Delta Terminates Xjt......sept 1, 2008
07-03-2008, 01:53 PM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 1st year pay for the 3rd time
Posts: 1,434
Originally Posted by DeadHead
Kind of ironic that the only company that can make money is the one that flies rednecks and fat chicks.
They're not all fat chicks....remember the girl that got "tossed" a while back was a hooters waitress and inspiring actress.
http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/0...iniskirt-gets/
Last edited by The Chow; 07-03-2008 at 01:55 PM. Reason: gigady!
07-03-2008, 01:54 PM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: Some Hotel
Posts: 1,617
Originally Posted by DeadHead
Kind of ironic in this industry where the only company that can make money is the one that flies rednecks and fat chicks.
07-03-2008, 02:05 PM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Posts: 193
Originally Posted by Squawk_5543
You guys are arguing for no reason you know.....we are ALL going to be out of a job real soon. Oil is not going down....it's going up. No airline still in business is making money, they are loosing millions a day. How long do you really think we have?
07-03-2008, 02:05 PM
#34
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: A-320
Posts: 6,929
seriously, how about the PITA that asked me for a blanket and Soda while I was walking down the aisle for a Deadhead on CAL................people in general are DUMB & LAZY. This job has made me dislike human beings even more then I already did 
XJT isnt a sinking ship, its a ship in a draining OCEAN
XJT isnt a sinking ship, its a ship in a draining OCEAN
07-03-2008, 02:12 PM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: FO
Posts: 3,032
Originally Posted by ExperimentalAB
Nope. We all know that XJT is arguably the best paying regional. My response to moon was invoked because, read between the lines, his post suggested SkyWest to be an undercutter in this case...completely ridiculous and unnecessary.
Originally Posted by ExperimentalAB
Maybe But he sounded sore over it nonetheless...!
I'm sore from last night and the 7 mile run this morning. Just to be clear, I'm not blaming skywest for those.
Last edited by BlueMoon; 07-03-2008 at 02:20 PM.
07-03-2008, 02:24 PM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: NOYDB
Posts: 876
Originally Posted by rickair7777
I'd say it's almost a forgone conclusion that DAL will not enter into a new capacity agreement for this....
The SLC will go to SKW. Almost zero chance that Inc. will open an ASA base in SLC.
The LAX flying will probably go to SKW...this has been in the works for several years, pending relief from UAL's non-compete clause at LAX (relief was granted a few months ago). The XJT LAX flying appeared temporary from the get-go to anyone who was paying attention...presumably there was always a chance that it could become permanent if it worked out for both parties, and if industry conditions were favorable.
Why SKW? DAL has contractual obligations to SKW/ASA for a certain amount of flying, but they need to do across-the-board RJ reductions. This way they can reduce net system flying, including some no-longer-needed SKW segments in the west, but still keep SKW/ASA at contract levels.
It's remotely possible that they could move another DCI carrier into LAX for the same reason, to maintain contractual minimum flying.
The SLC will go to SKW. Almost zero chance that Inc. will open an ASA base in SLC.
The LAX flying will probably go to SKW...this has been in the works for several years, pending relief from UAL's non-compete clause at LAX (relief was granted a few months ago). The XJT LAX flying appeared temporary from the get-go to anyone who was paying attention...presumably there was always a chance that it could become permanent if it worked out for both parties, and if industry conditions were favorable.
Why SKW? DAL has contractual obligations to SKW/ASA for a certain amount of flying, but they need to do across-the-board RJ reductions. This way they can reduce net system flying, including some no-longer-needed SKW segments in the west, but still keep SKW/ASA at contract levels.
It's remotely possible that they could move another DCI carrier into LAX for the same reason, to maintain contractual minimum flying.
07-03-2008, 02:39 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: Some Hotel
Posts: 1,617
Originally Posted by H46Bubba
SkyWest will take over for a while then look for the LAX flying to start converting over to mainline. They'll begin delivery on their new 73NG's (737-700s) this month. LAX is Delta's post merger gem for utilizing NWA's pacific routes.
07-03-2008, 02:43 PM
#38
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,293
Originally Posted by H46Bubba
SkyWest will take over for a while then look for the LAX flying to start converting over to mainline. They'll begin delivery on their new 73NG's (737-700s) this month. LAX is Delta's post merger gem for utilizing NWA's pacific routes.
07-03-2008, 02:46 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
Posts: 3,732
Originally Posted by CRJDriver
I heard DLs 737NG base in LAX is shrinking....
The thing I wonder is, was that DAL mainline, or was that to include ALL DAL operations in LAX? Meaning, XJT leaving may have been a part of that.
07-03-2008, 02:47 PM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
Posts: 3,732
Originally Posted by rickair7777
Could be. I think LAX is trying to discourage the use of small airplanes as a congestion measure.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
wannabepilot
Flight Schools and Training
34
07-07-2008 12:15 PM
