Spacklair started service to Nairobi before us!

 

This would be a nice retirement job. I used the large picture to "enhance" the scenery.

 

I apologize in advance if this woman was run over by the Mallard and this is actually a crime scene photo.

 

So they're into the fake airplanes!?

 

Actually "no relief" is only the preamble to the rest of the discussion on how much loaned out scope to recapture in C2012. But of course there's going to be no relief. With SWA plus as our NMB friendly bargaining floor, how much massive premium we are going to get for any tiny remaining outsourcing left over after we mass recapture our scope loan will be the discussion. If all DCI can outsource from us is 100 fifty seaters, thats still worth a large premium over and above SWA plus because SWA would have to offer a massive premium to SWAPA to get 100 fifty seaters. Our status quo of hundreds and hundreds of fifty seaters and 255 DC-9-10 replacements would be worth many tens of Billions for the company to be allowed to continue to farm out. I doubt they can afford to pay us that.

And you are right about the large T-Props. Much easier to recapture that while they aren't really being flown by DCI in large numbers. As bad as outsourcing 255 fuel efficient DC-9-10 equivalents has been to our careers, outsourcing the same thing only 30% more fuel efficient would be very myopic.

 

Well, actually, not really the same. We in LA have both been downsized AND been outsourced. There's the rub. Internal company maneuverings in terms of equipment and basing is one thing, downsizing a base AND partnering with another company for previous flying is wholly another. I'm sure MSP guys are experiencing some pain...how about going through the same thing with our company AND having another company move in and fly our flying? That's the difference. If DAL contracted with SWA to fly most of the routes out of MSP, I'd get you. DAL has contracted with AK to fly most of the 73 routes out of LA. Get it?

I completely agree with you about language in the PWA regarding base closure and downsizing. There's another, larger elephant in the room and its code share. Some bases are immune, some are not. Mine is, and it sucks in both regards.

 

Nothing funny about it. Their Mngt is all about the bottom line. Whatever will drive the stock price. When asked how much savings they would receive by furloughing all the pilots, the answer was $7-9M. That doesn't sound like much when you're canceling flights due to lack of crews. All pilots have now been given class dates for recall & they are planning on hiring 400+ over the next many years. Will be interesting to see how this all plays out. DAL walks away from routes, AK picks them up and this isn't a violation of scope...WTH?

Baja.

 

Regarding the topic of making sure large turboprops are covered by the C2012 scope clause:

I can speak with a little authority on this subject, being as I flew Q400s for Horizon Air for several years. We operated them in a single-class configuration, 70 seats at first and later 76. Same passenger count as the E175 I fly now, despite a max gross weight of 65k lbs vs 89k lbs. The thing absolutely sips fuel... we're talking roughly half the fuel burn of a E175 at middling altitude cruise, at 360 KTAS vs 440. Break even load factor, even with Horizon's relatively high labor costs, was something like 35%. Its one downfall was reliability. It's an absolute hangar queen. The very best Horizon ever got out of them was around 98% reliability, and that's with in-house maintenance that was very experienced on that airframe. Basically deHavilland was sold to Boeing and then Bombardier during the development, and Bombardier rushed it to market without ironing out all the bugs. That's the one thing that has stopped airlines from ordering these things by the hundreds. But for the reliability problems, it's far more efficient than a jet on any route under 500nm, and is unlimited by most scope clauses.

The reason this is important is that Bombardier has finally started to sell a lot more Q400s in the last few years. As the type becomes more common, the bugs are slowly getting ironed out. Meanwhile Bombardier is planning an even larger type based on the Q400, projected to hold up to 100 passengers. Whatever DAL management's current public position towards turboprops, they will take a very good hard look at this if they see it as a way around scope clauses. It could be an MD80 killer in certain markets. As an outsider looking in, and someone who hopes to be at DAL soon, I'd suggest mentioning turboprop scope in your contract surveys. I'm not sure it's even on DALPA's radar, but it should be.

 

So very true, Jungle. Perhaps you'll be able to flow in time and vote on the contract.

 

WTH, is right...!! I do not want to take another hit on seniority. The growth for our codeshare partners is exponentially greater than ours. This is not right!

If we are anticipating many retirements, how come we aren't hiring, or worrying about hiring?<---This seems odd to me, unless RA wants a 8000 pilot work force. Why else would they shut down NATCO in the mist of a pilot shortage?

ALPA, you better be watching out for this.

TEN