Well - that's the fuzzy part. Richard just threw out those numbers, without any way of how Delta was going to get to them. It's possible that they might be cuts that were already annouced, or cuts for aircraft going to heavy MX or to get lie-flat seats (good time in my opinion). Also, it's possible that those are "20 equivalent aircraft" which just might mean less flying for the aircraft we have.

It's possible that some of those aircraft might migrate from the Atlantic to the Pacific, or to South America. Or even domestically - they said in the call that domestic was doing well. Those B757-200ERs are very good aircraft for trans-cons, with the Biz Elite seating.

I think those investor calls are all about "we're cutting capacity and raising yields" these days. The stock price is already up 10% today on the news.

Steve Dickson always says they staff for Block hours, not aircraft, so this may not change where pilots are sitting, etc.

Yes, yes... but some of that has been announced, a bunch is at our regional partners, (CRJs and Saabs), some are DC-9s), but some of what they announced are new cuts.

---added:

The Delta press release at http://news.delta.com/index.php?s=43&item=1353 says "Announced the retirement of 130 of Delta's least efficient aircraft over the next 18 months, including the DC9-50 and Saab turbo-prop fleets, and 60 50-seat regional jets"

So, 60 of them are 50 seaters. (prob some already announced)
26 are Saabs that have previously announced.
39 are DC-9-50s (might be off, that's from Delta's fleet page) that were staying, then are going then some might be staying. This press release says they are going...

So that totals 125. That leaves 5 aircraft that I can't account for.

alfa,

It seems that you are trying to have your cake and eat it, too. The amount of posters and the amount of visitors are two different values.

Just because someone doesn't post on the forum does not mean they don't visit the forum. There are a significant amount of people who lurk. So, your challenge for someone to come up with 40 names to prove your point that less than 1/2 of 1% of pilots visit the forums only measures the number of posters, not the visitors.

Now, maybe if you assume that those who don't post on the forums agree with you, then you can say that DALPA need not respond to the needs of the vocal 1/2%. But, that is a pretty big assumption to make, isn't it? ;)

Well in your case, that would keep someone busy.

Carl

I know this is uncomfortable for you alfa. You're used to just throwing up opinions as if they were facts, and nobody around you to challenge you. But lately you've been providing a target rich environment. I also appreciate your need to change what you've previously stated in order to hold on to any shred of your previous argument. For example, you use term "posts" in your above post. But this is what you said earlier:

Did you catch it? Did you really think we wouldn't notice you changing your original premise from posters to visitors? And just for the record, this thread has 64,600 + posts, and over 5,963,000 views. That's about 92 views for every 1 post. Almost 100 to 1! The DPA thread has over 5,200 posts and over 169,700 views for about 32 views for every 1 post.

You can continue to ignore the power of the internet, but it's just whistling past the graveyard. ALPA is no longer the sole owner of information. I know this scares you. I know you feel all you can do is denigrate anyone who participates in this sacrilegious counter-culture movement, but you just look silly doing so.

Carl

Okay, you are making my point. My point was that the sentiments displayed on the web boards are from a small number of posters and do not represent the majority of pilots. It seems you agree with that.

I have no doubt that there are many lurkers on this board and on the ALPA board. Absent a mind reading device, it is difficult to gauge the opinions of the lurkers and I don't attempt to. That is why a rep has to make the effort to go out and engage with his pilots. That is why Wilson Polling is used. That is why a rep has to have the courage to ignore the loudest voices and listen to the most voices even if that means the forum crowd will call you names.

There has not been one TA at Delta that had even close to a significant amount of support from the forum, including C2K. Yet they have all passed so far. The forum crowd attributes that to the rest of the pilots being uneducated, sheep, fearful, mindless robots, etc. In short, they don't respect their fellow pilots and they don't value their opinions. So I repeat back to the forum crowd, no offense, but you don't represent the majority. Never have, probably never will. Your voice represents one pilot among 12000 and that's it. Same goes for me.

Oh great, Carl, I am sorry I used visit instead of post. For the rest of the world that understood exactly what I meant you know the meaning of my original post which was the opinions POSTED on the web boards do not represent the majority of pilots. Tell me Carl, how do you gauge the opinions of the non-posters. Please let me know your secret.

Now you have confirmed my original point. You can't find the numbers to support your claim and thus you deflect and attack which is about all you are good for. Another worthless post from another sideline brick thrower, too afraid to get into the arena.

To be more accurate that is why the questions written for Wilson Polling are either loaded/skewed or don't have a multiple choice answer that would accurately represent many of the pilots. I would not hold up Wilson Polling numbers as being any more accurate than the intended result of the question and answer author(s).

It's a lot like elections, if you put "None of the Above" or "All of the Above" as choices, your results would be markedly different.

Thanks Carl - I was trying to make a joke :cool:

Don't forget the incorrect use of you're, your, and they're :)

Thanks Nosmo. Works great on my Xoom with Android 3.0.1