Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-25-2012, 06:22 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Posts: 710
05-25-2012, 06:27 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Posts: 799
mainline jets at time of merger 767
mainline jets today 720
difference -47
Proposed Narrowbody jets 88
- difference in parked mainline jets 47
growth mainline airframes 41
41 717's = 70 76 seaters
Plus a hard cap of 450 DCI aircraft, until the next contract of course when the line in the sand can once again be moved.
mainline jets today 720
difference -47
Proposed Narrowbody jets 88
- difference in parked mainline jets 47
growth mainline airframes 41
41 717's = 70 76 seaters
Plus a hard cap of 450 DCI aircraft, until the next contract of course when the line in the sand can once again be moved.
05-25-2012, 06:35 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Capt
Posts: 2,049
mainline jets at time of merger 767
mainline jets today 720
difference -47
Proposed Narrowbody jets 88
- difference in parked mainline jets 47
growth mainline airframes 41
41 717's = 70 76 seaters
Plus a hard cap of 450 DCI aircraft, until the next contract of course when the line in the sand can once again be moved.
mainline jets today 720
difference -47
Proposed Narrowbody jets 88
- difference in parked mainline jets 47
growth mainline airframes 41
41 717's = 70 76 seaters
Plus a hard cap of 450 DCI aircraft, until the next contract of course when the line in the sand can once again be moved.
05-25-2012, 06:35 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Posts: 710
mainline jets at time of merger 767
mainline jets today 720
difference -47
Proposed Narrowbody jets 88
- difference in parked mainline jets 47
growth mainline airframes 41
41 717's = 70 76 seaters
Plus a hard cap of 450 DCI aircraft, until the next contract of course when the line in the sand can once again be moved.
mainline jets today 720
difference -47
Proposed Narrowbody jets 88
- difference in parked mainline jets 47
growth mainline airframes 41
41 717's = 70 76 seaters
Plus a hard cap of 450 DCI aircraft, until the next contract of course when the line in the sand can once again be moved.
05-25-2012, 06:45 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 05-25-2012 at 06:56 PM.
05-25-2012, 06:48 PM
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Position: 765A
Posts: 98
Exactly right, all we've seen is Capacity Restraint and Reductions. The B717 will be the lowest paying a/c on the property. I don't buy the growth theory.
05-25-2012, 06:57 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Posts: 799
I don't either, just trying to show that to an extent we are giving up scope just to replace aircraft that have already been parked. Throw in the seemingly still open RAH loophole and this TA is unacceptable to me
05-25-2012, 06:58 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,530
Yep-many angry yes voters who are doing anything possible to spin a TA that should stand on its own merit. Pretty laughable.
05-25-2012, 07:04 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: MD-88 F/O
Posts: 1,004
05-25-2012, 07:05 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: MD-88 F/O
Posts: 1,004
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
