Elvis,
Quit trying to pretend you have a life and get your post count up!:D. It's raining where I live and I'm whooped today so I've been monitoring this place too much. I, for one, miss your input.

Perhaps, and I hope they do. And I don't think we should "give away the farm" and blow all our negotiating capital on this issue to "fix it for them" or whavever. However it does seem like a great time to buy low WRT scope at the DC-9-10 level. If the large (70-90 seater) RJ's were all one type and on our certificate, they'd be our single biggest fleet. That's an awful lot of jobs and if we can take a sizeable bite out of that for little to no "cost" I'm in favor of it.

To any extent there is anything that can be called a cost anyway, I'd suspect it would be more centered around what rates they pay and things like that. Of course if we brought them all on our list and staffed them with new pilot positions on the bottom of our list, some would still claim we passed up some phenom raise or whatever. In any case I see a potential opportunity and we should capitalize if the terms are right.

What made some upset about C2012 RJ scope was the addition of a lot of the largest 90 seater "RJ's" (configured to 76 seats with a management desired first class). The 50's clearly were going away. I would not be in favor of any kind of additional "scope deal" that gave the company more large RJ's for any reason, especially if they want to use the larger hulls to fly more outsourced pax with a critical pilot supply shortage at the outsourced level. I could even see them trying to float some scheme where DCI gets larger [~100 seat?] "RJ's" in exchange for fewer 70's or even 76er's which are really 90's. No thanks. That would be a concession and a future downturn poison pill that would come back to bite us hard later even if the net DCI seats were reduced. The 76 seat and weight limits should be involitile. If anything, those numbers need to be revised downward.

I'm sure they will try even larger RJ's for some kind of carrot to bail them out of their pathetic DCI MBA experiment. I hope we don't fall for it. But I want larger RJ's reduced and the limits reigned in to some degree, if not entirely.

You and I drank from the same dementia pond on that one my friend..

I don't think AS is going anywhere, they just spent beaucoup bucks to move to T6.

UAL gave up the gates after canceling some connection flying from LAX, so more mainline UAL less UAX thus the ability to consolidate in T7 & T8.

AMR also said they would open a ticket counter in T6. I bet the Eagle "Nest" will close and the AMR RJs will be based out of T6. Instead of a bus ride from T4 to the Nest or T6 to go on AS, the AMR "operated by..." pax will take the double tunnel from T4 to T6. The new check-in counter at T6 will let AMR pax check in for their American operated by XXX flight (including AS).

I've seen some stange construction between 52 and 54. I bet the Eagle "nest" will become the "Connection Corral." So we'll bus the Delta DCI pax from T5 to the remote. That would free up 4-5 gates at T5. I bet VS will "move in" at T5...

No if we only can figure out how to charge a toll for AMR pax to transition though T5 ;-)

Good Stuff!

Cheers
George

I think number 3... skip to 1:35 if you don't want to watch the whole thing.. illustrates the viability of THAT proposal.

Thanks Scambo - I'll post more often.

Help with non rev question please.

I'm planning on jump seating or pass riding (will list and confirm for a boarding pass) with my golf clubs to FL. I have a Club Glove so I'm covered there:).

Questions: Do I need anything other than a boarding pass?

And is there a charge at curbside for the golf bag?

Thanks

No charge but tip will be appreciated. Really no big deal, just realize the clubs go whether you do or not!

I was thinking the same.

Thank you-