Delta defers 100 seat RFP

Reply Subscribe

Page 6 of 7

« First

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

08-26-2011 | 05:40 AM

#51

Check Essential

Works Every Weekend

Joined: Dec 2007

Posts: 3,506

Likes: 0

From: 737 ATL

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

You could use 1 88 to offer 74ish seats to two cities on 1 plane, using 1 gate and 1 "slot".

Looking at GSO and GSP to ATL, you've got 10 flights each or 20 flights total and 1769 seats a day in one direction between those two cities and ATL.

I don't think that would work financially. Making a "stop" in a Mad dog ain't like making a stop in a city bus. Way too much gas gets consumed in taxi and takeoffs.

08-26-2011 | 06:49 AM

#52

shiznit

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Feb 2009

Posts: 2,642

Likes: 0

From: right for a long, long time

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg

Yes, and the FAA nixed it. They were hoping to make a single category that included some Saudi MD90s with the more advanced cockpit, and 717s. Can you believe that now?

No. The Saudi cockpit layout and the 717 layout are not even close. Just because they have glass doesn't mean commonality. That was a spitball rumor that never had any credibility behind it.

08-26-2011 | 07:11 AM

#53

NuGuy

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Mar 2008

Posts: 4,099

Likes: 86

Quote:

Originally Posted by iaflyer

All Delta's manuals are in a certain format - it would make for a difficult transition to use another airline's style of writing and procedures.

LOL....you mean as different as the fNWA manuals/proceedures and the fDAL manuals/proceedures?

fNWA manuals were crafted from the finest linens and bound in the hides of ancient golden steers that once roamed the Himalayas Mountains. They were painstakingly hand illustrated by scribes using ink forumulated from the milk of the rare South American Nik Nik bug.

If we can make the switch from that, I'm sure we could handle whatever format the 717 manuals are in now.

Nu

08-26-2011 | 08:28 AM

#54

forgot to bid

veut gagner à la loterie

Joined: Apr 2008

Posts: 23,286

Likes: 0

From: Light Chop

Quote:

Originally Posted by acl65pilot

Frankly, if those are your goals, the fourth floor is not where you need to be. You probably need to work a little higher up than that.

Or lower and across the street.

08-26-2011 | 08:38 AM

#55

forgot to bid

veut gagner à la loterie

Joined: Apr 2008

Posts: 23,286

Likes: 0

From: Light Chop

Quote:

Originally Posted by NuGuy

I was looking at AT 737 stuff once and noticed it was heavy on the whatever Boeing said to do, not sure if the 717 is the same but I've got to imagine SWA way is not necessarily as Boeing oriented?

08-26-2011 | 08:44 AM

#56

forgot to bid

veut gagner à la loterie

Joined: Apr 2008

Posts: 23,286

Likes: 0

From: Light Chop

Quote:

Originally Posted by Check Essential

I don't think that would work financially. Making a "stop" in a Mad dog ain't like making a stop in a city bus. Way too much gas gets consumed in taxi and takeoffs.

The only thing as a whole though would mean 1 airplane ownership cost rather than 2 with the smaller 2 costing more. Not to mention 1 gate and ground crew instead of 2 in ATL and those 2 jets also will burn taxi and TO fuel as well. Works for SWA on slighty smaller more expensive to have albeit burning less fuel jets.

Now trying to get an 88 brakes to take to 45 min hops is a different issue.

08-26-2011 | 08:52 AM

#57

ExAF

Get's Every Day Off

Joined: Oct 2006

Posts: 1,864

Likes: 0

From: Retired

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

I was looking at AT 737 stuff once and noticed it was heavy on the whatever Boeing said to do, not sure if the 717 is the same but I've got to imagine SWA way is not necessarily as Boeing oriented?

I find it hard to believe that the AT stuff could be any worse than the DAL stuff.

08-26-2011 | 09:28 AM

#58

Bucking Bar

Thread Starter

Can't abide NAI

Joined: Jun 2007

Posts: 12,078

Likes: 15

From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

Now trying to get an 88 brakes to take to 45 min hops is a different issue.

Brakes, what brakes?

I thought that's why Douglas products just ran off in the grass ... to help them get slowed down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

I was looking at AT 737 stuff once and noticed it was heavy on the whatever Boeing said to do, not sure if the 717 is the same but I've got to imagine SWA way is not necessarily as Boeing oriented?

Someone uses that checklist printed on the yoke, right? There has to be some reason Boeing bothered.

08-26-2011 | 09:51 AM

#59

forgot to bid

veut gagner à la loterie

Joined: Apr 2008

Posts: 23,286

Likes: 0

From: Light Chop

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar

Brakes, what brakes?

I thought that's why Douglas products just ran off in the grass ... to help them get slowed down.Someone uses that checklist printed on the yoke, right? There has to be some reason Boeing bothered.

I never thought of that, who uses that checklist??

08-26-2011 | 09:54 AM

#60

forgot to bid

veut gagner à la loterie

Joined: Apr 2008

Posts: 23,286

Likes: 0

From: Light Chop

Quote:

Originally Posted by ExAF

I find it hard to believe that the AT stuff could be any worse than the DAL stuff.

Boeing books. blah. But yet, you somehow learn enough to fly the airplane just fine but feel you never learned anything. I think they're designed to subliminally teach you the minimum.

What's funny though is one of the DGS guys I had on my 88 initial had written the FCTM for the 88. He said basically he was handed the 777 book and told to match that. So it was written in house to be a Boeing book.

?