Where did you go to college? Did they teach math?

 

You know nothing about me, and I am not hurting for cash. Would I like some more? Sure. Could an upgrade do that for a lot of people? Sure. Are there people out there that are so focused on a few extra scheckles that they don't understand that it could take years to get that, and that this was early and could help all of us out, the pilots and management? I guess so. That's too bad. This is a good deal, not great, but good. Look around at the industry and the world right now. We don't really know what is around the corner.

 

Whisper that to ACL. Bombardier could also substitute large Dash 8s for old RJs now, and it would be unlimited, cheaper on gas, and close in size to a 70 seater.

 

This is just around the corner and may be launched for sale this year. We have no protections in the current contract.

engine in anticipation of a launch platform for a clean sheet 90-100-seat turboprop potentially as early as 2012. "Most sales today are for 70-seat aircraft," says Richard Dussault, P&WC vice-president of marketing. "We definitely see a place for 90- to 100-seat aircraft and that's where we're aiming for with a 5,000-7,000shp engine. We could easily do 8,000shp as well."
Rather than linear extensions of current product lines dominated by ATR and Bombardier aircraft powered by PWC engines, Dussault says there's a "clear push" for aircraft that are more spacious in cabin size than today's turboprops, a trend exhibited in the evolution from small-cabin first generation regional jets to the larger Embraer EJets and Bombardier CSeries families.
"The size of the aircraft relatively speaking might be a bit larger than today's turboprop, with larger overhead bins," he adds.
In terms of speed and altitude, Dussault says 300-350kt (555-647km/hr) is the "most likely goal of that market" with similar cruise altitudes to today's turboprops - in the mid-20,000ft (6,096m) range.
Fastest in today's turboprop fleet is the Bombardier Q400 with a maximum cruise speed of 360kt. The 68-78-seat aircraft is powered by two Pratt PW150A engines, each rated at 5,070shp (3,780kW), and connected to six-bladed Dowty Aerospace propellers.
"The big question is speed," says Dussault. "To preserve the economy of turboprop, you have to have the right speed. Though higher speed gives longer routes and more turns for the aircraft per day, it comes with higher fuel costs. When turboprops became very popular in end of the 1990s, [lower] speed was the tradeoff."
PWC is working with sister company Hamilton Sundstrand to develop an integrated propulsion system offering which will include the propeller, engine, nacelle and associated components. However Dussault says PWC will offer an engine-only option if a launch airframer decides to perform that work in-house.
Dussault expects the clean sheet aircraft to have "sixed-bladed or more" propellers that use "conventional" propeller technologies. "A lot of the technology will come in the way we integrate the engine and propeller control into single integrated system," he adds. Target reduction in fuel burn for the centreline engine is 20%.
Dussault says PWC will be ready to launch the new engine next year, timing that suggests a possible position on the 90-seat turboprop that ATR partner Alenia says it is committed to developing. Bombardier has been considering a derivative of the Q400 for the 90-seat sector.
Meanwhile, PWC is building a prototype engine which Dussault says will be ready for full-up testing next year, probably in Montreal. Dussault says the company has received "some raw materials" for the engine and is starting detailed manufacturing, with the first compressor unit to be ready for testing potentially later this year.
Once a launch customer is identified, PWC, per its usual process, will build 8-10 test engines and begin a flight test campaign on the company's Boeing 747SP testbed from its Mirabel facility. The most recent new engine test campaign for PWC took place in 1998 with the certification of the Q400's PW150 engine on the company's Boeing 720 testbed, an aircraft that is being retired.

Note the part on Bombardiar looking at a 90 seat Q400. We would make a great launch customer this fall.

 

They are also working on an integrated active noise canceling such as what Bose headsets have. I think this is a big problem with turbo props for those in the cabin, but the system proposed works with the onboard speaker system and cancels out the humm from the props quite well, making them more comfortable than small jets.

Also what kind of technology might come from the airbus A400M (C-130 looking) cargo plane that is way being schedule and cost overruns, would be nice to recapture some of that R&D in commercial applications.

 

Oh really?

 

It is no such thing. It pays for every gain with concessions. My reps say (in writing) that you are so personally invested in this TA, that you cannot even describe it objectively. Many of us here have posted chapter and verse of where your road show is highly distorting the truth.

I have. And they say you are the one who can't describe it accurately because you're so blind to it. They haven't called you a liar, just that you're too personally invested to describe it accurately.

You've proved nothing but your ability to continue a lie rather than apologize for it. This TA does NOT provide for 1,000 additional mainline jobs. Nowhere in the TA does it say that. Your own road show guys have specifically said that NOTHING in this TA provides for, implies, or guarantees even ONE additional mainline job. It could certainly happen, but nothing in this TA says that it will. Nothing. Not my opinion, that's the road show guys and O'Moakalley's written words. Keep it up though alfa. It's important because too many people just can't believe that an MEC leader would lie. Keep setting the live example.

And of course as you well know, this TA says not a single word of what you assert here.

Carl

 

This is yet another example of the rabid MEC apologists stooping to flat out lies. So we've misunderstood Bill? Here is what Bill said on another thread apparently hoping nobody would remember:

Plenty of lies as well Bill. Too bad you've taken that route.

Carl

 

If we all thought like this, the world would still be flat. Why take a chance sailing the Atlantic? Why take a chance landing on the moon? Why take a chance landing on the beaches of Normandy? Why take a chance fighting the British for our independence?

It sounds like you have blind faith in the negotiating committee and MEC. I am sure they would be happy to hear that. The problem is, the MEC and NC don't decide if this TA is good enough - we do. And it's not... but there are people that seem to think that because the MEC and NC say it's good enough, that it is. Neither of us know how mgmt will react if we vote down this TA, and I guess that is what you are afraid of. Fear of the unknown. Not everyone is scared, though.

It doesn't boil down to whether I "believe them or not". It's not about believing in them, it's about believing in yourself, and knowing what you are worth. Our pilot group has made tremendous sacrifices. It's time to be recognized for that. I'm not talking 40% raises and immediately C2K rates.

I'm talking NO CONCESSIONS.

 

No a mainline service from ATL-MGM probably won't work like it did just a few years ago. Neither would ATL-CSG.

But ATL-CSG-MGM-CSG-ATL could. stuff like that has made SWA a mint. And that only takes up 1 blip, 1 gate, 1 over wing team and 1 under wing team in ATL vs 2 blips, 2 gates, 2 of everything else etc.