet plan will be. The orders are well known as well as the RFP's. tell us what you think the retirements will be over the next 4 years.
|
Originally Posted by boog123
(Post 1416782)
In 4 years, IMO, there will be less planes and less pilots, regardless of what some say is "going to happen".
Mainline, thankfully, is increasing both. (at the expense of DCI) |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1416785)
Less planes and less pilots in all of the Delta system including DCI, yes.
Mainline, thankfully, is increasing both. (at the expense of DCI) |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1416785)
Less planes and less pilots in all of the Delta system including DCI, yes.
Mainline, thankfully, is increasing both. (at the expense of DCI) Is it really at their expense, or is it just the invertible correction after management went bonkers with RJs for years? In other words - if their growth was at our expense, and now we are recapturing flying that used to be at mainline, is it at their expense? Scoop |
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 1416819)
Is it really at their expense, or is it just the invertible correction after management went bonkers with RJs for years?
In other words - if their growth was at our expense, and now we are recapturing flying that used to be at mainline, is it at their expense? Scoop |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1416602)
All you can do is read the companies fleet plan. The wide bodies are planned for additional flying in the pacific. The possible narrow body purchase ïs in addition to the 100 737's planned as replacement aircraft. They are not planning to increase retirements at the mainline. They are however now planning a additional 25 50 seaters coming out of the fleet as those narrow bodies come online. The fifty seat fleet will stabilize at 100 airframes instead of 125.
|
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 1416819)
Is it really at their expense, or is it just the invertible correction after management went bonkers with RJs for years?
In other words - if their growth was at our expense, and now we are recapturing flying that used to be at mainline, is it at their expense? Scoop |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:32 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands