Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-10-2010, 08:08 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
Oh, I thought it was this:
YouTube - MD88 FMC Calculates VNAV
The cough is when it dumps and you get "standby" in the scratch pad.
YouTube - MD88 FMC Calculates VNAV
The cough is when it dumps and you get "standby" in the scratch pad.
I could only make it 17 seconds of that clip... did it get more interesting? 4.42 of that and I would be cleaning my rifle.
05-10-2010, 08:10 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,012
Originally Posted by tsquare
I could only make it 17 seconds of that clip... did it get more interesting? 4.42 of that and I would be cleaning my rifle.
05-10-2010, 08:12 AM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Originally Posted by keenster
Not really complaining. If you noticed, my title was food for thought. Being A FNG at DAL, was hoping that someone could explain away my concerns as some people have in making some good points. I have no idea how DAL runs things since we have only been operating under Phase 6 now for a month or so. A common theme you hear on our side of things in the 744 world is "boy they sure are ****ing a lot of money away" compared to what we have seen in the past. All of my concerns in my post were aimed at the company making the right decisions and becoming more efficient in order to become more profitable. I am amazed at some who always take everything that has a hint of questioning what mother DAL is doing as a slam to them and come to the defense of the situation no matter what the facts are or what the intent of the post was. Take the blinders off. I want this company to become the best there is for all of our sakes.
Point being you have a valid point on the fuel thing.
I would prefer to have the APA back myself.
05-10-2010, 08:13 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
Slow,
I don't know what software they use to assign trips. Their default position when you question an assignment is that "it's legal." After agreeing with them that's it's legal and you're doing the best you can, the follow up question is "why did you assign a 05:00 short call to a 6:30 departure instead of one of the 03:00 people?" They answer to that is, "we don't do it, the computer does it. The computer looks for availability two hours prior to departure time."
I don't know what software they use to assign trips. Their default position when you question an assignment is that "it's legal." After agreeing with them that's it's legal and you're doing the best you can, the follow up question is "why did you assign a 05:00 short call to a 6:30 departure instead of one of the 03:00 people?" They answer to that is, "we don't do it, the computer does it. The computer looks for availability two hours prior to departure time."
A pilot on short call is required to be within the general area of his base and promptly available for trip coverage. Since each base has its own particular traffic problems, the term “promptly available” has never been defined in terms of time or distance, and is based upon normal circumstances that can be expected throughout the day or night. Actual realistic response time may vary from base to base and with weather and time of day. It is not possible for a pilot to anticipate and account for abnormal conditions beyond his control, which may extend response time beyond that normally required. Therefore, an NYC pilot encountering a snowstorm or an LAX pilot caught in rush-hour traffic might each require in excess of three hours to sign in and be well within the definition of “promptly available."
Note: For NYC-based pilots, short-call availability may be measured from the pilot’s closest co-terminal (EWR, LGA, JFK), without regard to the actual co-terminal to which he is required to report. For LAX-based pilots, short-call availability is measured from LAX.
If a pilot anticipates an unusual response time, he should inform Crew Scheduling for their planning purposes. Any discussion of “reasonable” should occur only between the pilot, the Chief Pilot, and, possibly, an ALPA representative.
Note: For NYC-based pilots, short-call availability may be measured from the pilot’s closest co-terminal (EWR, LGA, JFK), without regard to the actual co-terminal to which he is required to report. For LAX-based pilots, short-call availability is measured from LAX.
If a pilot anticipates an unusual response time, he should inform Crew Scheduling for their planning purposes. Any discussion of “reasonable” should occur only between the pilot, the Chief Pilot, and, possibly, an ALPA representative.
05-10-2010, 08:21 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,012
Thank you Slow. So the question is, if they have programmed their computer to assign trips to SC with 120 minutes to departure time, should a concern be raised to the Chief Pilot or ALPA?
The issue for Delta is that while a pilot might not be punished, we've still got an operational issue that could be fixed by better SC reserve utilization. I'm sure you would agree with me that Crew Scheduling mostly relies on their software for assignment of trips. At 05:00 in the morning, with a 05:15 notification and a 06:30 departure, there is simply no time to fix the coverage problem.
The issue for Delta is that while a pilot might not be punished, we've still got an operational issue that could be fixed by better SC reserve utilization. I'm sure you would agree with me that Crew Scheduling mostly relies on their software for assignment of trips. At 05:00 in the morning, with a 05:15 notification and a 06:30 departure, there is simply no time to fix the coverage problem.
05-10-2010, 08:49 AM
Inventory survival kit ..
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: Seeking no jacket required rotations
Posts: 1,069
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
how about just get out of the RLA?
05-10-2010, 08:53 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
So the question is, if they have programmed their computer to assign trips to SC with 120 minutes to departure time, should a concern be raised to the Chief Pilot or ALPA?
There is a clear understanding as to what is "reasonable", and even if there isn't, it can be discussed after the fact. My understanding is that the expectation is for a person to show about two hours at one airport. The other pilot would most likely have prepared everything, which explains why there is no difference between show-time and push-back. Essentially, the expectation is that you will show up, but will not need 1:00 (domestic) or 1:30 (int'l) to push from that point.
05-10-2010, 09:53 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: A330
Posts: 216
Originally Posted by RockyBoy
4200 is when the lights come on. They changed that so they could run us with lower fuel and not have the lights come on all the time. If they want to they can plan you with lower than that, you just get the lights. You don't see it very often, but I have seen a number of times when the fuel was under 4200. Only seen it at 3900 once and the captain and I both scratched our heads for awhile. We had lots of taxi fuel in there for ATL and the lines were not long, so we didn't worry about it and had around 5K when it was all said and done.
The lights are modded to 2000lbs a side for a total of 4000lbs
45 minutes are cruise is 4200lbs
Flight Plan reserve fuel is 4200lbs
Unmodded planes light is on at 2500lbs total of 5000lbs
Flight plan reserve fuel is 5000lbs
FOM min fuel is based on when the lights come on
Flight plan reserve is the higher of 45mins (FAA requirement IFR) or FOM min.
I understand the mod lets them lower the fuel, but you still can't plan for under 4200 at destination. Unless I am reading it wrong.....
05-10-2010, 10:27 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Position: JFK A-330 A
Posts: 277
Keenster:
Years ago, DAL used to tanker fuel from one state/city to another based on the difference in fuel costs, SUPPOSEDLY saving a bunch of money...FWIW.
Since you're on the 747, I'm guessing that DAL is trying to learn the details of your aircraft and how it relates to the current flight-planning system. Since it's still early in the process, probably better to carry too much fuel, where only the crew and dispatch/planners see the result than fuel stop in ANC or HNL and EVERYBODY sees it, IMMHO;-)
Years ago, DAL used to tanker fuel from one state/city to another based on the difference in fuel costs, SUPPOSEDLY saving a bunch of money...FWIW.
Since you're on the 747, I'm guessing that DAL is trying to learn the details of your aircraft and how it relates to the current flight-planning system. Since it's still early in the process, probably better to carry too much fuel, where only the crew and dispatch/planners see the result than fuel stop in ANC or HNL and EVERYBODY sees it, IMMHO;-)
05-10-2010, 10:28 AM
Get's Every Day Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Retired
Posts: 1,859
Bullseye
Originally Posted by tsquare
Here,for the first time outside of Fort Widget, is a view of tha actual software in use.
Crew Sked software
Crew Sked software
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
