buzzpat

I love flying it. It handles better than the -800 and, IMO, lands the same. I do make sure to land on Vref and pay attention to those report card thingys we get. The pax are very happy with the back. The FAs, not so much.

contrails

I rode on one the other day.

The entertainment is nice. It's finally on par with, say, jetBlue -- with movies that you don't have to pay for (and you shouldn't after watching as many commercials as there are).

The lavs are totally unsat. The sink is the size of some kind of camping stove -- I saw the FAs washing the lav out several times during a 3 hour flight. Water was running down the door every time I went to the bathroom. The sink is so tiny there is nowhere for the water to go but the floor or the lav door itself.

I can't imagine having to actually sit down on that toilet in the aft lav either, but that is another story.

While I could roll my luggage down the aisle of the -800 every time, not so on the -900.

The Sky interior appears to be . . . blue and orange lightbulbs.

I would love to root for the home team with the aircraft manufacturer but I must say...looking forward to the A-321s.

buzzpat

Con, a few things.

A) you're an airline pilot so you view things a bit different then our customers do,

B) the lavs are worlds better than the -800, I've been peeing in the -800 for quite awhile,

C) my post was from a pilots perspective, not a deadheading or non-revving pilot, I'm sorry you couldn't roll it down the aisle. And we don't serve Cognac and breadsticks domestically. I intentionally don't roll mine down the aisle of any of our jets. You're a pilot, man up.

D), the 321s mission will be quite different then what DAL is utilizing the -900 for.

E) anecdotally, our customers are very impressed and, for that, I'm grateful. I'm the one standing in the door. If you don't like it, so what? DH or nonrev on something else.

Happy holidays,
Buzz

contrails

Oh nothing's perfect for sure. I just thought I'd share my own mental notes on the -900 vs. the -800 and also having the other manufacturer's equivalent in mind, from having ridden on them in the back.

I do think the 3 lavs in back is a legitimate error -- having two of normal size vs. 3 tiny ones would have been the thing to do in my opinion. There was a large puddle of water on the floor of the lav an hour after takeoff, with water dripping down the door. Yikes.


I must say though, the entertainment options really were great. What is available for a fee on other airplanes, was complimentary with a good sized PTV screen on the -900. Lots of movies etc. so tough to get bored even on a longer transcon flight.

gooddeal

From a revenue customer perspective, once the new Medallion Program rules kick in and put more of the previous "elite" travelers behind the economy comfort seats of the 737, I think you will see a large uptick in consumer dissatisfaction in the DL (and likely UA too...since they did the same restructure plan with Mileage Plus) coach layouts.

The upside will be more seats for non-revs and commuters when that population abandons legacy carriers for lost-cost "shiny object" advertising tactics

DeadHead

Personally, I don't think the company has much choice other than complying with the Part 117 rules. If the rule states that a pilot must have a 10 hour period of uninterrupted rest prior to a trip/short call, thereby requiring pilot acknowledgement/acceptance, then I'm not sure the company has any choice other than compliance.

I actually don't blame the company in the slightest for unilaterally restructuring the terms of our PWA to comply with FAR 117, however I'm extremely curious to see DALPA's response. We've been hearing for years now how DALPA was looking closely at FAR 117 and how it would affect the pilot group, so then why are we being blindsided by this less than a few weeks before the rule comes into effect?

Sailing was the first to respond to SD's email, and while I may not always agree with his perspective from time to time, he certainly seems to have his pulse on some of our contractual upgivings and obligations. I'm still in surprise as to how with the length of time and amount of information our union has had with FAR 117 that the company still could get the jump on so many of us with a major QOL concession.

I live in base and rarely have any issues acknowledging and being in position for a rotation/short call, but I can certainly see how this would become extremely detrimental for commuters.

The way I see it, the company is already begining to gather up its negotiationing capital for C2015. The talking point for years has been what are you willing to give, in order to get. FAR 117 will be laundered in as requiring section 23 alterations/improvements thereby reducing our leverage towards compensation, scope, or any other sought out improvements.

I'm not trying to sound pessimistic here, just one pilot's opinion. I'd expect an LOA/MOU out from the union in a few days echoing the union's lack of options with no other choice beyond mandatory compliance with the federal rule. I don't think DALPA has many options here, and I'm doubtful any other contractual improvements can be made outside of C2015 negotiations.
Hope I'm wrong on this, our management team is way to smart to not utilize every ounce of leverage they can hoarding it until the time comes.

chuck416

As was stated earlier in this thread…I, too, have read S.D.'s letter. Multiple times. The logic seems to take a few twists and turns, and at the end, I'm still not real sure what he said. One thought seems to come through pretty clear. The company '...is going to do what we have to do in order to cover this new FAR…' Only problem is, this FAR is not new. Our industry has known for a couple of years that this was in the pike, and now, 3 weeks before implementation, there is a problem with our PWA? A somewhat crude analogy comes to mind. "Stop ****ing down my back while trying to convince me it's raining." It'll be interesting to see how our union handles this. Hoping for a "win" for our team this time.

NwaBusDriver

I agree! It seems to me that we have a TON of leverage. We just follow the contract as written. If our PWA conflicts with FAR 117, that's their problem not mine. Our union should be asking them what they are willing to give up for that. A330 rest facility might be a nice starting point.

sailingfun

There are a couple of points that need to be clarified here. DALPA was not caught off guard by 117. They approached the company last March to begin discussions on FAR 117. The company stated at that time that we would want to much for any changes and they planned to operate under the current contract. The company felt that previous LOA's had not been cost effective for the company. Several provisions that tied into furloughs cost the company a enormous amount of money after the 09 economic downturn and the LOA that modified recovery flying has turned out to be far more expensive then they thought. I know the forum has a different opinion of the cost benefits of various LOA's. but the company and DALPA usually agree on costing data. I am not sure where the forum gets its costing data.
The company at the time appears to have been expecting a favorable outcome on the actual interpretation of some aspects of FAR117. ALPA was able to prevail in DC on most of those interpretations. The final clarification was not what ATA was seeking. Once the rule was clarified the company came back to DALPA and requested negotiations on FAR117 after snubbing us the first time. Those negotiation are now ongoing however personally I believe we should withdraw from those discussions until SD retracts his letter from 6 Dec.

Free Bird

So the consensus is that the company knew they had a problem and purposely waited till the last minute to grab yet another concession from the pilot group? If I'm comprehending this properly, we're essentially talking about getting rid of long call?

Imo the company is too smart to have not seen this coming. This is just another opportunity for the company to lower their cost at our expense.

If ALPA gives this one away it will be one more step towards the door for them. They just can't seemingly help themselves when comes to giving the company what they want. Hope I'm wrong, but I'll be shocked if ALPA doesn't cave on this.