1812V Vacancy

Reply Subscribe

Page 4 of 15

Last »

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

07-18-2018, 05:19 PM

#31

Beaver Hunter

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: May 2007

Posts: 294

What about the A-350?
We need more WB. Hell, CX does 3x daily from SFO and LAX to HKG. Plus New York area and ORD. They are starting IAD in the near future. They offer a good product. However, their employee relationship is in the toilet. We should be taking advantage of that.

07-18-2018, 05:36 PM

#32

UALinIAH

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: May 2015

Position: 777 CA

Posts: 1,029

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beaver Hunter

You do realize that we have more 787 and 777 sized a/c than AMR and DAL combined right? AMR has some more smaller A330s, but we are by FAR the largest WB percentage US Major and we’re the smallest of the big 3. Just keeping the WB argument in perspective......

07-18-2018, 06:00 PM

#33

Larry in TN

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jul 2008

Posts: 854

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winston

Last I saw we still have 135 MAXs coming

A total of 161 737 MAX aircraft. 61 737-9 MAX and 100 737-10 MAX.

We have taken delivery of 6 so far with 4 more coming this year. There are 329 737 NGs.

07-18-2018, 07:11 PM

#34

awax

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Posts: 1,803

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beaver Hunter

However, their employee relationship is in the toilet. We should be taking advantage of that.

Just be patient, we’ll eventually rise to the occasion to show the industry what poor employee relations look Iike. We always do!

07-19-2018, 05:13 AM

#35

Itsajob

Banned

Joined APC: Mar 2018

Posts: 1,358

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry in TN

A total of 161 737 MAX aircraft. 61 737-9 MAX and 100 737-10 MAX.

We have taken delivery of 6 so far with 4 more coming this year. There are 329 737 NGs.

I flew the max recently. The engines definitely take longer to start, the screens are pretty, but other than that it’s just an efficient 737. We had around 180 SOB and were burning just under 5,000 lbs at top of climb. I’d be curious to know how the 321neo would compare. I’m also curious as to what a 757-200 would burn.

07-19-2018, 05:27 AM

#36

duvie

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: May 2006

Position: WB Bunkie

Posts: 1,246

The 756 (uCAL airplanes) have 151 (I think) coach and 16 lie flat. It burns about 7.0-7.6 1,000 lbs/hour at level off.

07-19-2018, 06:19 AM

#37

MasterOfPuppets

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Feb 2012

Position: 787

Posts: 3,138

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itsajob

What a fuel guzzler!!! The 787 burns between 5-6

07-19-2018, 08:00 AM

#38

Grumble

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Nov 2009

Posts: 5,193

Quote:

Originally Posted by duvie

The 756 (uCAL airplanes) have 151 (I think) coach and 16 lie flat. It burns about 7.0-7.6 1,000 lbs/hour at level off.

With cargo underneath.

Frontier guy told me the 320NEO with 180ish (yeah I couldn’t believe that either) pax burns about 2100-2300/perside

07-19-2018, 09:11 AM

#39

Itsajob

Banned

Joined APC: Mar 2018

Posts: 1,358

Regardless of what manufacturer a person may prefer, the new engines have come a long way. I find it impressive comparing the burns on the max/neo to the 757, or 787/350 to the 767.

07-19-2018, 09:16 AM

#40

Itsajob

Banned

Joined APC: Mar 2018

Posts: 1,358

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterOfPuppets

What a fuel guzzler!!! The 787 burns between 5-6

We should replace the entire 737/320 fleet with 787’s. If everyone is on widebody pay we won’t need the company to buy us that pony that people keep talking about. We could buy our own.