Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-28-2011 | 07:36 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,457
Likes: 0
From: LAX ERA
Lot less button push'en go'en on
05-28-2011 | 08:05 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
From: LAX 350 A
Figures Delta would add their touch of "technology." I guess an iCrew and Travelnet app for iPhone and Adroid is no where in the future? AA and UAL/CAL have this. I sent an AA link to our Delta Technology department for their review. Their response, WOW, simple, clean, fast, but we don't have the resources to make one for us. Like there are any seats anywhere anyway...
BD
05-28-2011 | 08:17 AM
Inventory survival kit ..
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,069
Likes: 0
From: Seeking no jacket required rotations
05-28-2011 | 08:50 AM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
I don't think I said anything close to what you're putting forth. Simply that if you look at the amount of money generated from a typical flight the expense of crew is comes in right above the bottled water. But hey, don't consider it; look at it all from the eyes of management and be happy with that perspective if you prefer.
Good grief Alice. I just wanna know where you get all the numbers that make up the profitability or lack thereof which you used to do your back of the napkin math to state that the flight is profitable. Show me your work. Other than that, it's just weak conjecture on your part that the flight is profitable, much less that it is raking in money. Or I guess it could be that you have never heard of yield management?
05-28-2011 | 09:25 AM
Works Every Weekend
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,506
Likes: 0
From: 737 ATL
Management's argument:
How to Win Past Practice Grievances, Chapter One
05-28-2011 | 09:26 AM
Inventory survival kit ..
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,069
Likes: 0
From: Seeking no jacket required rotations
Duplicate Post from below
Last edited by Nosmo King; 05-28-2011 at 10:40 AM.
05-28-2011 | 09:49 AM
Inventory survival kit ..
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,069
Likes: 0
From: Seeking no jacket required rotations
Scary excerpt from AF447 BEA Report
When the captain returned to the cockpit, 1.5 minutes after the autopilot and auto-thrust had initially disengaged, the Airbus 330 was at 35,000 ft with an angle of attack greater than 40 degrees, losing altitude at 10,000 feet per minute, which is consistent with an aerodynamic condition known as deep stall in which the tail stalls, leaving the airplane in an aerodynamic state that may be a difficult or impossible from which to recover. Less than thirty seconds later, the co-pilot at the controls said, “I don’t have any more indications,” while the other co-pilot said, “we have no valid indications.”
When the captain returned to the cockpit, 1.5 minutes after the autopilot and auto-thrust had initially disengaged, the Airbus 330 was at 35,000 ft with an angle of attack greater than 40 degrees, losing altitude at 10,000 feet per minute, which is consistent with an aerodynamic condition known as deep stall in which the tail stalls, leaving the airplane in an aerodynamic state that may be a difficult or impossible from which to recover. Less than thirty seconds later, the co-pilot at the controls said, “I don’t have any more indications,” while the other co-pilot said, “we have no valid indications.”
Full report here: http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol....mai2011.en.pdf
05-28-2011 | 10:45 AM
Banned
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 793
Likes: 0
Good grief Alice. I just wanna know where you get all the numbers that make up the profitability or lack thereof which you used to do your back of the napkin math to state that the flight is profitable. Show me your work. Other than that, it's just weak conjecture on your part that the flight is profitable, much less that it is raking in money. Or I guess it could be that you have never heard of yield management?
05-28-2011 | 10:57 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Likes: 0
Oh, that's right...airlines have lost more money than they've ever made since the inception of this ridiculous "business."
05-28-2011 | 11:01 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
The legal answer is that it DOES violate our Section 1 but we have not enforced it in the past with AA Eagle at LAX and the lawyers claim that "past practices" will doom us in the System Board. They might be right. But now we'll never know.
Management's argument:
How to Win Past Practice Grievances, Chapter One
Management's argument:
How to Win Past Practice Grievances, Chapter One
It's like a pilot who's run an aircraft off the end of the runway twice telling you how to fly your plane. It makes no sense to say these are the best lawyers in the business when they wrote our section 1, a colossal jewel of what not to do, and then don't even bother to enforce it anyways.
Who in the hell does ALPA have as lawyers?!?!?
If they don't try or win this redefine the definition of air carrier so as to beat back RAH then I sure as hell hope nobody has the gall to tell us to do anything but demand we go to court and have them fired.
BTW, my counter to the American Eagle/AMR thing would be to say AE was never Delta Connection carrier other than to serve as a codeshare in the same vein as Hawaiian. According to the 10K AE is a revenue proration agreement and DCI's are capacity purchase agreements, enough for me to say they have always operated different then RAH.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
