Great you don't commute, yet.....I'd live in base too if delta didn't stire the pot over and over. Had I done what you suggest and picked up the family and moved years ago I'd be hosed now as delta just shut down the base. Then what? Uproot the family again and hope for the best? Yeah right :cool:

Unless you're senior in a "secure" base, you're only one bid away from the potential of commuting and not by choice.

It's not world revolving around commuters its the reality that delta makes happen. Shifting planes, hours, bases etc and all of it done without pilot input

+1

The myth of reduced DCI airframes is as you state.

How many routes, formerly mainline NB are now flown by 70-76 seaters?

Now we hear that they'll be used to develop routes until they are profitable and we can put a NB on it? You mean the ones that used to be NB?

More likely we'll see them continue to be flown to outsourced 70-76 seaters more profitably (or maybe not, but a workforce they can continuously whipsaw against each other).

Just like AK, perhaps it's even profitable for the corporation. The problem is we are not doing the flying, and no amount of profit sharing will make up for the stagnated career progression.

http://chrisoncars.com/wp-content/up..._side_01-1.gif

Management is driving, ALPA in the back seat, line pilots watching......

TANSTAAFL

As was pointed out around page 8854, DL, 20 years ago, did a huge amount of sub-100 seat flying with DC-9-30 and the like. At EAL, we had loads of 6-segment trips out of ATL in DC-9s. Now all that flying is still being done by sub-100 seaters, still not growing except maybe some by frequency, but just by the outsourced lines. The mistake was to let it become outsourced for reasons that, at the time, made sense to both the corporations and ALPA.

Now, ALPA has conflict of interest that should be eliminated, either by leaving ALPA or having ALPA divest itself of representing the RJ groups. I'm afraid that the anti-trust laws do not apply to unions.

GF

Or we could have a National Seniority list and all be one big happy union! :p

Hmmm...
Have the bean counters finally found a way to "shrink to profitability"?
It never worked in the past but it appears to be working now.

Yes,

The numbers slow talked about didn't include any of the JVs. What about Alaska?

Fixed it for you. :)

Just think of how much more profitable the company can become. :rolleyes:

TANSTAAFL,

You are correct to question what you have been promised. Up gauging is not going to happen until we have the right sized, modern, competitive equipment available to us. A 1950's tech DC-9, or even 1980's tech derivative isn't it. Three factors work against us:

• The gigantic scope gap between 76 seats and 150. In reality a MD88 is more than twice the capacity.
• Sudden increases in capacity move the demand curve to the right. Prices fall significantly.
• The MD88 is more expensive to operate on a per seat basis.

Again, we must force Delta to invest in competitive equipment for its pilots to fly. When ALPA and Management tell us fairy tales about upgauging, we need to diplomatically interrupt them (or do it in the Q&A) and remind them of the truth.

Sort of ... .

• Legacy carriers and Southwest have shown remarkable capacity discipline. This has driven prices up. It is a temporary gain to be sure. Nature abhors a vacuum and carriers like Spirit will grow to fill it as quickly as they can. Our action (including AA and United) might even save Virgin America.
• We don't own the RJ's. As capacity has shrunk it has forced Delta's partners into losses. The 50 seaters can not be re-deployed outside a network and remain profitable. They have to come up with a "plan B."
• Plan B is probably going to be high performance turboprops, which are not currently constrained by our scope. Bombardier will gladly resupply the market. The Q-400 has great operating numbers, but allegedly passengers don't like it. It's other problem is it's 737-800 sized footprint which makes it a bit of an elephant at a ramp developed for 50 seat RJ's. (ALPA is aware and I expect turboprop scope to be a part of C2012)

We need a competitive small jet that we fly.

I don't think shrinkage is linear. It isn't a long term strategy. The curve has to turn somewhere. As ACL points out, at some point the network loses efficiency. I'd say it loses relevance.