New flaw in TA scope
 

This is what DCI will look like in 2020...

2020 with new TA
111 50 seaters
325 70+ seaters
450 total RJs


2020 without this Ta
111 50 seaters
255 70+seaters
366 total RJs

So with this TA, DCI will actually be bigger!
These numbers are based on known lease numbers obtained from alpa rep.

It's an important point; the TA essentially trades DCI being smaller in 2015 for it being larger, and more profitable, in 2020 and beyond. It makes outsourcing more sustainable.

Would you mind posting exactly which 50-seat leases will be expiring by 2020 - and when? I'm curious about the "break-even point," ie at what date DCI becomes larger with the TA than without it.

"................

That makes sense.

Slow, can you shed light on this?

We need to know Management's plan B. If the alternative to re-fleeting DCI is a big C Series order ALL COMING TO MAINLINE, then we are a lot better off without this TA.

Your assuming a lot with those numbers. The 50 seater is not dead. If the company puts the engine money into those aircraft there might extend those leases. My understanding is that 311 of the airframes are tied up until 2020. So overnight they are going to dump 200 airframes with no replacement. Not likely. Its far more likely that a lot of those aircraft would be replaced or released.

Bingo. The regionals are currently withering on the vine and on life support. What we are proposing is a DL pilot funded alpa blood transfusion. Hopefully CAL/UAL will hold the line.

True, but instead of trading (assumed) CRj900's for swapping out the leases, is plan B the C Series?

Obviously, fleet renewal COULD be accomplished using more mainline airplanes and more mainline pilots than the TA provides for.

Too much information is being held back for anyone to truly make an intelligent decision.

Why would the company dump $$ into a product they or pax do not like, and loses money?
Everyone is assuming on Both sides of the argument!

DAL (the corporation) is providing that life support BTW... and will continue to do so as long as they have leases and no way to reduce them. Vote NO.

The line that CAL/UAL will hold is 40% behind this TA in terms of pay.. and light years behind in terms of scope. It is not a bar to aspire to, it is one to trip over.. Vote NO.