One thing about the lack of air: (and I know some idiot that called me out on FI will hate this) if you dont hear a rush or air or dont look out and see the air connected to your plane when it's a hot day don't shut off the air. We always default to single engine taxi but will never burn more than is necessary...

If the company can't figure out that air is needed to cool the cabin....then run it! Not much thought process goes into that. DTW and SEA never hooked up air today on a very warm day. I can never forgive laziness...

Get ready for some A330 flying to Luanda(via Dkr) this fall...

I'd take a bow, but I won't because I might get a cut across my forehead like I got on the 88 one day trying to get my water bottle. I think it was the audio panel that did it. I looked like Harry Potter. I have a photo... I've been debating posting it. :D

The problem is not one engine or two. The Maddog does not produce any significant airflow with an engine at idle. If you don't have an APU and you are taxiing on either one or two engines, you have to get them up to 70% and let it stay there for a while to cool the airplane. That means sitting there with the brakes set and the engines up, but that is what it takes.

The DC9 and 88 have the same packs as far as I know with a shortened fuselage, and the problem was bad enough on that - accepted practice during hot wx to keep the plane cool was engines and APU running right up to before TO check. Start the APU as part of after landing flow. Turn off at gate IF and only if external hooked up AND blowing cold.

If the nimrod who had the plane ahead of you was trying to save the co. money and the APU was shut down with no external it could take until almost cruise on the next leg before the cabin was cool again on a hot day :mad:

Between the heat and the #of legs it was a safety/fatigue issue, not just passenger comfort. The reflective window shades helped out a lot. Are we using those on the maddogs?

How Delta compares in regional feed
 

http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploa...ert-Herbst.jpg

:eek:

(Courtesy of Seeking Alpha)

Another addition to my avoid list. This should be good for green slips for someone when all the reserves call in sick.

Wait till you add CAL to UAL! :eek:

But what is that vertical axis on the right saying, is that the % of overall flying for the mainline carrier?

And despite the constant talk of RJ's going away they are just being replaced with smaller numbers of larger SJ's for a flat ASM that is better suited to replace NB flying.

Back of the napkin math tells me that 255 70-76 RJ's (153 76 seaters plus 102 70 seaters) is the same ASM's as 375 50 seaters. So we reduce 50 CRJ200's while we have grown the 70-76 seat class.

Does anyone have access to YoY fleet numbers with the DCI's. Might be quite educational :eek:

Here's the full article:

Airline Industry: Growth Returning -- Seeking Alpha