Originally Posted by Carolsdanger

There you go - SLI is over we're just waiting on the results. Do you only look for things that greed controls to direct your arguments. If you have 26 years, you'll be about the same on either the CAL or UAL proposed list - you'll be ok.

Get over yourself, I didn't say "CAL is a regional airline". Well, not this time. Jeff is not a big airline CEO and unfortunately, he doesn't have enough big airline types below him to make our airline competitive. They are not doing a very good job of maintaining the domestic operation. Be offend all you want but what I've seen in the domestic and international operations we are operating on a regional airline model.

We now celebrate getting new 737, 787 not being grounded (the company stopped calling it the Dreamliner - it's now just called "Sparky"), The 747 allocation fiasco, going from a 3 class airline to a 2 class airline(chasing premium pax away) and it goes on. These are all traits of the regional airline mentality trying to run an international airline.

Be offended if you want - I don't care because our company is not doing well at what we are supposed to do well.

Originally Posted by Regularguy

Heard some rumors coming out of LAX, SYD and DENTK about -400 flying.

1. The company looked at EWR for a -400 base but found the current airport facilities couldn't handle the -400 very well, so that idea was canned. The ORD-HKG flying is a disaster with the 777-200 (too many weight restrictions) so to try to save face they are looking for a base to do "W" flying of the -400 to ORD and then a HKG turn.

2. Pilots, FAs, PAs and MECHs coming out of SYD are saying the 777s of CAL will start the LAC-SYD turn in the spring. Added onto that is the rumor LAX -400 will pick up the ORD-HKG flying instead.

3. Important to note nothing will happen until the ISL is complete and to see if the current sUAL pilots can flying the sCAL 777 to SYD in the spring. Any freezes or fences will effect these rumors.

Too bad this MGT won't just admit their ORD -400 move was a mistake and just put the base back there. I guess saving face is more important.

Originally Posted by zippinbye

What's a "-400." One must recognize that four hundred means very different things depending which side of the north/south line you come from. I would submit that as of today, the most common perception of -400 is that a 767-400 is being referred to. But in the context of your query, I assume you're talking about the 747-400, which now seems to be known simply as the 747. Big difference. Just wondering if all the respondents are on the same page.

Originally Posted by zippinbye

My apologies for jumping on that; thought I was on a DL thread. Oooops!

Originally Posted by zippinbye

My apologies for jumping on that; thought I was on a DL thread. Oooops!

Originally Posted by zippinbye

What's a "-400." One must recognize that four hundred means very different things depending which side of the north/south line you come from. I would submit that as of today, the most common perception of -400 is that a 767-400 is being referred to. But in the context of your query, I assume you're talking about the 747-400, which now seems to be known simply as the 747. Big difference. Just wondering if all the respondents are on the same page.

Originally Posted by Shrek

Or the whale - that works too

Originally Posted by bigfatdaddy

767-400 = "Poor Man's Triple". 😁

Originally Posted by zippinbye

What's a "-400." One must recognize that four hundred means very different things depending which side of the north/south line you come from. I would submit that as of today, the most common perception of -400 is that a 767-400 is being referred to. But in the context of your query, I assume you're talking about the 747-400, which now seems to be known simply as the 747. Big difference. Just wondering if all the respondents are on the same page.