Airline Pilot Central Forums - Details on Delta TA

I think our current scope allows them to do it whenever management wants to do it. You don't see the discretion because it's not prohibited. Now they need to ask our permission. This is a gain because they have to ask first and we have the right to say no. Before they could just do it and we had no recourse.

Deleted....filler

Cubdrick

06-12-2015 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Professor (Post 1903479)

No smaller aircraft in our fleet now or in the future can even do JFK to Europe.

75s fly JFK-DKR. It is feasible to see 75s start flying the traditionally ER served routes or take the 764 LHR flying. Can the 739 or A-321 fly those legs?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

forgot to bid

06-12-2015 07:28 PM

Cubdrick, if I ever meet you, I'm going to be disappointed if you don't look like your avatar picture. :D

cornbeef007

06-12-2015 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cubdrick (Post 1903566)

75s fly JFK-DKR. It is feasible to see 75s start flying the traditionally ER served routes or take the 764 LHR flying. Can the 739 or A-321 fly those legs?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sounds like the 737max would be able to.

slowplay

06-12-2015 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cubdrick (Post 1903566)

75s fly JFK-DKR. It is feasible to see 75s start flying the traditionally ER served routes or take the 764 LHR flying. Can the 739 or A-321 fly those legs?

Neither the A321 or B739 in Delta's configuration have the range even empty to do JFK-LHR eastbound. On a VFR day the 739 might be able to do KEF (5+45). Westbound would be daily technical stops.

notEnuf

06-12-2015 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bananie (Post 1903561)

You missed the first sentence of 1E:

Section 1 C. will not apply to international partner flying under Section 1 E.

This new language provides that same protection for international partner flying on the discretion of the MEC. This is a gain.

Thanks, does the 1.C.3. requirement need full MEC approval (19 member or majority) versus MEC chairman discretion? Or are they to be read as the same requirement?

forgot to bid

06-12-2015 07:47 PM

Scambo1, instead of a Cessna 150 example you should use a Cessna 182 as an example because this particular registration number is the most appropriate :

http://img1.jetphotos.net:8080/img/3...1341326984.jpg

:D

80ktsClamp

06-12-2015 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cubdrick (Post 1903566)

75s fly JFK-DKR. It is feasible to see 75s start flying the traditionally ER served routes or take the 764 LHR flying. Can the 739 or A-321 fly those legs?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The 321NEO-LR will be able to do those.

Cubdrick

06-12-2015 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 1903588)

The 321NEO-LR will be able to do those.

Fantastic! I'm sure the language was intended with good will and not a present/future loophole. [emoji57]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

80ktsClamp

06-12-2015 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cubdrick (Post 1903591)

Fantastic! I'm sure the language was intended with good will and not a present/future loophole. [emoji57]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk