Hotel Kilo

Now you're thinking 😉

Hotel Kilo

Yes. NYC is the second largest base we have. We plan on growing there once we get all the A gates in T4 once the new T1 construction is done.

Big plans for NYC forthcoming from what I'm hearing. General Lee what have you heard?

fishforfun

100% it’s coming. Will be the best bid pack at Delta.

OOfff

except, you know, that it doesn’t.

OOfff

yep, which is why we get planned at .81 all the time based on the mountains of data the company has


oh wait

tcco94

yeah we all know India is coming and maybe something else but that still doesn’t = base opening. Look at SLC for clue. 3 a day and sometimes up to 5 a day on the 330. We would need substantially more evidence of 350 NYC routes than the 1 or maybe 2 being discussed (and that’s discussion is so preliminary and far out it’s a just a talking point anyways)

tcco94

no one is arguing that. People are just flat out saying who cares? The factor of affecting us is so minimal, it’s not even a factor in your bids unless you have some sort of burning desire to say you flew the thing and let everyone know.

for the vast majority of the seniority list, people only care about trips/pay/QOL/seniority etc. Do you bid based on a performance of an airplane?

Vsop

I was never in the 7ER but the 765 certainly did. We would routinely adjust the crossing speed and arrive at destination with way over planned fuel and track the increase at each point of the crossing. Some captains would stay at .78/.79 and we would hit the paperwork planned fuel. I think at least the 765 prefers the higher speed probably due to its lack of wing span.

sailingfun

The testing on fuel burn numbers by Boeing is down to the pint basically. If you fly fast you burn more gas period. To the comment the company flies us at .81 that is because of crew costs and headwinds. When a ER CA got 160 bucks an hour not that long ago we flew at 78.
The Key factor on why we consistently under burn is takeoff weight and that Delta plans slightly conservative based on historical burn numbers. The company flight plans for the max possible takeoff weight. The actual takeoff weights are generally less. When the agents in Mumbai were lying about the amount of cargo onboard we often overburned as much as 7000 lbs of fuel.
This argument reminds me of the almost pathological need to constantly fly as high as possible on the 330. Airbus has a different take on that but what do those French engineers know about the airplane they built!

FL370esq

But the magical 350-1000 will change all that. 😁