Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-21-2014 | 07:35 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,642
Likes: 0
From: right for a long, long time
I understand and I completely get that the cost per the trip would be more expensive with 3 pilots. I don't dispute that on a leg by leg basis. But I think we would need fewer Captains in the month to cover the trips under the TA then we do now.
Now forgive me, I went off and built a 5th line in the first "present way" so I didn't mean for it to look like a real PBS award. I just had to move some stuff around. See notes below.
[Note, this is as big as I could get it, you need CTRL+ and CTRL- to zoom in and out on your browser, if you have Apple, I have no idea how your overly expensive computer works
]
Now I am going to put my management hat on, which is appropriate, when I log onto Deltanet it goes to... Corporate. So now I have gravitas.
The way I see it, if I had to cover 1 single ATL-SFO-ATL trip where the airplane flew out and then flew right back 1 hour later, I would have 290 hours of block to cover.
But if I am constrained by the fact that under the PWA I cannot return those pilots (and let's say I have no other flights that day) then I have to give them a 24 hour overnight and make this a 3 day trip worth 13.30. By my estimation I would need 5 As and 5 Bs to cover it for the month and I still have a lot of open time to cover. If the contract allowed me to pay straight time on those open time trips this whole thing costs be $144K before overnight expenses.
If I had to GS those open time trips I pay out $187K.
If I could make them bring it right back then it's a turn worth 10.30. Now the trick is I have to pay for a 3rd FO. But under this scenario I only need 4 As and 8 Bs and the good thing is from my management hat on perspective I only have 1 trip in open time.
Cost to me $160K. If I GS that one trip $170K.
So it's cheaper to run it under the PWA and I only need 10 pilots under the PWA. Under the TA I would need 12 pilots and it costs more. That's what seems like the win.
Except that's 1 fewer A. Multiply this over 7 routes per day with the same constraints and now I go from needing 40 As under the PWA to 29 As under the TA, or 80 pilots vs 87.
Now multiply this out and yea, it's 12% more expensive to run it with the TA than PWA and you saved on costs. But to me we've lost Captain positions. I'm not sure if that's a win but I'm open to changing my mind that it's a win if the TA is very restrictive but even then, it's eh. Although that TA schedule looks appetizing.
---
Also, I do wonder if the modification to get a 40 degrees of pitch and a spongebob in would be easier than losing 2 FC seats.
Now forgive me, I went off and built a 5th line in the first "present way" so I didn't mean for it to look like a real PBS award. I just had to move some stuff around. See notes below.
[Note, this is as big as I could get it, you need CTRL+ and CTRL- to zoom in and out on your browser, if you have Apple, I have no idea how your overly expensive computer works
]Now I am going to put my management hat on, which is appropriate, when I log onto Deltanet it goes to... Corporate. So now I have gravitas.
The way I see it, if I had to cover 1 single ATL-SFO-ATL trip where the airplane flew out and then flew right back 1 hour later, I would have 290 hours of block to cover.
But if I am constrained by the fact that under the PWA I cannot return those pilots (and let's say I have no other flights that day) then I have to give them a 24 hour overnight and make this a 3 day trip worth 13.30. By my estimation I would need 5 As and 5 Bs to cover it for the month and I still have a lot of open time to cover. If the contract allowed me to pay straight time on those open time trips this whole thing costs be $144K before overnight expenses.
If I had to GS those open time trips I pay out $187K.
If I could make them bring it right back then it's a turn worth 10.30. Now the trick is I have to pay for a 3rd FO. But under this scenario I only need 4 As and 8 Bs and the good thing is from my management hat on perspective I only have 1 trip in open time.
Cost to me $160K. If I GS that one trip $170K.
So it's cheaper to run it under the PWA and I only need 10 pilots under the PWA. Under the TA I would need 12 pilots and it costs more. That's what seems like the win.
Except that's 1 fewer A. Multiply this over 7 routes per day with the same constraints and now I go from needing 40 As under the PWA to 29 As under the TA, or 80 pilots vs 87.
Now multiply this out and yea, it's 12% more expensive to run it with the TA than PWA and you saved on costs. But to me we've lost Captain positions. I'm not sure if that's a win but I'm open to changing my mind that it's a win if the TA is very restrictive but even then, it's eh. Although that TA schedule looks appetizing.
---
Also, I do wonder if the modification to get a 40 degrees of pitch and a spongebob in would be easier than losing 2 FC seats.
The place I see it differently is that the company doesn't think in A/B positions; they look at overall pilot costs. It may be less overall "A" but if the total cost to run the operation is more, it benefits the company to fill the "A" positions to run an equally effective and less expensive operation (plus the BE seat revenue benefit).
