it’s probably our most profitable hub because they count all the tickets purchased for United employees going to TK. I’m kidding.

DIA is insane right now. The train between terminals looked like a Tokyo subway, they need people with gloves, and broom sticks to shove people on the train.

They won’t open the “other” underground tunnels because the extra terrestrials and lizard people.

No other airport does so little with so much.

I love the fortress hub model but DIA is one hard inter-terminal train breakdown away from complete disaster.

I understand it. The central USA location and terminal layout make it extremely well suited to be UAL's closest near term approximation to ATL or DFW. Yeah, the WX, altitude, and teeny train are why it is unlikely to ever quite match them either. IAD is also well suited to a bigger hub role and can handle short term growth even before the new terminal has broken ground. Growth at our other more constrained hubs will be harder to come by until we get more gates (speaking of which, the new Terminal 1 at EWR is opening very soon with about a dozen UAL gates... but good luck cramming more flights into the airspace).

Ummmmm, yeahhhhhhh.

I don’t suppose you’d like to link to an SSC note, or any union communication? Or maybe educate us on the unions role in opening pilots bases?

I do recall the (rumor) of the company dangling a FL pilot base IF ALPA would change staffing rules to include only making the base available to current NB pilots which completely abrogated seniority.

Otter

Did SSC work for many years and the company has floated satellite bases many times. That was the case you speak to. We allow only a true base with regards to pilot manning for many reasons. I’m not in the mood to explain but let’s just say the answer is no to that concept and always has been. If you need a deeper explanation, PDR the SSC manpower folks for info.

Well, it hasn't always been no. Shuttle did a short lived experiment in PDX, mid 90's. When they ran short on reserves in PDX, they forced SEA reserves to cover PDX. It didn't work out so well. Since then, the answer to satellite bases has been no, for good reason. The company didn't want to have realistic expectations on how to cover flying--or to pay for the convenience.

Are pilots who live in the existing bases and want to continue to live in the existing bases generally against new bases (for fear of diluting the flying)? Yes. Are some of those people influential in SSC and LECs? I think it’s fair to say yes.

DALPA negotiated with the company for an "experimental" satellite base in MCO with all kinds of restrictions that was cancelable at any time by either party.

When that part of the contract was known, the whining from the other bases was so loud DALPA cancelled the "experiment" before it even started.

DALPA and the company negotiated for an experiment to try a MCO satellite base on our last contract with a whole lot of stipulations to placate those worried about flying dilution. Before the experiment could even be tried, the whining was so loud from existing bases that DALPA informed the company that it cancelled the "experiment" before it even could happen.