777-300ER order
01-21-2015 | 11:33 AM
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
From: Gets weekends off
Ah it's not coming this year. Pretty sure the koolaid slide I saw was Feb 2016. Also after 25, there is over a year delay until #26. Quite simply vacancies after #25 will largely based on attrition. And recent events could very well change all of this. We shall see.
The old Unimatic page showed 12/15/2015 but that DIS page is gone. That was a while back.
Either way as long as I have an Airbus on the property to fly I'm happy.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
01-21-2015 | 02:04 PM
#52
Line Holder
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,069
Likes: 25
If you believe the info at the 787 blog, which seems pretty up to date, our 25th airplane is due to be delivered on 11/20/2015.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...=2&output=html
theoretically that could change if the deliveries were modified based on a 777-300 order, but since we are now 10 months out from that delivery, I think it is unlikely.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...=2&output=html
theoretically that could change if the deliveries were modified based on a 777-300 order, but since we are now 10 months out from that delivery, I think it is unlikely.
01-21-2015 | 02:24 PM
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
From: 787 CA
Not so sure this is true. We're almost certainly taking the AF/KLM deferral that was slated for 2015/2016 and that's obviously within 12 months. So allowances were made somewhere and I don't think they will want much of a delay since they're apparently so hot and bothered to get them as replacement aircraft. If its not meant to replace any of this years 78's then we're talking 2017 due to the 78 delivery gap in 2016 and I just don't think that was the plan. But you're right in that the crux of the issue is how many of this years orders can be converted and how quickly.
01-21-2015 | 02:34 PM
#54
Thread Starter
Line Holder
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
From: 756 CAP
01-21-2015 | 03:32 PM
#55
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,282
Likes: 0
From: A320 Cap
Not really. Yes those exact seats are fenced, but when a LCAL 757 or guppy Captain upgrades to Sparky, that opens a 757 or Guppy Captain for anyone to bid. Same for all those 747 bids. Yes the direct bid sucks, and we should not have fences. I understand why they proposed it though.
The other tradeoff is that Sparky is very junior. Seniority 6,000 on the seniority list would be about 30% in any base on Sparky. Same guy on the 747 is on reserve.
The other tradeoff is that Sparky is very junior. Seniority 6,000 on the seniority list would be about 30% in any base on Sparky. Same guy on the 747 is on reserve.
01-21-2015 | 03:39 PM
#56
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,282
Likes: 0
From: A320 Cap
01-21-2015 | 04:43 PM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
From: Gets weekends off
I agree it affects some people more than others. Its what we got. Its part of the deal. I'm at peace with the decision.
01-21-2015 | 05:24 PM
#58
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,282
Likes: 0
From: A320 Cap
Which backfire would you rather have? Proposing fences for less than 5% of the aircraft or not having your proposal even considered and letting the other side decide the methodology because you proposed 1-for-1.
I agree it affects some people more than others. Its what we got. Its part of the deal. I'm at peace with the decision.
I agree it affects some people more than others. Its what we got. Its part of the deal. I'm at peace with the decision.
Like you, I'm at peace with it. It is what it is, and is definitely all water under the bridge. But do I wish we hadn't brought the issue of fences into the SLI discussion? Yes.
01-21-2015 | 05:28 PM
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Are those my only two choices? I would rather have had our proposal in it's entirety.... minus the fences. I thought it was a mistake at the time of the proposal considering it was LUAL who made brought the issue to the table. I've been scolded for not having all the facts behind the decision, and it's true - I certainly don't. We will never know what would have happened if there WERE no fences, but I'm sticking to my hunch that we would have been better off without them.
Like you, I'm at peace with it. It is what it is, and is definitely all water under the bridge. But do I wish we hadn't brought the issue of fences into the SLI discussion? Yes.
Like you, I'm at peace with it. It is what it is, and is definitely all water under the bridge. But do I wish we hadn't brought the issue of fences into the SLI discussion? Yes.
01-21-2015 | 08:39 PM
#60
Don't say Guppy
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,926
Likes: 0
From: Guppy driver
So we are getting 10 unfenced airplanes, and both sides are complaining about fences???????????????????????????????
For a 400 guy the 777 is quieter.
For a 787 guy you don't have to worry about leaning forward and hitting your forehead on the HUD on a 777.
You both win.
I am stuck on the Uberguppy. The cockpit is too small and loud, no intercom, and the toilet seat won't stay up.
There is something for everybody with 10 777-300ER.
For a 400 guy the 777 is quieter.
For a 787 guy you don't have to worry about leaning forward and hitting your forehead on the HUD on a 777.
You both win.
I am stuck on the Uberguppy. The cockpit is too small and loud, no intercom, and the toilet seat won't stay up.
There is something for everybody with 10 777-300ER.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
