Originally Posted by georgetg (Post 1629734)

Meet our next wide body...

http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2...dal%20A346.png

• First flew March 2004
• Seats 350 pax
• Good cargo capacity
• Great for hot and high SA/LA destinations
• Airbus has seven 340-600 available right now
• 4 for the price of 2 engine MX from Rolls
• Virgin is parking their remaining 340-600s
• Used prices dropping to 20-30M
• Average price for a new 777-300 approx. $300M
• Fuel burn only 12% more than 777-300, but 24% less than 747-400

Cheers
George

Originally Posted by Fly4hire (Post 1647647)

Any further rumors on this?

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1647654)

17 to 20 percent fuel burn disadvantage to other airframes. There is a reason it was a flop. Never going to happen.

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1647654)

17 to 20 percent fuel burn disadvantage to other airframes. There is a reason it was a flop. Never going to happen.

Originally Posted by Fly4hire (Post 1647667)

At the mentioned price what's the break even in years of operation on fuel costs ? That's about an 80% saving on the cost of a large WB. That buys an awful lot of gas. I could see these as a bridge WB for lift now until RFP acft show up in force. RA made money operating the DC9 long past any other carrier. Paid for aircraft give you a lot of flexibility.

Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 1647503)

Actually in a way, yes. If they don't have anything for you by noon on your last day, you can ask to be released. If the next day is a golden day which it is 2 or 3 times a month anyway, its an automatic approval.

Perhaps there is room in there to find bargaining credits to apply to more deserving local pilots though. I'd actually almost second that resolution just to see it play out. :cool:

Since your active contempt for commuters is clouding your creative math in counting days off, let's just go nuts with it, shall we:

We have very, very few reports at 1am. Or 2am. Or 3 am. Or 4am. So the vast majority of reserves and line holders always start off with a quarter day off almost every day. With 4 blocks of work per month, that's an extra day off! I wonder if the company knows this? If we agree with this interpretation, we can reduce min days off by one for almost every pilot and still be in compliance with the contract! Don't want those pesky pilots getting free days off now, do we?

Then, since most release times occur at or before 8PM, that's another quarter day off per trip/reserve period. So we can reduce days off by 2 for most pilots. In fact, let's take every hour prior to report on day one, and every hour after release on the last day, and add up those total hours then divide that by 24 and that is the amount of extra work days we owe the company.

You still serious about this Shirley?

Originally Posted by Fly4hire (Post 1647667)

At the mentioned price what's the break even in years of operation on fuel costs ? That's about an 80% saving on the cost of a large WB. That buys an awful lot of gas. I could see these as a bridge WB for lift now until RFP acft show up in force. RA made money operating the DC9 long past any other carrier. Paid for aircraft give you a lot of flexibility.

Originally Posted by iceman49 (Post 1647710)

RA said he does not like used WBs, think and remember the DC 10-30s. No, don't think so.

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1647548)

My concern is that it sets a precedent for the company wanting more pay no credit flying. Would if they propose in mediation having pay no credit for all back side of the clock flying and justify that to the NMB by using our productivity numbers. Big loss of jobs.

Originally Posted by LateFolder (Post 1647716)

I am struggling to see the problem. I know that greenslips are pay no credit. Are greenslips evil in that they distort our productivity numbers? You are a valued contributor to this forum so I thank you for your postings. Would you consider posting an example with numbers that would illuminate further your concerns?