19-02 Out later today. Crew Resources update
#13
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2014
Posts: 42
Hmmm, WHQ is Chicago. No vacancies at all for any aircraft or seat in ORD. The MAX and MIN numbers in every aircraft and seat for ORD show they are willing to lose people without any backfill, in some cases by more than 20. Maybe in 8 years when the new terminals are done we'll actually grow ORD. Pretty disappointed with this vacancy.
#14
Hmmm, WHQ is Chicago. No vacancies at all for any aircraft or seat in ORD. The MAX and MIN numbers in every aircraft and seat for ORD show they are willing to lose people without any backfill, in some cases by more than 20. Maybe in 8 years when the new terminals are done we'll actually grow ORD. Pretty disappointed with this vacancy.
Life as an ORD based pilot is disappointing. What we need in ORD is for UAX ops to get neutered and pass that flying back to us. Oh, and a 787 base. I think I’ll ask Santa for that this year.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,190
The city of Chicago is all but bankrupt, bonds are rated junk status, taxes going up, in a booming economy the real estate market is flat/declining, there’s a middle class population exodus... shall I go on? Nothing against the base, ord is by far my fav base to fly in/out of. Smells like Type 1 nine months out of the year... but hands down best controllers in the country.
#16
Banned
Joined APC: Mar 2018
Posts: 1,358
There’s not going to be any movement for f/o’s on the 777 or 787 in the base on the bayou for a long time either, but overall I think things are pretty good right now. Both companies brought strengths and weaknesses into this deal. Others were created as a result of putting the pieces together. I think that we have trimmed the fat and are turning into a pretty lean and efficient machine. Parking the 747 early and shuffling the bases around wasn’t fun, but it needed to happen. This bid is just the beginning of many more to come. We have a bunch of 737’s on the way as well as the 350. All they need now is a modern replacement for the 767. After years of industry stagnation, furloughs, concessions, etc, this is nice.
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: guppy CA
Posts: 5,154
350? Unlikely. And Rolls Royce's engine problems are making it easier to walk away from any engine deposits.
767 replacement? 787-8 for the 767-300. 787-9 for the 767-400. Compare seat counts.
Or the 737 is the 756 replacement, depending on how cynical you are.
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Posts: 611
First, there’s been no noticeable issues with the RR engines on the A350. Second, the 787 doesn’t make a very good 767 replacement; it’s significantly heavier, dimensionally larger and doesn’t make a lot of sense doing the shorter 767 transatlantic routes.
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: Schempp-Hirth
Posts: 417
UAL recently named the A350 fleet program manager as the A320 program manager. I wouldn't read between the lines too much, but I think it's a significant impact as to the viability of the A350 program at UAL.
#20
Not so sure that's 100% correct. He's been the 320 guru for a long time. And now, he's been dual qualified (on the bus and the 777) to get him up to speed on long-range international stuff. I flew with him just a few months ago.
All that being said, James isn't holding his breath. In fact, I don't even think he's breathing.
All that being said, James isn't holding his breath. In fact, I don't even think he's breathing.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post