Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1478656)

I didn't think airbus pilots "flew" anything. I thought it was merely a vote on what it was going to do. :cool:

But you do have a point that it is more comfortable in the back than Boeing.

Boeing pilot. Airbus driver.

Originally Posted by nwa757 (Post 1478555)

RA has publicly spoken out in support of the AA/US merger for obvious reasons.... increase in stability in the industry etc.

This merger will help DAL pilots whether you want to realize it or not. Pattern bargaining in the years ahead will be dependent on US Airways pay and the quickest fix to the East/West never ending lawsuit saga is this merger. The merger MOU specifically calls for pay to be on par with UAL and DAL by 2016. Just 2 years away.

Let's take 30 seconds and give them some support in asking the DOJ to get their nose out of business.

Write your local reps here: Speak Up

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1478656)

I didn't think airbus pilots "flew" anything. I thought it was merely a vote on what it was going to do. :cool:

But you do have a point that it is more comfortable in the back than Boeing.

Boeing pilot. Airbus driver.

Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1478801)

So did DAL get invited to the S&P?

Originally Posted by buzzpat (Post 1478796)

Oohhh, based on the AE today, looks like LA will be the third -900 base after ATL and DTW.

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1478436)

717's and ... what about the new RJ's that are predicated on the 717's? This thing has the potential to snow ball. Remember all the talk of the opportunity this transaction provided? We already got our C2012 money. Now management is not getting it's payback (I guess due to some silliness about modifying an already airworthy design (or at least as airworthy as a Douglas product ever is)). Meanwhile qualified 717's crews will start to de-qual or fly a lot of empty legs. (I'd love to charter one BTW ... hmmm wonder if under Part 91...)

With Delta's Aviation Partners Boeing experience and overall high level of MRO expertise, it's a bit surprising that we undertook a modification of a Boeing product, probably without Boeing support, following sequestration. Boeing hates for operators to modify anything (in Boeing's view, how can anyone improve on perfection) so they hold it up, charge a King's ransom for engineering support, then write the FAA and claim the modifications are unsafe and the airplane should be grounded, or fly with significant restrictions.

Aviation Partners Boeing got around all of this by (as their name states) partnering with Boeing and basically giving Boeing engineering support and maybe cash that Boeing did little to nothing to earn in exchange for not fighting them.

Moral of the story; Boeing exists to sell new airplanes. They take a dim view of anyone improving an old airplane rather than buying a new one. I do not know that Boeing is involved in this, but frequently this plays out this way.

Of course, the FAA has recently taken a couple of black eyes for percieved failures in Certification oversight (namely 787 and G-650). I'm sure they've got their gain turned up.