|
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1166197)
I tried over and over and over again to keep the DPA/DALPA thing out of this thread, but it was rarely assisted.
I guess I'm doing things right when I'm accused by the DPA people of being biased for DALPA and vice versa by the DALPA people. I think you and the mods should talk, and I think posters ought to consider helping. I don't really see a way you can get into the crux of the discussion about what we're doing to further our goals, when it's aparent many people are only interested in who would be doing whatever we'll do. Got a post that's mostly talking which is the best CBA? Moderate it home. It has a home, it's just temporarily lost in the L&G. Guide it home, ever so gently, and lovingly. |
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1166178)
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." John Adams, 'Argument in Defense of the Soldiers in the Boston Massacre Trials,' December 1770
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1166195)
Ironic that someone would quote John Adams to support tyranny.
Carl |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1166204)
The lines that you bolded from the opener are what are so incredibly vague that they are of little substance.
I do take them at their word that they will improve Scope. I do understand there is a lot to do there, at both ends of the gauge spectrum. I can live with a "conceptual" opener. I just want "improve" to mean "improve". But never mind the negotiators: I'm curious about Slowplay's vision. What do you think we should do with the DCI issue, Slowplay? |
Originally Posted by Sink r8
(Post 1166213)
Hopefully a sign that negotiators are considering a number of fresh approaches to the issue.
I do take them at their word that they will improve Scope. I do understand there is a lot to do there, at both ends of the gauge spectrum. But never mind the negotiators: I'm curious about Slowplay's vision. What do you think we should do with the DCI issue, Slowplay? |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1166197)
I tried over and over and over again to keep the DPA/DALPA thing out of this thread, but it was rarely assisted.
Carl |
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1166200)
If the definition were changed over 50 seat aircraft like the Q400 or new generation follow-on would count against the permitted aircraft limit. Right now as long as they're under the gross weight limit they don't.
It is definitely a tightening of scope. My perspective: I thought the prop limit in the contract already is 76 seats. The new definition doesn't have seat limits. Allowing geared turbofans enables newer gen aircraft at DCI, IOW it doesn't remove them...IOW not a tightening of scope, instead extending the outsourcing. If geared turbofans were NOT permitted, that would be a tightening of scope and certainly contracts would be sunsetted in somebody's lifetime. |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1166215)
Hey, come on Clamp. When you asked me to stop, I stopped. I think the vast majority of us DPA supporters did so also. Other DALPA guys have recently accused us of posting DPA stuff when no such thing occurred in an attempt to shut down posts they didn't like. When they did that, it was/is the DPA guys that tell them to take it to the other thread.
Carl The other mods weren't helping me keep the DALPA/DPA stuff out of this thread (or gave up earlier), so honestly I just gave up... that is what I was talking about. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1166214)
Seconded ... yielding the floor to the Distinguished Gentleman.
Carl |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1166219)
I wasn't talking about you, Carl. :) You were never the problem.
The other mods weren't helping me keep the DALPA/DPA stuff out of this thread (or gave up earlier), so honestly I just gave up... that is what I was talking about. Carl |
Originally Posted by scambo1
(Post 1166218)
My perspective:
I thought the prop limit in the contract already is 76 seats. The new definition doesn't have seat limits. Allowing geared turbofans enables newer gen aircraft at DCI, IOW it doesn't remove them...IOW not a tightening of scope, instead extending the outsourcing. If geared turbofans were NOT permitted, that would be a tightening of scope and certainly contracts would be sunsetted in somebody's lifetime. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:46 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands