johnso29

Number 7 is not correct. The DC9s are being replaced by MD90's. 30 MD90s in for 21 DC9s leaving. The 737-900ERs can be replacement aircraft, but can also be growth airplanes. They are cash flow positive from Day 1, which gives the company flexibility to use them as replacement OR growth.

80ktsClamp

Havent we parked quite a few more dc-9s than what is being replaced by the 90s?

johnso29

I think we will end up with 62 MD90s. Or is it 58? Either way, we will eventually park a total of 68 DC9s. So we will end up with fewer MD90s then DC9s. But the MD90s have always been DC9 replacements. The B717s were never slated as DC9 replacements. That's the way I've always understood it. The DC9s were originally planned to be gone by the end of this year. And it's one case where we are replacing lower paying aircraft with higher paying aircraft.

Pro Fessional

The MD-90s keep coming. There are 17 MD-90s from China Southern delivered but not yet in service. These will arrive in the active fleet this fall. 16 more MD-90’s from Japan Airlines are to be delivered in 2012 and should enter service in 2013. That is 33 MD-90s yet to join the fleet, with 35 already in service - enough to offset the 21 DC-9s yet to be retired. Some of these are on the ramp in HND with the airline name removed. A DAL ferry crew was there a few days ago to ferry one back for mods and paint.

rickhouck300

Oh, I know, there are negatives, and yeah I know it will be close. I am still on the fence. I go back and forth between the two positions. My son is an ATL 88 FO and he is a definite no, my wife is an ATL 737FO and she is on the fence like me. Just wish I had a gut feeling for what the company will do if we send it back to the negotiators...play ball or drag feet and send it to the NMB eventually. I tend to believe Steve Dickson's June 8th remarks about hiring the last quarter of this year if the TA passes, which makes sense to me to gear up for the 717's coming next year. We are still getting a bunch of MD-90's which are replacing the DC-9's , and we will have to hire a boatload of pilots soon. My oldest son who just got out of the Air Force hopes to be one of them. So yeah, I have all seniority levels covered in this decision.

Bill Lumberg

Don't the MD90s have longer stage lengths? I thought that meant something? I can't recall what that means, but maybe it does?

Bill Lumberg

All I gotta say is D-D-D-DAM! You do have a lot invested in this decision. Wow.

nwaf16dude

I don't doubt that you are right. I'm 500ish numbers senior to you, so the LOA is effecting me a little differently. I'm sure they will catch up to me eventually, but I could have grown a very nice beard between my last two days at work, counting short calls. Things will change, and I'm sure we'll get back to a point where most reserves are getting heavily used, but I'd much rather do it for 75-80 hours of pay vs. 70.

Bill Lumberg

If they promise me 99 hours per month (ALV+15) I'll bid reserve. That way, I'll get a month or two off due to the 1000 hours per year limitation, and I'll be rich. One other thing, a lot of FNWA pilots liked the 80+ hours and the time and a half that was associated with that over 80 hours per month. That would cause a manning change too, with everyone going for any open time to get that extra time and a half pay. They wouldn't need any reserves, just whiteslips. It would be a free for all, and it probably was up there in priority on the survey.

LeineLodge

Bill,

I agree with your campaign here, and plan to vote yes myself. Just a point of clarification. What you have pointed out (in this and other posts) is that you would fly to ~99 and get 2 months off. This is not possible in our current contract, and I don't think it changes in the TA. Do a quick search for "Block Hour Limit" in our PWA. It basically limits us from timing out as you suggest.