Originally Posted by TOGA LK (Post 1003213)

I imagine the shift in flying from Delta to Alaska is to focus the premium narrow bodies (737/320) elsewhere in the system, target other markets.

Originally Posted by buzzpat (Post 1003323)

If that means focusing the 73 on MSP, DTW and JFK, I think you're onto something. It used to be CUN, PVR, MEX, in addition to JFK, BOS, FLL, etc. Alaska does most of that for us now. I hope its profiting somebody because I'm getting pretty tired of Livonia, MI.;)

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1003311)

Are we still taking a little trickle of new hires?

Sorry to hear some folks are having problems. The DC9 / MD88 is a anachronistic jet that would be a rather harsh change is the new hire had gained nearly all their experience in modern, well designed, well functioning equipment. In our class the single seat guys found the MD88 to be very challenging, but they had the right mind set, knew where to focus their energies and when to be humble. All but one made it through. The guy we lost also ended up at Southwest and I hear he's doing great on the 737.

For the civilians, time in an older turboprop would likely be of more value than RJ time. The recent generation of regional jets are very well designed and easy to fly. Aviation has advanced a lot in the half century which has elapsed since the Douglas engineers drew the first design sketches on cave walls.

Certainly our skills on EP's were sharpest on the E120. That thing broke in some of the most dramatic ways at least one a month.

Originally Posted by cni187 (Post 1003241)

HEY! The Mad Dog has glass! Now only if it would quit fogging up so we could see it!

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1003311)

anachronistic jet

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1003311)

For the civilians, time in an older turboprop would likely be of more value than RJ time. The recent generation of regional jets are very well designed and easy to fly. Aviation has advanced a lot in the half century which has elapsed since the Douglas engineers drew the first design sketches on cave walls.

Certainly our skills on EP's were sharpest on the E120. That thing broke in some of the most dramatic ways at least one a month.

Originally Posted by Columbia (Post 1003141)

Better to save that stuff for APC. :)

Originally Posted by TOGA LK (Post 1003213)

If 80% of Delta pilots had Alaskan payrates, hourly quarantees and retirement it would be a step up. Delta pilot costs are lower than Alaska for anyone other than a newhire, yet Delta continues to transfer flying to them.

*Went back and looked on APC, for newhires its about dead even when you consider the higher hourly and lower monthly guarantee. With the contract (greenslips, etc) there is likely better career earnings at Delta.

I imagine the shift in flying from Delta to Alaska is to focus the premium narrow bodies (737/320) elsewhere in the system, target other markets.

Originally Posted by TANSTAAFL (Post 1003358)

So lack of basic airmanship is now the aircraft's fault? Wow. I guess you are also saying today's crop of pilots are not as good as their predecessors?

Originally Posted by iaflyer (Post 1003352)

I live here and I'm tired of Livonia!

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1003398)

I don't know. Ask the Air Force test pilots who were unable to master the Wright Flyer a couple of years ago. :rolleyes:

I'm not drawing comparisons between our 757 and our MD88 pilots, but would you question that one airplane is more "pilot friendly" than the other.