Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
08-31-2009, 02:13 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Is Delta trying to cut ties with some of its regionals?
Delta and Mesa Air lock horns again - Business Courier of Cincinnati:
Weed
Delta and Mesa Air lock horns again - Business Courier of Cincinnati:
Weed
08-31-2009, 02:22 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
08-31-2009, 02:23 PM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
08-31-2009, 02:35 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
08-31-2009, 02:56 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,324
08-31-2009, 03:04 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 243
The CASM numbers you posted are non fuel CASM numbers. Hedging ect.. has nothing to do with those numbers. The numbers I posted the link to reflect total CASM including fuel and that is why as you pointed out they are much worse. Excluding fuel Delta is still 25% higher CASM on the same stage length and same aircraft as SWA.
I will agree that SWA system CASM is lower than Deltas. However the numbers I quoted do include fuel and in fact give a fair representation of the cost difference that Delta and SWA are paying for that fuel. The numbers include all direct operating cost of the individual aircraft but doesn't include things like management, marketing, airport fees, write offs, and other overhead. The original number you linked to (about 16 cents/seat mile) included all items.
As far as implying we can't fly 69 plus seats at the mainline I have pointed out on here many times that I believe the E170/175 is a mainline aircraft and can be flown at a competitive cost by the mainline. I know that past MEC officers elected who where very strong scope hawks when given all the data and real numbers have a shift in thinking on aircraft below that size. John Malone gave up the E170/175 under the threat of a Chapter 11 filing. The subsequent scope changes that allowed more of those jets came while we were in court on a 1113 motion. They were not given away because reps felt we could not fly them. They were taken while the company held all the high cards including a judge in their hip pocket. The MEC cut the best deal they could under the circumstances. The deal they cut has every Delta pilot employed today with zero furloughs.
When the new round of reps gets elected they will have access to the same numbers and data. I don't have the real numbers on the 175. I believe it can be flown at a competitive cost structure at the mainline but like every poster on this forum I don't know that they can be. The reps will have the numbers. I hope they make good choices in looking at those numbers. I do know from direct talks to the reps who have seen the data that we can't get anywhere near a competitive costs on jets under 70 seats and we would end up losing not gaining jobs if we were able to force the companies hand on those jets.
I agree with most of your feelings and statement. I am a little curious about your last comment. Are you saying that current Delta pilots would be furloughed if tomorrow the PWA was changed to require all flying 50 seats and above to be flown by Delta pilots?
I will agree that SWA system CASM is lower than Deltas. However the numbers I quoted do include fuel and in fact give a fair representation of the cost difference that Delta and SWA are paying for that fuel. The numbers include all direct operating cost of the individual aircraft but doesn't include things like management, marketing, airport fees, write offs, and other overhead. The original number you linked to (about 16 cents/seat mile) included all items.
As far as implying we can't fly 69 plus seats at the mainline I have pointed out on here many times that I believe the E170/175 is a mainline aircraft and can be flown at a competitive cost by the mainline. I know that past MEC officers elected who where very strong scope hawks when given all the data and real numbers have a shift in thinking on aircraft below that size. John Malone gave up the E170/175 under the threat of a Chapter 11 filing. The subsequent scope changes that allowed more of those jets came while we were in court on a 1113 motion. They were not given away because reps felt we could not fly them. They were taken while the company held all the high cards including a judge in their hip pocket. The MEC cut the best deal they could under the circumstances. The deal they cut has every Delta pilot employed today with zero furloughs.
When the new round of reps gets elected they will have access to the same numbers and data. I don't have the real numbers on the 175. I believe it can be flown at a competitive cost structure at the mainline but like every poster on this forum I don't know that they can be. The reps will have the numbers. I hope they make good choices in looking at those numbers. I do know from direct talks to the reps who have seen the data that we can't get anywhere near a competitive costs on jets under 70 seats and we would end up losing not gaining jobs if we were able to force the companies hand on those jets.
I agree with most of your feelings and statement. I am a little curious about your last comment. Are you saying that current Delta pilots would be furloughed if tomorrow the PWA was changed to require all flying 50 seats and above to be flown by Delta pilots?
Last edited by vprMatrix; 08-31-2009 at 03:22 PM.
08-31-2009, 03:07 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
JetBlue, Lufthansa Plan Code-Share Deal - WSJ.com
CHICAGO (Dow Jones)--Lufthansa on Monday announced plans to expand co-operation with JetBlue Airways (JBLU) in a move that may irk rivals such as Delta Air Lines Inc. (DAL).
The German flag carrier and JetBlue plan a code-share deal from early October, a move that will leverage the U.S. carrier's strong position at New York's John F. Kennedy airport.
Deustche Lufthansa AG (DLAKY) acquired a 19% stake in parent JetBlue Airways Group Inc. in January 2008, but planned cooperation required the U.S. airline to first upgrade some of its reservations technology.
The planned tie had already raised concern from some rivals wary of efforts by members of the Lufthansa-led Star Alliance to boost their presence at JFK.
Delta last year called for Lufthansa to drop its two JetBlue board seats and "restructure" its relationship if it wanted additional anti-trust clearance for Star members.......
CHICAGO (Dow Jones)--Lufthansa on Monday announced plans to expand co-operation with JetBlue Airways (JBLU) in a move that may irk rivals such as Delta Air Lines Inc. (DAL).
The German flag carrier and JetBlue plan a code-share deal from early October, a move that will leverage the U.S. carrier's strong position at New York's John F. Kennedy airport.
Deustche Lufthansa AG (DLAKY) acquired a 19% stake in parent JetBlue Airways Group Inc. in January 2008, but planned cooperation required the U.S. airline to first upgrade some of its reservations technology.
The planned tie had already raised concern from some rivals wary of efforts by members of the Lufthansa-led Star Alliance to boost their presence at JFK.
Delta last year called for Lufthansa to drop its two JetBlue board seats and "restructure" its relationship if it wanted additional anti-trust clearance for Star members.......
08-31-2009, 03:35 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,991
[quote=sailingfun;670884][quote=vprMatrix;670760]
When the new round of reps gets elected they will have access to the same numbers and data. I don't have the real numbers on the 175. I believe it can be flown at a competitive cost structure at the mainline but like every poster on this forum I don't know that they can be. The reps will have the numbers.
I think there are a lot of FOs who would love to fly the 175/190 at the New Jet Blue 190 rates. I am on 10th year FO pay on the 767/757 and the left seat of a 190 at those rates would be pay raise for me and almost every DAL FO. If Jet Blue can fly them profitably at those rates why can't we?
Scoop
When the new round of reps gets elected they will have access to the same numbers and data. I don't have the real numbers on the 175. I believe it can be flown at a competitive cost structure at the mainline but like every poster on this forum I don't know that they can be. The reps will have the numbers.
I think there are a lot of FOs who would love to fly the 175/190 at the New Jet Blue 190 rates. I am on 10th year FO pay on the 767/757 and the left seat of a 190 at those rates would be pay raise for me and almost every DAL FO. If Jet Blue can fly them profitably at those rates why can't we?
Scoop
08-31-2009, 03:36 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Position: 320B
Posts: 511
Thanks to those of you getting involved at this level. There is much work to be done over the next couple of years.
TC
08-31-2009, 03:40 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Position: 320B
Posts: 511
I think there are a lot of FOs who would love to fly the 175/190 at the New Jet Blue 190 rates. I am on 10th year FO pay on the 767/757 and the left seat of a 190 at those rates would be pay raise for me and almost every DAL FO. If Jet Blue can fly them profitably at those rates why can't we?
Scoop
Scoop
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
