Originally Posted by sailingfun

. I will wait to here what the MEC reports on the simulations. The forum of course will call those reports selling the TA.

Originally Posted by scambo1

8:01 flt
Minus 1.5 (toc and tod) equals 6.5 at cruise

Pm at toc gets ninety minutes, that puts us with 4 hrs remaining.
Pilot landing gets the last 2 hours.
That still leaves 2 hours.

It is just friendly to give the relief guy bunk time.

Originally Posted by nwaf16dude

If what you say is true (and I'm not arguing that it isn't) then what is your best guess as to why augmented domestic ops is in this TA?

Originally Posted by Scoop

0500 AM was and is contractual. NLT noon was by memo. If the new rules go into affect than 1000 becomes contractual.

This just highlights the perils of operating "by memo." What the memo giveth, the memo can taketh away.

Noon would have been great but 1000 on the first day is still pretty good.

Remember the NLT than noon was tied to a 2 hour long call response which many reserve Pilots were rightfully outraged about.

Lets see the details, read them calmly, study them.............................................. .............and then burn the house down!

Scoop

Originally Posted by gloopy

Most rotations won't benefit from the new ADG. This was costed by the company, obviously, and I think you are over stating its significance. Yes it is a positive, but its not worth what we gave up for it.

Originally Posted by gloopy

You also have to include the MASSIVE concession of a 3 hour call back leash.

Originally Posted by Purple Drank

agree..but that 0500 on Day 1 had to be on your line prior to 1500...and the schedule check was mandatory.

Originally Posted by sailingfun

Another post with forum histeria without any real thought. As already discussed it requires 3 pilots verses two for each flight on a transcon turn. There has been nothing to stop any airline from flying these as a augmented turn for at least the last 30 years. No airline does them because it makes no sense. Even JetBlue who really wants transcon turns never considered augmenting them.
One other consideration. If Delta did decided to fly transcon turns if your not in the top 20 percent in category don't plan on seeing one. A SFO turn would pay around 12:30. Fly 6 a month and you will have 75 hours. Two three day groupings would look pretty nice as a monthly schedule! Not going to happen however, just to costly for the company

Originally Posted by Dorfman

The check wasn't mandatory until 0200, 3 hours prior to report/start of duty period.

Originally Posted by Check Essential

gloopy-
You are one of the calm and rational voices around here.
I respect your analysis.
I gotta tell you. I'm coming to the same conclusion as you.

I've been trying to approach this on a sort of "pro/con" type thought process.

I see quite a few cons but I'm having trouble listing pros.

I don't know why we would agree to this thing.

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

From our Chairman's letter:
• Provides augmentation for a non-ocean crossing FDP.

I'm going to take this to mean it can be a domestic turn such as ATL-SFO which has 7 flights going and 7 coming back per day (and let's just say that's what it is everyday) and let's for arguments sake say it averages out to 5.15 each way.

Now what you are seeing is:
• You will need 1 CA + 2 FO on each flight x 7 flights per day, figure $219/hr for A and $150/hr for B x 365 days per year the company with the TA will now shell out $6.97M to do this route,

• Current PWA is 1 CA + 1 FO x 7 flights per day x 365 days per year the company shells out $4.96m to do this route, thus the pilots gain $2M more per year in salary on this route alone.

• And for the pilots they can be done after 7 days of work (73.5 hours) and we will net for this route alone 2200+ more credit hours thanks to the 3rd FO. Actually the airplanes fly 2237 hours per month on this route regardless but with our current PWA we get 4474 credit hours and with the TA 6711.

Big win, amirite? You see big gains across the board, more pilots, less days working, more money?

But I see it a different way. Currently even with short overnights it would take 12 crews to complete all 14 flights per day between ATL-SFO because none of these 2-man crews can turn that jet around and fly home.

• Why 12? The first two crews of the day could do the first two ATL-SFO flights and the last two SFO-ATL flights. But you would need 5 additional crews to do the middle of the day stuff.

• So right now per month you need 12 Captains snoring at the hotel and 12 FOs in the room next to them to complete 1 day of ATL-SFO-ATL flying. With the TA you need 7 Captains and 14 FOs per day to complete a day of ATL-SFO-ATL flying.

So we lose Captains and total pilots but we as a group gain credit hours (even though aircraft hours remains constant) by adding that 3rd FO. So yes the pilots make more money but that is offset by reducing Captains required and pilots required.

in the interim the company saves money on hotels, upgrades, training and hiring which as a wag given its SFO that would be a huge money saver. What is a hotel for SFO for an airline? $75/day? 75 x 24 guys x 365 days = $650K? What's fewer Captains upgrading and going through CQ save?

I figured the drop in As and increase in Bs but loss in total pilots alone washed out to around $300K gain in our favor but I think the company comes out ahead after its all said and done. ymmv.

This is back of the napkin math here but your turn, would augmented crews on a non ocean crossing FDP reduce Captains and total pilots required on routes like ATL-SFO?

Still waiting for the details, this is all going off the MEC letter for now.


And are we still required to do talk about other mans trash? Fine...