Revenue - cost = profit
The company is interested in results, and not as much how we get there. When Henne-roed and Hummel show SD/RA it's still cheaper to use two/two and not three for a round trip.. I bet I know what RA will choose.
05-21-2014 | 07:40 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,898
Likes: 0
From: Stay THIRSTY, my friends!
Delta just made a bold move WRT insourcing data management. This should really take the stops off developing an entirely new technology backbone to replace the Atari 2600 we're currently using.
05-21-2014 | 07:43 AM
Get's Every Day Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,864
Likes: 0
From: Retired
05-21-2014 | 07:50 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,724
Likes: 0
From: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Has anyone sat down and compared current PWA with straight FAR?
I'm pretty sure the PWA limits trump the 117 FDP limits with early/late reports. I know I have run up at this limit several times...
Cheers
George
I'm pretty sure the PWA limits trump the 117 FDP limits with early/late reports. I know I have run up at this limit several times...
Cheers
George
05-21-2014 | 07:56 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Why does it have to be a 24 hour layover? You fly out on A day and back on B day. Zero credit and same value as the turn. Some rotations will be like that and others will simply integrate the legs into longer trips. The company is not going to build any 3 day two leg trips with the 5:15 daily minimum.
Pilot positions are based on block hours. They don't change with turns. We will not lose Captains. The company will not fly augmented turns except perhaps some mil charters or cities where a layover is unsafe.
Pilot positions are based on block hours. They don't change with turns. We will not lose Captains. The company will not fly augmented turns except perhaps some mil charters or cities where a layover is unsafe.
05-21-2014 | 08:00 AM
Line Holder
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 5
Looks like we got some flying for the LA guys. Taking over one of Virgins' flights from LHR-LAX and giving up one LHR-ATL. Good for LA bad for ATL. Nevermind, not sure who will do the LAX flights for Delta, didn't say what airframe. Might be a crew DH into LA like the SYD flight.
05-21-2014 | 08:02 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
I see that, my napkin math compatriot!
The place I see it differently is that the company doesn't think in A/B positions; they look at overall pilot costs. It may be less overall "A" but if the total cost to run the operation is more, it benefits the company to fill the "A" positions to run an equally effective and less expensive operation (plus the BE seat revenue benefit).
Revenue - cost = profit
The company is interested in results, and not as much how we get there. When Henne-roed and Hummel show SD/RA it's still cheaper to use two/two and not three for a round trip.. I bet I know what RA will choose.
The place I see it differently is that the company doesn't think in A/B positions; they look at overall pilot costs. It may be less overall "A" but if the total cost to run the operation is more, it benefits the company to fill the "A" positions to run an equally effective and less expensive operation (plus the BE seat revenue benefit).
Revenue - cost = profit
The company is interested in results, and not as much how we get there. When Henne-roed and Hummel show SD/RA it's still cheaper to use two/two and not three for a round trip.. I bet I know what RA will choose.
i just dont want to leave any gate open because producitivty is a heard of bulls that want out.
05-21-2014 | 08:08 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,642
Likes: 0
From: right for a long, long time
05-21-2014 | 08:08 AM
meh
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 828
Likes: 0
When a pilot's schedule is built, it is "full" at a certain CREDIT. When a pilot tries to pick up more flying, it is limited by CREDIT. This results in that pilot being unusable by company and another one must be hired and flown to handle the remaining block the first pilot didn't actually fly but got capped out by similar credit.
This entire discussion revolves around the company's ability to reduce CREDIT hours for the same block hours, perhaps in a couple ways. Less synthetic credit for a 30 hour layover; and maybe flying stuff for PAY NO CREDIT. Allowing the company to reduce credit, while still flying the same actual flights (block) results in fewer pilots and less $$ spent on them by Delta. Bad.
Every time you insist that manning is based on block hours, you lose sight of the entire crux of this costing decision, and where the nut-cutting of whether this is better for us or the company will happen; and you mislead the thought process of other pilots away from "truth".
In this case, I don't think you're probably doing it on purpose, I think you're just so used to saying that incorrect mantra you're maybe missing the critical piece here.
If Delta can fly 100 block hours on certain CREDIT COSTLY routes for say 200 credit hours currently, but by adding split duty and CDOs and some targeted 3 man ops they can operate those routes for a hard-time block of 150, then it's a win for them, and a LOSS FOR US.
Didn't throw in any example, just want you to think on and consider the credit vs. block argument and that Delta's continuing mission is always to reduce credit to equal block. I'm following your posts on this, much useful info, hoping you'll factor this critical and driving goal of Delta into your considerations.
Thx
05-21-2014 | 08:11 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Everyone need to tell the REPS to send this thing back.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
