|
Originally Posted by Dirtdiver
(Post 2221322)
The topic was stupid things they do with no cost benefit. Their reason has been shortage of crews in SEA, yet half a dozen AEs come and go with no positions or backfills.
|
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 2221300)
I say pull it down immediately.
So nyah. |
Originally Posted by JamesBond
(Post 2221435)
I say let's wait and see.
So nyah. |
Originally Posted by surfnski
(Post 2221028)
So looks like DFW, MCO, and RDU for starters. Never saw that coming. (Eye roll) Unknown negative effect on staffing? Add that to the NO column for me. Sorry.
|
Originally Posted by MD88Driver
(Post 2221537)
How do you know those 3? Did I miss something in a NN? Thanks!
Those 3 cities were randomly chosen for the map just to demonstrate what airports could be eligible for a Virtual Base under the language Apologies if that got anyone's hopes up. We have no inside information and there was no intent to suggest that those will be Virtual Bases |
Originally Posted by BtoA
(Post 2221478)
Of course you do. I have not seen a concession that you have not vehemently supported yet.
https://media2.giphy.com/media/90rLh...oM/200w.gif#40 |
Originally Posted by MD88Driver
(Post 2221537)
How do you know those 3? Did I miss something in a NN? Thanks!
BOS also makes sense. We have lots of domestic flights on the 757, plus the international flights that we do there. In the summer they use A330's and 764's but there is enough service for a small base if management has the discretion of shrinking it without penalty. I also see a seasonal A330 base in MSP. Possibly even PDX, PHL, 7ER for the summer. I haven't been to DFW in a couple years but from what I remember, we only have 2-3 gates and don't have common equipment flying in and out of there, same with ORD. Every narrow body aircraft we own makes an appearance daily, which isn't conducive to a pilot base. Look to the airports with a lot of the same type flying in regularly. Like CVG and the A320. :eek: |
If I'm reading the NN correctly, it's virtually impossible to have a virtual base with equipment larger than 75/767. The ocean crossing restrictions see to that. Also any current base cannot be a virtual base. From the NN: A virtual base will not be located at an existing pilot base, e.g., SEA cannot be used for a 777 virtual base.
Denny |
Originally Posted by JamesBond
(Post 2221704)
And I have yet to see you post anything where you don't light your hair on fire and run around with both arms flailing like some 5th graders on lunch recess.
https://media2.giphy.com/media/90rLh...oM/200w.gif#40 |
Originally Posted by Big E 757
(Post 2221723)
The only one of those three that even makes sense is MCO as a 7ER VB. The reason I see MGT wanting a VB is in a large "focus city" like MCO or BOS with a lot of ops with the same equipment. MCO could support a small ER base where management had the luxury of flexing up or down their staffing needs without displacements costing them money and back flow in the training department. (That is why JB wants this and I don't blame him. If I had any hope of being based at home for even part of the year, and not commuting, I'd be all over this.)
BOS also makes sense. We have lots of domestic flights on the 757, plus the international flights that we do there. In the summer they use A330's and 764's but there is enough service for a small base if management has the discretion of shrinking it without penalty. I also see a seasonal A330 base in MSP. Possibly even PDX, PHL, 7ER for the summer. I haven't been to DFW in a couple years but from what I remember, we only have 2-3 gates and don't have common equipment flying in and out of there, same with ORD. Every narrow body aircraft we own makes an appearance daily, which isn't conducive to a pilot base. Look to the airports with a lot of the same type flying in regularly. Like CVG and the A320. :eek: |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:22 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands