If you really wanted to split hairs you could argue how PPAS also increases airframe utilization in respect to inspections and depreciation. An extra .1 or .2 per leg eventually adds up towards hourly inspections. This extra time accumulates added costs Comair must eat in respect to time limited parts, such as overhaul of engines, and ultimately increases Comair's cost per flight.

If every regional in the Delta Connection network were forced to use the same rulebook, when it comes to PPAS, I would bet Comair's costs would more in line with it's competitors per flight hour.

PPAS is more efficient for Delta rather than for Comair. This is the double edged sword Delta likes to swing at Comair every time costs become an issue.

 

So what the heck is this Fleet Captain position that's posted on EPIC? A chief and assistant chief aren't enough?

 

PM -----sent

 

Takes the place of the two program managers?

First step towards dual qual?

 

Off topic, but does anyone still have the software keygenerator.exe ?

Please PM me if you have it stashed somewhere. My copy got deleted.

This is a logbook software piece for those curious.

 

I would agree with you if every aircraft made it in for inspection at exactly 100 hours...but they don't. They start scheduling them to come in around 93, 94,95...it all depends on when it is done for the night and home in base. So it really does not matter if it gets inspected at 93.6 or 94.7 - cost is still the same.

Every airframe at Delta flies this way - I doubt they would do it if it increased the operating costs.

 

Actually, PPAS accounts for airframe time, engine wear, etc. as well as crew costs and then balances the combined hourly cost vs the cost of fuel to determine the best cruise speed. As the cost index number goes down, fuel is saved. As C/I goes up, more fuel is wasted but all other costs are reduced.

Or, more importantly, as C/I goes down, Delta saves money. As C/I goes up, Comair saves money. Guess which one Delta tells us to do...

 

I understand you're trying to make a point, but there is no need to assume I need to read something multiple times in order to understand it. I am reasonably good at communicating within the English language.

I agree with you 100% that there should be no career regional airlines. There should be a job available at every legacy airline for every regional airline pilot who wants one. By the way, that job should become available before that regional pilot turns 40, so the risk of being furloughed after leaving the top 25% of their regional's seniority list is adequately offset by their future earnings potential. - Hint...there's a little sarcasm there.

When that day arrives, there will be no need for reasonable pay and benefits at the regional level.

There are any number of reasons a pilot may decide to stay at a regional vs. moving on, and judging another pilot's decision with one's own personal myopic perspective is not going to produce the highest quality opinion.

At no point in my post did I write that PPAS doesn't save money overall. Perhaps you might want to revisit what you quoted to verify that. PPAS may or may not save costs overall, that is above our pay grade as pilots to know.

What PPAS does though, is make crewmembers less productive (and therefore more expensive) relative to crewmembers at other airlines who are not using PPAS. We're not comparing Comair to Delta, and I never wrote that cost index flying isn't the most efficient way to complete a flight.

What I wrote is when management criticizes my pay with one side of their mouth, then tells me I'm not allowed to be as productive as a Freedom, Chautaqua, ASA, SkyWest, or...for Christ's sake...Big Sky pilot (yes they were a Delta Connection carrier for a period of time), with the other side of their mouth, they lose credibility.

Anyone who was a pilot at Comair when PPAS was introduced...and for years afterward, knows Comair was the only regional in the Delta network using PPAS. We've all heard this conversation time and again:

ATC: Comair xxxx, say speed?
Comair xxxx: mach .64
ATC: Freedom xxxx, say speed?
Freedom xxxx: mach .77
ATC: Candler/Acey xxx, say speed?
Candler/Acey xxx: mach .78

The point of my using the PPAS example is not to discredit the benefit it may or may not provide. The point is employees who are handcuffed to their desk are not going to get work done on the other side of their office.

Throw in a manager who stands in the corner of the office and berates the employee because their paid too much relative to the guy in the office next door who management hasn't handcuffed to his desk, and you have a reasonably accurate metaphor for what has been going on at Comair for some time.

Certainly there is an "experience premium" associated with Comair. That entire organization should be proud of the level of experience they have/had, vs. ashamed of it. I know I'd rather have a crew with 40 years of combined experience operating the aircraft I'm deadheading on, than a crew with three years total experience.

I am aware the G.O. was built a number of years ago. I don't "adore" any of Comair's leaders, but for the fact that prior to Delta turning the Comair President's job into nothing more than that of a secretary who answers the telephone when it rings from Atlanta, the leadership at Comair had some degree of control over the company's destiny.

It's strange to me that you would write this: "Long story short - if you think the strike had no impact on Comair, rather Comair failed because of the big GO and PPAS, you are living in a dream world." because I never wrote that the strike had no impact on Comair. Can you find where I wrote that?

The purpose of my original post on this subject was to suggest that what Comair has operated through during the last decade is perhaps a little more complex than the black & white, 15-yr. old, Beavis & Butthead world, and those who proclaim the responsibility for Comair's problems lie exclusively with the strike might do well to look a little deeper beyond one single event over the last decade.

I do live in a dream world. Comair's future, Delta's future, and the aviation industry's future, as a whole is, to my family's financial security and well being...what's the word I'm looking for?

Irrelevant.

That doesn't mean I want any of the above entities to fail.

 

But it's still good to hear from you. Business doing well?

 

So ... are we going to still be arguing about who/what/where/when/why Comair died when we're in the nursing home? (silly question - i know the answer)