Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
11-04-2011, 05:20 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: 7ERA
Posts: 1,231
11-04-2011, 05:21 PM
Banned
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Posts: 793
I wouldnt say he has almost 4000 pilots behind him. I think the more appropriate statement is that almost 4000 pilots have submitted a DPA card. Whether all are behind him is a entirely different argument.
I'm not trying to call you out. I'm merely pointing out the very good possibility that some guys submitted the DPA card solely to poke ALPA in the eye. Some would likely still vote NO for DPA.
I'm not trying to call you out. I'm merely pointing out the very good possibility that some guys submitted the DPA card solely to poke ALPA in the eye. Some would likely still vote NO for DPA.
11-04-2011, 05:22 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,590
LOT 767 Gear Up Incident:
I’m glad there are folks like me out there analyzing and trying to solve this LOT 767 gear up mystery. From everything I can logically put together, it certainly looks like they “screwed the pooch.” The pieces of this puzzle just don’t add up. I really hope I am wrong. As a 767 Captain, not only do I have a vested interest in this incident, I feel I have somewhat of a duty to get to the cause of this mishap. I am not the sharpest tool in the shed, so I like to learn from other’s mistakes so I don’t repeat them. Ha Earlier in my attempts at solving this mystery, I suggested that there might be a CB associated with a hydraulic [pressure release] valve which may inhibit the gear from coming down, but I just threw that out there as a shot in the dark. I don't even know if there is such a valve. The existence of this possible valve should not be confused with the confirmed electrically held open shuttle valve which closes and prevents the gear from extending with a complete loss of electrical power. I believe this would be a different animal all together. Even if such a valve and such a circuit breaker do exist, I still don't buy this theory. This is why. After takeoff, we place the gear handle from UP to OFF to shut off the valve supplying hydraulic UP pressure and then also release pressure from the system. At that point, the gear basically rests against the up locks and gear doors with no further UP pressure being applied. So even with this valve supposedly closed and not allowing fluid movement, if the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system switch was activated with no UP pressure in the system, wouldn’t we at least see the gear doors begin to open? With absolutely no center system hydraulic pressure and all of the gear and gear door up locks electrically retracted by the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system, I find it difficult to believe that even with trapped system fluid, that the gear would not have at least fallen out of the well at all. The gear and gear doors on that LOT 767 looked like they were sealed tight. I’m hoping that these guys are heroes, but my 36 years of flying and my 29 years as an A&P tell me they “screwed the pooch.” I hope I’m wrong. Very wrong. Media perceived heroes like Sully make us ALL look bigger than life; a good thing. Media perceived dirt bags like the NW crew that over shot MSP make us all look really bad. Remember, “It’s better to look good, than to feel good.” Billy Crystal.
P.S. Is it just me, or is anyone wondering why this Heroic Award Winning Crew:
1] Chose to continue to destination with the failure of the most critical hydraulic system on the aircraft? Time airborne is questionable here. Hot date in Warsaw perhaps?
2] Thought and stated that after the center hydraulic system failed that they knew that they would be unable to lower the gear upon reaching their destination? They seemed to immediately and falsely think that a center hydraulic system failure would inhibit lowering the landing gear. Only a complete electrical failure will inhibit the lowering of the landing gear on a 767. A failure of the center system will not inhibit lowering the landing gear. So why did they anticipate a gear up landing? Perhaps unfamiliarity with 767 systems??? Most knowledgeable 767 crews would have just anticipated a gear down landing using the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system.
3] Assume that the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system was not going to function properly? Perhaps they weren’t familiar with the system or didn’t even know it had this system?
These are stretches, but until the real cause is revealed, we can only speculate. What say you?
I’m glad there are folks like me out there analyzing and trying to solve this LOT 767 gear up mystery. From everything I can logically put together, it certainly looks like they “screwed the pooch.” The pieces of this puzzle just don’t add up. I really hope I am wrong. As a 767 Captain, not only do I have a vested interest in this incident, I feel I have somewhat of a duty to get to the cause of this mishap. I am not the sharpest tool in the shed, so I like to learn from other’s mistakes so I don’t repeat them. Ha Earlier in my attempts at solving this mystery, I suggested that there might be a CB associated with a hydraulic [pressure release] valve which may inhibit the gear from coming down, but I just threw that out there as a shot in the dark. I don't even know if there is such a valve. The existence of this possible valve should not be confused with the confirmed electrically held open shuttle valve which closes and prevents the gear from extending with a complete loss of electrical power. I believe this would be a different animal all together. Even if such a valve and such a circuit breaker do exist, I still don't buy this theory. This is why. After takeoff, we place the gear handle from UP to OFF to shut off the valve supplying hydraulic UP pressure and then also release pressure from the system. At that point, the gear basically rests against the up locks and gear doors with no further UP pressure being applied. So even with this valve supposedly closed and not allowing fluid movement, if the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system switch was activated with no UP pressure in the system, wouldn’t we at least see the gear doors begin to open? With absolutely no center system hydraulic pressure and all of the gear and gear door up locks electrically retracted by the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system, I find it difficult to believe that even with trapped system fluid, that the gear would not have at least fallen out of the well at all. The gear and gear doors on that LOT 767 looked like they were sealed tight. I’m hoping that these guys are heroes, but my 36 years of flying and my 29 years as an A&P tell me they “screwed the pooch.” I hope I’m wrong. Very wrong. Media perceived heroes like Sully make us ALL look bigger than life; a good thing. Media perceived dirt bags like the NW crew that over shot MSP make us all look really bad. Remember, “It’s better to look good, than to feel good.” Billy Crystal.
P.S. Is it just me, or is anyone wondering why this Heroic Award Winning Crew:
1] Chose to continue to destination with the failure of the most critical hydraulic system on the aircraft? Time airborne is questionable here. Hot date in Warsaw perhaps?
2] Thought and stated that after the center hydraulic system failed that they knew that they would be unable to lower the gear upon reaching their destination? They seemed to immediately and falsely think that a center hydraulic system failure would inhibit lowering the landing gear. Only a complete electrical failure will inhibit the lowering of the landing gear on a 767. A failure of the center system will not inhibit lowering the landing gear. So why did they anticipate a gear up landing? Perhaps unfamiliarity with 767 systems??? Most knowledgeable 767 crews would have just anticipated a gear down landing using the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system.
3] Assume that the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system was not going to function properly? Perhaps they weren’t familiar with the system or didn’t even know it had this system?
These are stretches, but until the real cause is revealed, we can only speculate. What say you?
The fact they knew to use the alternate system for the flaps tells me they knew how the backups systems work. I think they were surprised when the gear did not extend.
11-04-2011, 05:29 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
Delta has customer service folks driving around High Value Customers in brand new Porsches:
Planelopnik stories - Jalopnik
That sure beats the Ford Explorers they were using (although I like Ford Explorers better than 6,000lb Porsche Sports SUV's
My first 911 weighed in at about 2,300 pounds, or about what a Miata weighs today.
Planelopnik stories - Jalopnik
That sure beats the Ford Explorers they were using (although I like Ford Explorers better than 6,000lb Porsche Sports SUV's
My first 911 weighed in at about 2,300 pounds, or about what a Miata weighs today.
11-04-2011, 05:33 PM
Banned
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Posts: 793
LOT 767 Gear Up Incident:
I’m glad there are folks like me out there analyzing and trying to solve this LOT 767 gear up mystery. From everything I can logically put together, it certainly looks like they “screwed the pooch.” The pieces of this puzzle just don’t add up. I really hope I am wrong. As a 767 Captain, not only do I have a vested interest in this incident, I feel I have somewhat of a duty to get to the cause of this mishap. I am not the sharpest tool in the shed, so I like to learn from other’s mistakes so I don’t repeat them. Ha Earlier in my attempts at solving this mystery, I suggested that there might be a CB associated with a hydraulic [pressure release] valve which may inhibit the gear from coming down, but I just threw that out there as a shot in the dark. I don't even know if there is such a valve. The existence of this possible valve should not be confused with the confirmed electrically held open shuttle valve which closes and prevents the gear from extending with a complete loss of electrical power. I believe this would be a different animal all together. Even if such a valve and such a circuit breaker do exist, I still don't buy this theory. This is why. After takeoff, we place the gear handle from UP to OFF to shut off the valve supplying hydraulic UP pressure and then also release pressure from the system. At that point, the gear basically rests against the up locks and gear doors with no further UP pressure being applied. So even with this valve supposedly closed and not allowing fluid movement, if the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system switch was activated with no UP pressure in the system, wouldn’t we at least see the gear doors begin to open? With absolutely no center system hydraulic pressure and all of the gear and gear door up locks electrically retracted by the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system, I find it difficult to believe that even with trapped system fluid, that the gear would not have at least fallen out of the well at all. The gear and gear doors on that LOT 767 looked like they were sealed tight. I’m hoping that these guys are heroes, but my 36 years of flying and my 29 years as an A&P tell me they “screwed the pooch.” I hope I’m wrong. Very wrong. Media perceived heroes like Sully make us ALL look bigger than life; a good thing. Media perceived dirt bags like the NW crew that over shot MSP make us all look really bad. Remember, “It’s better to look good, than to feel good.” Billy Crystal.
P.S. Is it just me, or is anyone wondering why this Heroic Award Winning Crew:
1] Chose to continue to destination with the failure of the most critical hydraulic system on the aircraft? Time airborne is questionable here. Hot date in Warsaw perhaps?
2] Thought and stated that after the center hydraulic system failed that they knew that they would be unable to lower the gear upon reaching their destination? They seemed to immediately and falsely think that a center hydraulic system failure would inhibit lowering the landing gear. Only a complete electrical failure will inhibit the lowering of the landing gear on a 767. A failure of the center system will not inhibit lowering the landing gear. So why did they anticipate a gear up landing? Perhaps unfamiliarity with 767 systems??? Most knowledgeable 767 crews would have just anticipated a gear down landing using the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system.
3] Assume that the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system was not going to function properly? Perhaps they weren’t familiar with the system or didn’t even know it had this system?
These are stretches, but until the real cause is revealed, we can only speculate. What say you?
I’m glad there are folks like me out there analyzing and trying to solve this LOT 767 gear up mystery. From everything I can logically put together, it certainly looks like they “screwed the pooch.” The pieces of this puzzle just don’t add up. I really hope I am wrong. As a 767 Captain, not only do I have a vested interest in this incident, I feel I have somewhat of a duty to get to the cause of this mishap. I am not the sharpest tool in the shed, so I like to learn from other’s mistakes so I don’t repeat them. Ha Earlier in my attempts at solving this mystery, I suggested that there might be a CB associated with a hydraulic [pressure release] valve which may inhibit the gear from coming down, but I just threw that out there as a shot in the dark. I don't even know if there is such a valve. The existence of this possible valve should not be confused with the confirmed electrically held open shuttle valve which closes and prevents the gear from extending with a complete loss of electrical power. I believe this would be a different animal all together. Even if such a valve and such a circuit breaker do exist, I still don't buy this theory. This is why. After takeoff, we place the gear handle from UP to OFF to shut off the valve supplying hydraulic UP pressure and then also release pressure from the system. At that point, the gear basically rests against the up locks and gear doors with no further UP pressure being applied. So even with this valve supposedly closed and not allowing fluid movement, if the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system switch was activated with no UP pressure in the system, wouldn’t we at least see the gear doors begin to open? With absolutely no center system hydraulic pressure and all of the gear and gear door up locks electrically retracted by the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system, I find it difficult to believe that even with trapped system fluid, that the gear would not have at least fallen out of the well at all. The gear and gear doors on that LOT 767 looked like they were sealed tight. I’m hoping that these guys are heroes, but my 36 years of flying and my 29 years as an A&P tell me they “screwed the pooch.” I hope I’m wrong. Very wrong. Media perceived heroes like Sully make us ALL look bigger than life; a good thing. Media perceived dirt bags like the NW crew that over shot MSP make us all look really bad. Remember, “It’s better to look good, than to feel good.” Billy Crystal.
P.S. Is it just me, or is anyone wondering why this Heroic Award Winning Crew:
1] Chose to continue to destination with the failure of the most critical hydraulic system on the aircraft? Time airborne is questionable here. Hot date in Warsaw perhaps?
2] Thought and stated that after the center hydraulic system failed that they knew that they would be unable to lower the gear upon reaching their destination? They seemed to immediately and falsely think that a center hydraulic system failure would inhibit lowering the landing gear. Only a complete electrical failure will inhibit the lowering of the landing gear on a 767. A failure of the center system will not inhibit lowering the landing gear. So why did they anticipate a gear up landing? Perhaps unfamiliarity with 767 systems??? Most knowledgeable 767 crews would have just anticipated a gear down landing using the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system.
3] Assume that the ALTERNATE GEAR EXTENSION system was not going to function properly? Perhaps they weren’t familiar with the system or didn’t even know it had this system?
These are stretches, but until the real cause is revealed, we can only speculate. What say you?
Perhaps they (along with company?) weighed the options and thought partial extension was a possibility and thus decided to accept the devil they knew?
11-04-2011, 05:37 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Capt
Posts: 2,049
11-04-2011, 05:52 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
That was a legit question. We don't squash rumors around here, we talk about them.
So do you want to see this in con-text:
767 Friend: Big displacement coming shortly... around 400 off the 67... looks like my tenure is fading into oblivion.
FTB: Says who? Rumor was rather neutral but no big MDs. Supposed to be out by now.
767 Friend: [Name withheld but it's right here on my iphone] [Position in CPO withheld]... you'd think they know the scoop. I think my contacts are better than yours.
)))) Oh wait, you are my contact.
FTB: Yes I am. It'd be incredible to see DAL in one month go from no displacements on 767 to 400.
FTB: Says who? Rumor was rather neutral but no big MDs. Supposed to be out by now.
767 Friend: [Name withheld but it's right here on my iphone] [Position in CPO withheld]... you'd think they know the scoop. I think my contacts are better than yours.
)))) Oh wait, you are my contact. FTB: Yes I am. It'd be incredible to see DAL in one month go from no displacements on 767 to 400.
Rumor from someone in the CPO's office in ATL is 400 MD's off ATL 767. Anyone else heard anything like that?
11-04-2011, 05:54 PM
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Position: A320
Posts: 74
Nope. From FAA passenger enplanement statistics for the 5 LA Basin airports (LAX, SNA, BUR, LGB, ONT) combined:
Airline 2008 2010
Delta 3,917,308 3,900,127
Alaska 2,220,377 1,960,141
So we carried 17000 fewer pax and they carried 260,000 fewer since we startedcode sharing with them.
Oh, in case you didn't notice, the Seattle pilot base (which has way more codeshare exposure) has doubled in size. Maybe you can come to ATL and enjoy some of those nice UIO and GYE 3 days.
Airline 2008 2010
Delta 3,917,308 3,900,127
Alaska 2,220,377 1,960,141
So we carried 17000 fewer pax and they carried 260,000 fewer since we startedcode sharing with them.
Oh, in case you didn't notice, the Seattle pilot base (which has way more codeshare exposure) has doubled in size. Maybe you can come to ATL and enjoy some of those nice UIO and GYE 3 days.
Lets be clear on the facts you present. Delta has NO service from both LGB and BUR. So, can you present data to show the real comparison loss of PAX based on the other three airport were Delta MAINLINE has service? There is DCI service via SLC for LGB and BUR, so is DCI included in your facts? Does Alaska's passenger data INCLUDE Horizon, which has pulled out of those markets due to the loss of their jets? Jetblue has established a mini hub in LGB. Don't you think Alaska might want to not fight a LCC and cede market share in the name of profitability?
Yes, The SEA base has grown because Delta is using the feed at Alaska's hub in SEA. The thing to watch will be if Alaska starts to build a hub at LAX. If so, why is not Delta? Alaska has a pilot base in the LAX area. Do you think those pilots have a bunch of 17 hour 4 day trips on their 737's?
If you want to build a Global airline, there are other parts of the globe besides ATL. Facts should be clearly presented so people can make informed choices. I hope this was not an oversight on your part in using all 5 LAX basin airport.
11-04-2011, 05:56 PM
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
Nope. After every merger/acquisition we've had an attempt for a new bargaining agent. PER (pilots for equitable representation) was the first I remember, but there was no Section 6 active when they were around. Then came PPA. They got cards representing 42% and helped create the environment for our POS96 contract.
11-04-2011, 05:56 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Delta has customer service folks driving around High Value Customers in brand new Porsches:
Planelopnik stories - Jalopnik
That sure beats the Ford Explorers they were using (although I like Ford Explorers better than 6,000lb Porsche Sports SUV's My first 911 weighed in at about 2,300 pounds, or about what a Miata weighs today.
Planelopnik stories - Jalopnik
That sure beats the Ford Explorers they were using (although I like Ford Explorers better than 6,000lb Porsche Sports SUV's
My first 911 weighed in at about 2,300 pounds, or about what a Miata weighs today. The ladies were plus size and he had them beat 4x over.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
