Rebuttal, from last year. :)

Delta to equip 11,000 pilots with Microsoft Surface 2 electronic flight bags



I win :) I think it had more to do with figuring out which penalty laps fit with which South America trip. A round trip to Birmingham makes so much sense before a leg to Bogota during thunderstorm season in the South. Charleston .. Belize? What could go wrong? I mean, airports within 400nm of Atlanta never get ground stops do they?

Good one, Bar! :D

But I'm still not convinced that reprogramming 5:15 ADG equates to the same level of difficulty as the EFB project.

Ever taken an early morning flight into a hub on a regional jet? It was probably a CDO.

If I recall the LOA proposal didn't segregate CDOs from the general pairing pool and I agree that is a mistake. Too easy to get the wrong combination of regular trip and CDO.

CDOs on their own line with the proper work rules are a different animal. If you could get six hours behind the door each night, work three nights a week and get paid 84 hours a month would you be interested in CDOs? Those are the kind of CDO I'm talking about. As I mentioned before, I seriously doubt the company is interested in creating a new class of inefficient (from the cost side) pilots. They'd have to give way more than they are worth.

I'm done talking about CDOs. I don't even really care about them. I guess the topic came up at a time when I didn't have anything better to do.

Your last sentence is the best. I agree with other posters in that SDPs/CDOs as tentatively agreed to in our most recent LOA were a disaster in the making. I have personally enjoyed not having them at DAL. I would be surprised if the company would agree to a system that I would find acceptable (one hour block time max, only extendable by up to 15 minutes, 6 hours behind a door minimum, never reducible below that--ever--and pay 7+ hours).

I will not chime in on this subject again unless I see them in a C2015 TA, whenever that might happen! Anything else is just message board talk--though in this case, I find it to be a very good conversation.

Yeah, I get it. You don't really care. Sorry to beat a dead horse but I still think you're missing the point and don't want to see bad gouge put out there about this (which could potentially lead to these things being brought up again in future negotiations).

I don't care if I work two nights a week and get paid 100 hours. Flying fatigued is still flying fatigued. It's not worth it. It's not responsible.

Six hours "behind the door" is only going to yield absolutely best case maybe 5 hours of sleep and probably more like 4. If your flight that night to the outstation is late, now you're talking even less sleep.

Again, history shows (remember, no stats but plenty of observation) that pilots who like/bid these do so because they consider it a good deal in terms of time off. They are rationalizing the safety aspect to maximize money and time at home. On paper, it IS a good deal. Until you actually have to fly it and, if you are honest with yourself, find that you are fatigued flying that early morning flight back to base.

The FAA considers flying fatigued to be a really big deal. So does the general public. This is NOT something we need at Delta Air Lines. It's not something I even remotely thought would ever even come up at Delta. It needs to be squashed before it ever gets off the ground.

Did I miss something? I see a lot of talk about CDO's, however that part of negotiations got pulled off the table. Is there more talk about implementing them?

Nothing officially. Just a lot of talk here and on the chitchat forum. Some of the DALPA insiders that frequent both of those forums seem to be very interested in defending them, which leads me to think they haven't given up on the idea. That's the only reason I'm spending so much time on it. It needs to be nipped in the bud before it ever ends up in another negotiation.

Sure. 6 hours behind the door is a different animal. That is not what was being talked about. What was being talked about is unsafe. Period.

You can post all the stats about line makeup and productivity and how great it will be to work 8 days for 150 hours and all that crap. The fact is that these WILL be abused going forward once they are here. IT is wrong to even entertain the idea of this.

I can only hope that you are right that they will be way more inefficient and costly to the company so as to be not worth it.

If they are on any TA, I will be a solid no vote. My only single issue vote.... ever.

I disagree entirely with that point. To wit: FAR117. Also the flying public's willingness to pack full a red eye if it is a little cheaper. It's all talk and nothing more.

Okay. Comment during preflight (so it's on the CVR) that you're really exhausted and didn't get enough sleep last night. Then go out and depart the edge of the runway during an aborted takeoff. See how that goes for you with the FAA. ;)

Seriously though, I understand what you're saying. The sad reality is that money trumps safety. But that's not their official position. And if you fly fatigued and something bad happens, they're going to hold you to their official position not their unofficial position... and they're going to make a really big deal out of it as they hang you out to dry. Just sayin'...