Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: A-320/A
Posts: 588
I remember reading in the paper about a DAL crew that stopped in Nome, AK due to pilot fatigue. If I recall, it doubled the population of the city when the aircraft landed. Had to bunk pax in the school gym, on cots or something. Can anybody fill in some details????
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: A-320/A
Posts: 588
I also remember maybe half a dozen times passing over a DAL MD-11 on NWAs NRT-MSP route (DAL was probably going to JFK, or maybe ATL?) when the MD-11 was at FL270 till fuel was burned off, and enabling a climb. We were usually 4,000' above them, sometimes more. That's gotta' be expensive
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Position: Nice while it lasted
Posts: 326
Another great example of a weak scope clause.
When I flew for Atlas, 5 of China Air's 8 freighters, all painted in China colors, were owned and flown by Atlas. Not many people may know this, but back in '97 NWA came very, very close to selling its freight operation to Atlas. Atlas was going to get all eight NWA freighters on a 10 year contract. Only NWA ALPA stopped it.
Airlines will exploit weak scope clauses, even up to the most senior seats. It's all about scope, baby. SCOPE. SCOPE. SCOPE.
When I flew for Atlas, 5 of China Air's 8 freighters, all painted in China colors, were owned and flown by Atlas. Not many people may know this, but back in '97 NWA came very, very close to selling its freight operation to Atlas. Atlas was going to get all eight NWA freighters on a 10 year contract. Only NWA ALPA stopped it.
Airlines will exploit weak scope clauses, even up to the most senior seats. It's all about scope, baby. SCOPE. SCOPE. SCOPE.
Just wait till they start selling tickets on Skyteam *operated by GoJet dba Delta dba Skyteam. Your scope is weaker than you think.
I actually asked someone to post any details about this a few months ago. If it's the same one you are talking about, it was ATL-NRT which stopped in PDX because of the rest bunk. I'll try and find it again.
Another great example of a weak scope clause.
When I flew for Atlas, 5 of China Air's 8 freighters, all painted in China colors, were owned and flown by Atlas. Not many people may know this, but back in '97 NWA came very, very close to selling its freight operation to Atlas. Atlas was going to get all eight NWA freighters on a 10 year contract. Only NWA ALPA stopped it.
Airlines will exploit weak scope clauses, even up to the most senior seats. It's all about scope, baby. SCOPE. SCOPE. SCOPE.
When I flew for Atlas, 5 of China Air's 8 freighters, all painted in China colors, were owned and flown by Atlas. Not many people may know this, but back in '97 NWA came very, very close to selling its freight operation to Atlas. Atlas was going to get all eight NWA freighters on a 10 year contract. Only NWA ALPA stopped it.
Airlines will exploit weak scope clauses, even up to the most senior seats. It's all about scope, baby. SCOPE. SCOPE. SCOPE.
Actually those B747-8F'S are flying at GSS "GLOBAL SUPPLY SYSTEMS"
Atlas Air owns 49% and BA owns 51%.
Atlas owns the 3 -8 GSS are flying.
Global Supply Systems - commercial aircraft operations
As far as the NWA freight operation, Atlas has its ops at the former NWA building and ramp.
Happy Holidays
Random thoughts ...
With the Continental/United merger wrapping up soon, do you think DAL we be at a disadvantage once their synergies realize? I ask because they have an impressive wide body fleet, and most of their hubs are located at airports with large O&D demand.
DAL only has ATL and NYC with large O&E. I don't consider LAX because it seems our company doesn't want to compete there ... or at least it is giving it away to Alaska. Our other hubs don't make it in the top ten of O&D
We chased SWA out of SLC but they went to DEN and have set up an impressive hub there. Why didn't our management see the potential in DEN like SWA did?
With the Continental/United merger wrapping up soon, do you think DAL we be at a disadvantage once their synergies realize? I ask because they have an impressive wide body fleet, and most of their hubs are located at airports with large O&D demand.
DAL only has ATL and NYC with large O&E. I don't consider LAX because it seems our company doesn't want to compete there ... or at least it is giving it away to Alaska. Our other hubs don't make it in the top ten of O&D
We chased SWA out of SLC but they went to DEN and have set up an impressive hub there. Why didn't our management see the potential in DEN like SWA did?
So I found some interesting numbers, some don't show us far behind except in the super premium WB point of view, but overall we will one day be behind.
We have according to wiki a NB fleet of 565 airplanes and a WB/ER fleet of 144 aircraft for a total of 709.
United has a NB fleet of 546 and WB/ER of 156 for a total of 702. So we're not far off. We have a slightly larger NB and they have a slightly large WB fleet and we are overall very very slightly larger.
In seat count (fleet x smallest seating capacity for type because of incomplete data) they have 84,501 seats in their NBs and 38,807 in their WBs for a total of 123,308 seats or 175 per aircraft and 248 per WB/ER aircraft. For us, nearly the same. 84,564 in NB and 35,731 in WB/ER for a total of 120,295 seats and an average of 170 per aircraft and 248 per WB/ER.
Our order book is for 100 739s, 9 MD90s, 2 763ER and 18 787s. We want to add 129 aircraft. United wants to add 240 and really a net of around 174 airplanes given they want to park 744s for A350s and 763/762s in favor of 787s.
Anyways, the end result is we could one day have a fleet of 838 airplanes while they have 876. They'd have a WB fleet of 265 aircraft and we'd have 164 (if we don't retire anything and they retire the 744/762/763 as planned). It's about a 10% difference in total seat inventory in their favor. So it's not as big as it seems because of the large 763 fleet at DAL to offset the massive 777 fleet of 74 jets vs our 18!!
Add in 744s and they CURRENTLY have a fleet of super premium widebodies that totals 97 to our 33. But again, just in today's terms we offer nearly the same seat inventory and WB fleet because of our 58 763s and 32 A330s.
They will blow us out of the water one day though, it won't be so much in seat inventory as it is fleet size and they will of course retire some jets.
So do we bet on 767-300s or Super Premium Widebodies?
Or let's say this more correctly, do we bet on 767-300s flown by us and outsourcing for the big heavy metal?
I have the answer and I believe it's 100% correct. My answer? Is to ask Gloopy for his thoughts, add in George, and there ya go.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post