Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
02-02-2011, 01:46 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: 320B
Posts: 781
To add to your question, what if, after bringing on the MD90's we quickly sign agreements for additional 76 seater DCI flying. Then, a couple months later we decide to park all of the DC9s. It is my understanding that this new, higher, limit on 76 seaters is the benchmark moving forward and that if we shrunk the mainline a/c numbers that DCI can continue to fly the additional 76 seaters. Is this true?
02-02-2011, 01:52 PM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
To add to your question, what if, after bringing on the MD90's we quickly sign agreements for additional 76 seater DCI flying. Then, a couple months later we decide to park all of the DC9s. It is my understanding that this new, higher, limit on 76 seaters is the benchmark moving forward and that if we shrunk the mainline a/c numbers that DCI can continue to fly the additional 76 seaters. Is this true?
In an short answer, yes, if the company keeps all of the 9's adds the 49 confirmed 90's they can take delivery on a 3-1 ratio 76 seat jets to the allowable limit, then park the 9's with no consequence to the amount of 76 seat jets. This is not something new.
02-02-2011, 01:57 PM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Signing of the agreements does not matter. It would be the delivery of the jets. Remember that grievance settlement 09-01 that stated that the company will now go by our interpretation.
In an short answer, yes, if the company keeps all of the 9's adds the 49 confirmed 90's they can take delivery on a 3-1 ratio 76 seat jets to the allowable limit, then park the 9's with no consequence to the amount of 76 seat jets. This is not something new.
In an short answer, yes, if the company keeps all of the 9's adds the 49 confirmed 90's they can take delivery on a 3-1 ratio 76 seat jets to the allowable limit, then park the 9's with no consequence to the amount of 76 seat jets. This is not something new.
So what I hear you saying is that:
The Vols are great.
Carl is reasonable.
ALPA is fallable
02-02-2011, 02:15 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,530
02-02-2011, 02:24 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 593
Right now we're expecting about 30 MD-90s in the next 18 months. If all those jets are growth aircraft, with zero aircraft retirements and no other mainline aircraft arriving, the mainline fleet would be ~758. Still 9 short of what's required to add any additional 76-seat jets.
02-02-2011, 02:40 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Because the single opportunity to address outstanding issues would have been for the DAL and NW pilots to agree on a SLI voluntarily, and hold it as leverage early on in the merger process. I'm not saying it could have been done, because the SLI piece is almost unsurmountable without arbitration. But once it became pretty obvious to management that we were really not going to stop this thing, and only wanted a payout, BUT could not work together, they gave us the existing contract, plus equity, and some raises, and we jumped on it. I'm not really interested in who is to blame, because, let's be honest: we probably could never have done a voluntary SLI in a split second, and jointly turned against management.
So there went our one significant post-bankruptcy chance of cleaning up the contract.
Are you really confused as to why we're still under a POS contract, or are you just venting?
So there went our one significant post-bankruptcy chance of cleaning up the contract.
Are you really confused as to why we're still under a POS contract, or are you just venting?
02-02-2011, 02:41 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Signing of the agreements does not matter. It would be the delivery of the jets. Remember that grievance settlement 09-01 that stated that the company will now go by our interpretation.
In an short answer, yes, if the company keeps all of the 9's adds the 49 confirmed 90's they can take delivery on a 3-1 ratio 76 seat jets to the allowable limit, then park the 9's with no consequence to the amount of 76 seat jets. This is not something new.
In an short answer, yes, if the company keeps all of the 9's adds the 49 confirmed 90's they can take delivery on a 3-1 ratio 76 seat jets to the allowable limit, then park the 9's with no consequence to the amount of 76 seat jets. This is not something new.
The short answer is zero
Right now we're expecting about 30 MD-90s in the next 18 months. If all those jets are growth aircraft, with zero aircraft retirements and no other mainline aircraft arriving, the mainline fleet would be ~758. Still 9 short of what's required to add any additional 76-seat jets.
Right now we're expecting about 30 MD-90s in the next 18 months. If all those jets are growth aircraft, with zero aircraft retirements and no other mainline aircraft arriving, the mainline fleet would be ~758. Still 9 short of what's required to add any additional 76-seat jets.
We've got 2 different answers here. Which one is correct?
02-02-2011, 02:45 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 593
To add to your question, what if, after bringing on the MD90's we quickly sign agreements for additional 76 seater DCI flying. Then, a couple months later we decide to park all of the DC9s. It is my understanding that this new, higher, limit on 76 seaters is the benchmark moving forward and that if we shrunk the mainline a/c numbers that DCI can continue to fly the additional 76 seaters. Is this true?
.
The number of 76-seat jets authorized is determined by the mainline fleet at the time the 76-seat jet enters service.
Besides, even if we took delivery of 30 MD-90s in the next 18 months and didn't park any DC-9s or 88s, the company still isn't authorized additional 76-seat jets because our mainline fleet would still be below 768 airframes.
We would have to have significant mainline growth to add any additional 76-seat jets and even if we did, the number of 70-seat + 76-seat jets is hard capped at 255 regardless of the mainline fleet size.
I think one of the reasons the company may be filling up on 70-seat jets is because they recognize that it is unlikely they will be authorized any additional 76-seat jets.
02-02-2011, 02:52 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 593
I believe the difference may be with the delivery schedule versus total MD-90s. Right now we have 19 MD-90s and we are scheduled to receive 30 more over the next 18 months for a total of 49 MD-90s.
That being said, I might be wrong and it is possible they've got contracts and delivery schedules for 19 more. If they do, great and even if they do, I very much doubt that the mainline fleet will be at or above 768 aircraft by the time the last MD-90 arrives on the property.
However, I will say that I am not a cut off my nose to spite my face kind of guy. I hope we have a mainline fleet of 774 aircraft in the next 18 months, even if it means authorizing 20 additional 76-seat jets, I'll take the ~46 mainline growth aircraft.
That being said, I might be wrong and it is possible they've got contracts and delivery schedules for 19 more. If they do, great and even if they do, I very much doubt that the mainline fleet will be at or above 768 aircraft by the time the last MD-90 arrives on the property.
However, I will say that I am not a cut off my nose to spite my face kind of guy. I hope we have a mainline fleet of 774 aircraft in the next 18 months, even if it means authorizing 20 additional 76-seat jets, I'll take the ~46 mainline growth aircraft.
02-02-2011, 02:53 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Bingo. Plus these RAH S5 E170's are already a 2 configuration 70 seat jet configured at 6/64. The CRJ700's that are being converted from single to 2 class will have only 66 seats.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
