|
|
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1476867)
Both, Johnso. There is always overlap on aircraft being delivered to replace aircraft. I've said over and over that at least some 321s are certainly replacement aircraft. Not all, some. You're putting words in my mouth again.
You posted this:
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1476839)
The 739 is coming to replace 757s, 763s (!!), and early gen 320s. That's a lot more than 100 airplanes. It will be interesting (and critical) to see if the 320 airframe life extension is part of this deal.
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1476863)
Well which is replacing the 757s? Because previously you said it was the A321. But now you're saying it's the 737-900ER. So which is replacing the B757s?
Last I checked we have 139 B757-200s, 16 B757-300s, 16 B767-300s, & 69 A320s. And what defines "early generation?" Are you implying that Delta is parking all these airplanes by the end of the announced deliveries? Where did I put any words in your mouth? |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1476799)
I'm ok with you saying that. And I agree with not getting too spun up. But it's nice to finally hear good news. I've never denied that I can be a overely optimistic at times, but can't we for once acknowledge some good news? Why do we always put a negative spin on it?
http://sportbilly.co.za/wp-content/u...eerleaders.jpg Not that there's anything wrong with that!:D Cheerleading is fine and all. In fact, as shown below, Timbo used to be a cheerleader...albeit for very different reasons: http://www.totalprosports.com/wp-con...eerleaders.jpg Carl |
Originally Posted by TenYearsGone
(Post 1476308)
Mechanic told me he has been hearing of some sort of announcement occurring tomorrow. I asked him if he thought it had to do with a/c orders, he told me he thinks it is about mx early outs.:mad:
TEN TEN |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1476814)
How was anything that I said gloomy? DL employed 10,400 pilots in 2001. I was 6822 when I got my seniority number in 2007... we are at 11,800 after merging with Northwest which had ~5500 pilots. The numbers speak for themselves! Timbo was speaking on reality when it comes to past actions in regard to growth.
|
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1476876)
What do you want? For the 757s, all the 5500 and up through 670 are up for replacement. All of the 763 domestics (non-etops) are up for replacement. Without a life extension, 3209-3250 are up for replacement. Also, I believe some of the first delivery 88s are up as well.
I've never stated that all the 321s are non-growth. There is always overlap on deliveries being taken and aircraft being parked. You keep putting words in my mouth for some reason. I went back and counted off the most current fleet card the 757-200s you mentioned(it was 42), plus the 16 767-300s and 40 A320s. So I count 98 airplanes. Give or take. Just FYI. :) If you could answer this, I'd appreciate it. I'm just curious what people's thoughts are on this.
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1476836)
Ask yourself folks, would you want the A321/739 to pay equal to a B767-300 if it meant it could give another pilot group who does NOT have WB jets a WB argument?
IOW, if we merge with say....Alaska.....could an arbitrator consider a 737-900 the same as a B767? I mean, if Delta ALPA considers a 737-900ER equal to a 767-300ER, then what does that do for us in an arbitrated ISL situation? |
Originally Posted by bigbusdriver
(Post 1476883)
That's because mergers aren't 1+1, the resulting synergized and disciplined capacity means that you operate the same network with less.
DL had 10,400 pilots in 2001 and 6800 in 2007 was more my point. With a combined network with NW, we only have 1400 more pilots than DL alone had in 2001. |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1476836)
Ask yourself folks, would you want the A321/739 to pay equal to a B767-300 if it meant it could give another pilot group who does NOT have WB jets a WB argument?
IOW, if we merge with say....Alaska.....could an arbitrator consider a 737-900 the same as a B767? I mean, if Delta ALPA considers a 737-900ER equal to a 767-300ER, then what does that do for us in an arbitrated ISL situation? Carl |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1476884)
Perfect. Thanks. Now is that more then 130 airplanes? Because I don't know how many M88s are up. I haven't heard anything about those.
If you could answer this, I'd appreciate it. I'm just curious what people's thoughts are on this.
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1476836)
Ask yourself folks, would you want the A321/739 to pay equal to a B767-300 if it meant it could give another pilot group who does NOT have WB jets a WB argument?
IOW, if we merge with say....Alaska.....could an arbitrator consider a 737-900 the same as a B767? I mean, if Delta ALPA considers a 737-900ER equal to a 767-300ER, then what does that do for us in an arbitrated ISL situation? You did say you wanted the A321 to pay what the B757 pays, but I wasn't sure if you addressed the integration part. I didn't say I want the 321 to pay what the 757 pays...putting words in my mouth again. DL successfully argued that every 757/767 slot was a widebody slot in the DL/NW SLI. We are losing that leverage no matter what with the parking of the older 757s and replacing them with 737s and Airbii. What we can at least do now is have the 321 pay more than the 739, thus getting a boost like DL got with the 757/767 above the NW narrobody fleets. That is critical leverage in an SLI with a 737 operator! |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1476893)
I'm not sure how many that is off the top of my head, but it is very close to 130. Like I've said, I think there is at least some growth involved with the 321s.
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1476839)
I didn't say I want the 321 to pay what the 757 pays...putting words in my mouth again.
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1476839)
The 321 is 20,000 lbs heavier than the 739 and carries more people than the 757. It should pay more than the 739, logically (I just gave tsquare an aneurysm). That will also put us in a better position given an AS merger.
From what's highlighted in red, I assumed you meant you think the A321 should pay more then the B757. My apologies for the misinterpretation. EDIT: I see where the misunderstanding is. I mistakenly typed this: You did say you wanted the A321 to pay what the B757 pays, When I meant to type this: You did say you wanted the A321 to pay MORE then what the B757 pays, Sorry again.
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1476839)
DL successfully argued that every 757/767 slot was a widebody slot in the DL/NW SLI. We are losing that leverage no matter what with the parking of the older 757s and replacing them with 737s and Airbii. What we can at least do now is have the 321 pay more than the 739, thus getting a boost like DL got with the 757/767 above the NW narrobody fleets. That is critical leverage in an SLI with a 737 operator!
Thanks for the answer. :) |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1476836)
Ask yourself folks, would you want the A321/739 to pay equal to a B767-300 if it meant it could give another pilot group who does NOT have WB jets a WB argument?
IOW, if we merge with say....Alaska.....could an arbitrator consider a 737-900 the same as a B767? I mean, if Delta ALPA considers a 737-900ER equal to a 767-300ER, then what does that do for us in an arbitrated ISL situation? |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:03 AM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands