Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
02-03-2011, 09:06 AM
seeing the large hubs...
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 73N A
Posts: 3,722
I'd explain that you were holding with scheduling for 20 minutes, but departure time is approaching...
Again, the CPSC is very helpful.
02-03-2011, 09:28 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Posts: 187
02-03-2011, 09:32 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
From my interactions I've gotten the impression that "everything is under control, nothing to see here, move along"
The sad thing is that until you recognize a flaw, it's pretty darn hard to fix it...
Our Section 1 isn't all bad, in fact the AF JV scope language is tight, reviewed annually and subject to remedies if the balance of flying goes more than 3% in favor of one group.
Why that model wasn't used for RJ or AS scope is a mystery, maybe the negotiators saw only the upside for the intl. and looked past the corresponding impact on domestic...
Cheers
George
The sad thing is that until you recognize a flaw, it's pretty darn hard to fix it...
Our Section 1 isn't all bad, in fact the AF JV scope language is tight, reviewed annually and subject to remedies if the balance of flying goes more than 3% in favor of one group.
Why that model wasn't used for RJ or AS scope is a mystery, maybe the negotiators saw only the upside for the intl. and looked past the corresponding impact on domestic...
Cheers
George
02-03-2011, 09:37 AM
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
Here is the link to the Delta portion of the Raymond James Airline Conference
Wall Street Webcasting - Delta Air Lines, Inc.
Wall Street Webcasting - Delta Air Lines, Inc.
02-03-2011, 09:37 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
My take on the subject is: everybody on the DAL NB fleet will be impacted by AS growing if the DAL NB count remains mostly flat...
Cheers
George
02-03-2011, 09:43 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
OK, I'm listening to the webcast. Here are the cuts I'm hearing Ed talk about:
1) The remaining DC-9's, all -50's (about 35), to be retired in 12-28 months,
2) The remaining Saab 340's (26), retired this year,
3) 60 CRJ 50-seaters to be retired in 12-18 months.
Ed doesn't talk about MD-90's right away. He says (technically correct) that we have "no order book". I think he's saying no orders with the manufacturers. Capacity for the full year is being looked at, probably will end up being at the low end of the previously announced range: up 1%. Q1 will be up 3%, vs. previously announced up 5%.
It's really hard to tell how our overall capacity will be affected by listening to the webcast, which I guess is the point.
You get some idea on replacaments/additions (other than through the RFP, which will be addressed much later in the year) from the Q&A: replacements will be the ERJ-170's just announced (8), and a "handful" of 70-76 seat airplanes, for a total of 10-20, and (20) MD-90's from the used market.
Based on the webcast, I guess that takes capacity down by 15 mainline airframes, down 40 RJ's (60 leave, 20 come in), and down 26 Saabs in the next 12-18-months.
There is no timeframe given for aircraft coming in, or if 20 MD's is all there is, and no mention of some airframes we've been told were coming out of the desert previously. This is also short of the 49 MD-90's previously mentioned (Bastian mentions 20, and we already have 19, so he's only mentioning 39).
Depending on how positive you want to be, and depending on how many of these mystical MD-90's you want to count, and the 2 ER's and several 757's coming out of the desert, it all varies between a slight positve, to as much as minus fifteen airframes. That's all I could figure out.
1) The remaining DC-9's, all -50's (about 35), to be retired in 12-28 months,
2) The remaining Saab 340's (26), retired this year,
3) 60 CRJ 50-seaters to be retired in 12-18 months.
Ed doesn't talk about MD-90's right away. He says (technically correct) that we have "no order book". I think he's saying no orders with the manufacturers. Capacity for the full year is being looked at, probably will end up being at the low end of the previously announced range: up 1%. Q1 will be up 3%, vs. previously announced up 5%.
It's really hard to tell how our overall capacity will be affected by listening to the webcast, which I guess is the point.
You get some idea on replacaments/additions (other than through the RFP, which will be addressed much later in the year) from the Q&A: replacements will be the ERJ-170's just announced (8), and a "handful" of 70-76 seat airplanes, for a total of 10-20, and (20) MD-90's from the used market.
Based on the webcast, I guess that takes capacity down by 15 mainline airframes, down 40 RJ's (60 leave, 20 come in), and down 26 Saabs in the next 12-18-months.
There is no timeframe given for aircraft coming in, or if 20 MD's is all there is, and no mention of some airframes we've been told were coming out of the desert previously. This is also short of the 49 MD-90's previously mentioned (Bastian mentions 20, and we already have 19, so he's only mentioning 39).
Depending on how positive you want to be, and depending on how many of these mystical MD-90's you want to count, and the 2 ER's and several 757's coming out of the desert, it all varies between a slight positve, to as much as minus fifteen airframes. That's all I could figure out.
02-03-2011, 09:45 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
I brought up that point with RD (JV guy) and he said that since AS doesn't have widebodies, the SLI wouldn't be impacted by that.
My take on the subject is: everybody on the DAL NB fleet will be impacted by AS growing if the DAL NB count remains mostly flat...
Cheers
George
My take on the subject is: everybody on the DAL NB fleet will be impacted by AS growing if the DAL NB count remains mostly flat...
Cheers
George
02-03-2011, 09:45 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
02-03-2011, 09:47 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
From my interactions I've gotten the impression that "everything is under control, nothing to see here, move along"
The sad thing is that until you recognize a flaw, it's pretty darn hard to fix it...
Our Section 1 isn't all bad, in fact the AF JV scope language is tight, reviewed annually and subject to remedies if the balance of flying goes more than 3% in favor of one group.
Why that model wasn't used for RJ or AS scope is a mystery, maybe the negotiators saw only the upside for the intl. and looked past the corresponding impact on domestic...
Cheers
George
The sad thing is that until you recognize a flaw, it's pretty darn hard to fix it...
Our Section 1 isn't all bad, in fact the AF JV scope language is tight, reviewed annually and subject to remedies if the balance of flying goes more than 3% in favor of one group.
Why that model wasn't used for RJ or AS scope is a mystery, maybe the negotiators saw only the upside for the intl. and looked past the corresponding impact on domestic...
Cheers
George
Some legacy agreements suck more, and some less. You like the AF JV better? I had never looked at it that way before, but it's a good thing AF bought KLM, or we would have a legacy KLM agreement to comply with also.
02-03-2011, 09:53 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
Yup.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
