|
Originally Posted by Express pilot
(Post 1133838)
Yes it should go to pilot #1, you are still on long call and next for flying even though you have a SC the next day. They have called me at night and assigned a trip and taken me off SC. You can call ALPA on Mon and I'm sure they would tell you the same thing.
Originally Posted by Express pilot
(Post 1133838)
But I wouldn't put it passed Scheduling to just do what they want. The last few months I have been 2 for 3 on items they have missed with giving out trips. I was told sorry new people.
|
Originally Posted by NuGuy
(Post 1133527)
As always, Slow's press releases are only part of the truth:
1) How many of those DAL aircraft on order are slated to replace airframes currently on the property? 2) DCI is 100 aircraft smaller....what was the change of gauge of the DCI makeup? How many of the smaller 50 seat RJs, which do not directly replace mainline flying, left the DCI property, in exchange for 70-76 seat airframes arriving, which DO replace mainline flying? It's great if 200 50 seaters left the DCI property. Whats not so great is when they are replaced by 100 76 seat aircraft that parks 100 aircraft at the mainline. Nu 1. The new aircraft orders are designed to be capacity neutral. Delta retains options on 737-900's, 777's and MD-90's for delivery in 2013 and thereafter. 2. DCI gauge has increased to an average of 58 seats per aircraft. According to Delta's 10-K, DCI capacity and traffic dropped 2% last year. Mainline traffic was flat on a 1% capacity increase. If you look at scheduled system departures from the OAG, DCI peaked in January 2010 at 60.4%. They are down to 57.4% of system departures in March, 2012. If you look at system ASM's (again from OAG) they were at 14.5% of system ASM's in January 2010, and will be at 13.8% of ASM's in March 2012. Your assertion that they are replacing mainline flying doesn't match with the math. DCI as a percentage of Delta flying got smaller. |
Originally Posted by NuGuy
(Post 1133394)
Do you really want DALPA to be like a "big business", Slow?
I like efficientcy. I like transparency better. As to your last point, that's what I've been trying to tell folks here. To get to the top, you need to start at the bottom. You didn't answer my question...;) Any example...doesn't have to be big business or the Federal .gov. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1133671)
Sort of ... .
We need a competitive small jet that we fly. I hear the MX reliability of the Q400 is not good. Have you looked at those numbers.? Just curious as I don't know if it is true. |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1133849)
Bar,
I hear the MX reliability of the Q400 is not good. Have you looked at those numbers.? Just curious as I don't know if it is true. Have you looked at the reliability of DCI in general? :eek: Just because it's unreliable or low quality doesn't mean our management won't gravitate to it if they think it saves them a few bucks on the next quarterly report. |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1133849)
Bar,
I hear the MX reliability of the Q400 is not good. Have you looked at those numbers.? Just curious as I don't know if it is true. It's my opinion that we need additional scope language covering aircraft in this class with "nextgen" powerplants. |
Originally Posted by DAL 88 Driver
(Post 1133864)
Johnso,
Have you looked at the reliability of DCI in general? :eek: Just because it's unreliable or low quality doesn't mean our management won't gravitate to it if they think it saves them a few bucks on the next quarterly report.
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1133865)
It's not just the MX reliability. The Q400 has been available for sale since 2000. Out of a total production of 383 aircraft (including all the military models) I think there are less than 60 flying in the US, and Bombardier only plans to deliver 28 worldwide this year. Their production backlog is just 29 airplanes. Compared to CRJ sales during the same period the Q has not been popular with Bombardier's customers. PCL says the Q400 contract is the worst financial performer in their portfolio.
It's my opinion that we need additional scope language covering aircraft in this class with "nextgen" powerplants. |
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1133845)
The answers you seek are found in the 10-K that was released this past week.
1. The new aircraft orders are designed to be capacity neutral. Delta retains options on 737-900's, 777's and MD-90's for delivery in 2013 and thereafter. 2. DCI gauge has increased to an average of 58 seats per aircraft. According to Delta's 10-K, DCI capacity and traffic dropped 2% last year. Mainline traffic was flat on a 1% capacity increase. If you look at scheduled system departures from the OAG, DCI peaked in January 2010 at 60.4%. They are down to 57.4% of system departures in March, 2012. If you look at system ASM's (again from OAG) they were at 14.5% of system ASM's in January 2010, and will be at 13.8% of ASM's in March 2012. Your assertion that they are replacing mainline flying doesn't match with the math. DCI as a percentage of Delta flying got smaller. |
Interest survey from the guys who aren't hiding the survey results. So far over 1,100 pilots had voted and over 80% say the raise should be in the 20% - 50% range. Vote up guys & gals if you haven't already voted.
|
Originally Posted by Ferd149
(Post 1133873)
Does Alaska do anything to these numbers?
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:49 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands