|
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 568209)
I appreciate the level of detail that some are drilling down in to, but I think we have to remember one point that is EXTREMELY important in my opinion:
Our union chose to not even fight! Our union chose to settle out of court/arbitration. Our union chose this option on the single most important issue in any contract. THAT is a significant problem in our union. Carl Right now we don't seem to have a objective scope policy. Right now scope = bargaining credits and the result is management expects to be able to violate scope and barter to resolve the contractual breach. Without a clear policy we will always be reactive and the easy solution is a concession. What would happen if Delta just decided to cut pay? Obviously we know that number and don't deviate, but our scope policy is much less objective. One of my goals with the LEC44 resolution is to get some clarification and objectives that will serve as a benchmark for future activity. Are we taking it back? Are we done giving away flying? Is the flying below 122 seats and 4,200 miles important to us? Answers to those questions will define the answer to the Compass Representational Question. It is hard to "sell" your own pilots. If they are Delta pilots we are much less likely to trade them away later. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 568401)
Delta management likes the first class seats. We can fly every aircraft in the fleet with more seats and take out first class. The feel they generate more revenue with first class then more overall seats in the aircraft. we have tried the one class flying several times at Delta and it never offset the lost revenue the big seats generate. If we get the airframes at the mainline I don't think they will add any seats.
Delta realized FC was not needed on Shuttle. Why are we outsourcing 3+ hour flights? What's regional about that? Maybe we should rename them Continental Jets, or Western Atlantic Jets. When they put an HDG on an RJ and a big life raft, what are we going to say? |
Originally Posted by Joemerchant
(Post 568686)
Then why are you whining? You work for the carrier that "creates" the flying, yet you sound pretty upset....Why is that?
The very fact you are against a CPZ merger helps build support among everyone else. Thank you. |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 568414)
The E-series has a variant that can take 120 or so people 4000 miles. Now do we want that at DCI? I don't and that is exactly where it is going given our current trend vector.
E-190 98-114 seats, 2400 nm range E-195 108-122 seats, 2200 nm range. The site mentions close to 4000 km, and hopefully this is where the confusion came from unless I missed something else. Am NOT poking, just want accurate info here on this very important issue. |
It is an Variant of the 195. And it was not a mistake.
Embraer Lineage 1000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Though a business jet version, it can and and will be reconfigured to be used at a 737-700 replacement. They have announced that they are working on this. Further more, they are looking at a new series of jets to go beyond the E-jet capabilities. |
I could only find the STD, LR, or AR variants on their site, and all top out at under 3000 nm carrying nothing as per their range vs payload charts. are they making another variant and where is that info? just curious.
|
I will look for the info I have on their announcement of this. I have it around here somewhere. Just give me a little bit. The kids are playing havoc on my research today. :)
|
I'm not 100% sure, but I think the corporate versions have longer range because they carry extra fuel tanks which aren't found on commercial versions due to weight issues. The premise is that a corporate version won't be carrying 100 people (or whatever the number is) plus all their baggage.
I know the Legacy, which is the corporate version of the EMB135, has a ventral tank and winglets which isn't found on the airline version. Maybe that's why the Lineage has a 4000 mile range, but I don't think the airplane was ever designed to be able to carry fuel for that range plus a full passenger load. I'm sure they can build a variant that way but it would be so weight restricted it wouldn't be economically feasible. But that's just my guess. I'm probably wrong. |
The Lineage 1000 is largely based on the successful Embraer passenger jet, the E-190. The greatest change in the Lineage 1000 is the added fuel tanks in the lower deck cargo hold space, nearly doubling the range of the jet. ...The Lineage 1000 is only topped in available space by the 737 and A319 and A318 .... The Lineage 1000 received its certification from Brazil's ANAC and from EASA in December 2008. It was certified by the USA Federal Aviation Administration on 7 January 2009.[3] The first two production aircraft were delivered in December 2008. General characteristics * Length: 36.24 m (118 ft 11 in) * Wingspan: 28.72 m (94 ft 3 in) * Height: 10.28 m (34 ft 7 in) * Max takeoff weight: 55,000 kg (121,252 lb) Bombardier Challenger 600 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia to http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace...er-crj1000.jpg By Lori Ranson, Aviation Daily Bombardier's launch of the 100 seat CRJ1000 could help the airframer penetrate the low-cost carrier market, and the company plans to target those airlines with the new aircraft. The airframer debuted the CRJ1000 last month, with Air France subsidiary Brit Air, Italian airline My Air and an unnamed customer placing a total of 38 firm orders for the derivative of Bombardier's CRJ-700/900 family of regional jets. Ngo noted Bombardier is not unaware of the potential use by LCCs of the CRJ-700/900/1000, but it hasn't seen "such use in the U.S." He noted, however, that European low-cost carriers have tapped into the aircraft family, noting that AtlasJet leased two CRJ-700s before buying -900s outright. My Air's decision to buy the CRJ1000 came because its Airbus A320 aircraft were not satisfying its full fleet requirements. |
Have you written your reps today???
If not, I highly recommend you cut and paste the jpeg link above, with the related article, and email this to your reps! |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:52 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands