|
Now for a commercial break
|
Any of you A320 greenslipin' fools out there want to pony up the $75 for a transcript of todays call with EB at the Raymond James' conference?
:D |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 941412)
Any of you A320 greenslipin' fools out there want to pony up the $75 for a transcript of todays call with EB at the Raymond James' conference?
:D |
Originally Posted by Sink r8
(Post 941368)
Depending on how positive you want to be, and depending on how many of these mystical MD-90's you want to count, and the 2 ER's and several 757's coming out of the desert, it all varies between a slight positve, to as much as minus fifteen airframes. That's all I could figure out. In storage: ship number-type-date of manufacture 9220 - MD-90-30 - 07-Oct-97 9221 - MD-90-30 - 07-Oct-97 9222 - MD-90-30 - 14-Dec-97 9223 - MD-90-30 - 30-Mar-98 9224 - MD-90-30 - 30-Jun-98 9225 - MD-90-30 - 01-Oct-98 9226 - MD-90-30 - 13-Dec-98 9227 - MD-90-30 - 26-Mar-99 9228 - MD-90-30 - 31-Mar-99 9229 - MD-90-30 - 14-Nov-96 9230 - MD-90-30 - 31-Oct-96 9265 - MD-90-30 - 19-Sept-00 |
|
Originally Posted by Sink r8
(Post 941395)
We may be talking past each other. I'm not saying the DCI agreement, or the AS agreement, are good. I'm saying all three were negotiated under different times, by different groups. They involve a third party. On the AF, we got involved upfront. On the DCI agreements, we weren't involved at all: whatever our contract allowed, the company negotiated. The AS agreement was negotiated with NW. At least that's how I understand it...
The AS agreement was modified to account for the NW AS agreement. IOW the Section 1 was in fact modified when DAL and NW merged... I agree that most of these things are in place now with little room for remedies. That's why it is so important to understand and learn from the mistakes and the successes. Something that's not possible if one doesn't allow for criticism of sections that are lacking. If we want to avoid past mistakes we need to acknowledge them, study them and ensure they don't happen again. or we just don't admit to mistakes and continue... Cheers George |
Originally Posted by Sink r8
(Post 941414)
They're all flying right now.
..... |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 941282)
Realize that as Delta CONTRACTS for more regional lift they are obligated to use it.
When they need to further adjust capacity the only remaining capacity they can adjust is mainline. We become the accumulator in the system with 90 days notice. Not forecasting anything, not saying we're on fire, just pointing out the operation of the system so you understand the steps in the QRH. Hope we don't have to use it.Loyalty? |
Originally Posted by Reroute
(Post 941416)
I wouldn't say they are "mystical" MD-90s, we've recently taken delivery and operating 3, for a total of 19 on the line and there are 12 in storage under going maintenance/conversion. Ed said we'd acquire about 20 more. I'm sticking with at least 49 MD-90s in the fleet in the next 18 months, possibly more.
In storage: ship number-type-date of manufacture 9220 - MD-90-30 - 07-Oct-97 9221 - MD-90-30 - 07-Oct-97 9222 - MD-90-30 - 14-Dec-97 9223 - MD-90-30 - 30-Mar-98 9224 - MD-90-30 - 30-Jun-98 9225 - MD-90-30 - 01-Oct-98 9226 - MD-90-30 - 13-Dec-98 9227 - MD-90-30 - 26-Mar-99 9228 - MD-90-30 - 31-Mar-99 9229 - MD-90-30 - 14-Nov-96 9230 - MD-90-30 - 31-Oct-96 9265 - MD-90-30 - 19-Sept-00 |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 941426)
They are not mystical. I think he is referring to my speculation. As Ed stated 100 Newer Airframes. Even with those 30 and the allowable 70+seat jets, there are still some jets unaccounted for in that figure.
they're made in China! Cheers George |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:29 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands