Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
01-21-2012, 05:15 PM
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Good point. I have to say my inclination is to say "screw em' I'm going to 350 because that's what they cleared me too!" and ASAP and let them deal with it. However, clarification is as simple and safe as "climb to 350, do you need me to comply with the crossing restrictions?" Who knows if you do have that one or two controllers out of 10 who have a different interpretation.
In your above example, I do not ask for clarification but I do respond to the clearance this way: "Roger Delta 123 altitude restrictions cancelled, climbing to FL 350."
Carl
01-21-2012, 05:31 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,619
It does pass the "make sense test". But when you ask, even though you don't have to because it makes sense, and you get a contradictory response from ATC 1 or 2 times out of 10 (more like 2 or 3 times out of 10 in SLC) then it warrants a free 5 second querry. Every single time.
Exactly. "Resume Normal Speed" in those situations means nothing. Clarification is required because you know that ATC is incorrect on the phraseology or at the very least unsure about what's going on or being asked. So you get clarification. If they give you a "climb and maintain" and you waste a query only to be told 8 or 9 times out of 10 "um, yeah, duh! what else can it mean you big dummy!" then you might not win the top gun trophy for the day, but at least you'll graduate. During those 1 or 2 times out of 10 that you query a "climb/descend and maintain" where there are charted altitudes and you uncover a difference of expectations, that more than makes up for the other 8 or 9 wasted free 5 second radio calls.
Even if we fixed this issue 100% today with never another misunderstanding on either to come up, its reasonable to still be cautious for a while and ask anyway because there is no way to tell if the issue was fixed 100% until you get 100% correct responses for a while. So far, on either "climb/descend and maintain" with crossing restrictions and/or "resume normal speed" with charted speed restrictions, I'm still trapping way too many errors by asking to stop asking so therefore I will keep asking. Its as simple as that.
Exactly. "Resume Normal Speed" in those situations means nothing. Clarification is required because you know that ATC is incorrect on the phraseology or at the very least unsure about what's going on or being asked. So you get clarification. If they give you a "climb and maintain" and you waste a query only to be told 8 or 9 times out of 10 "um, yeah, duh! what else can it mean you big dummy!" then you might not win the top gun trophy for the day, but at least you'll graduate. During those 1 or 2 times out of 10 that you query a "climb/descend and maintain" where there are charted altitudes and you uncover a difference of expectations, that more than makes up for the other 8 or 9 wasted free 5 second radio calls.
Even if we fixed this issue 100% today with never another misunderstanding on either to come up, its reasonable to still be cautious for a while and ask anyway because there is no way to tell if the issue was fixed 100% until you get 100% correct responses for a while. So far, on either "climb/descend and maintain" with crossing restrictions and/or "resume normal speed" with charted speed restrictions, I'm still trapping way too many errors by asking to stop asking so therefore I will keep asking. Its as simple as that.
01-21-2012, 05:33 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
The aircraft fleet booklet show 618 total RJ's in the Delta system as of 1/1/12. That number is continuing to decline, as there is only 1 delivery scheduled for this year and CMR is forecast to shed at least 24 CRJ-100/200 by this fall. I believe there will be a lot more change in that segment of the industry. Pinnacle Corp and Republic are both having signficant financial problems, and Skywest, Inc isn't making any money. The following was in a Pinnacle 8-K last week and is from a letter to all employees:
What happens next is not yet clear. Our hope is that we can reach agreement with all of the necessary parties on the changes we need to implement our turnaround plan and ensure the company’s continued viability. It is also possible that we may ultimately conclude the best way for us to achieve our goal is to use the court-supervised Chapter 11 process which, as you know, many other airlines have used successfully in recent years. Going that route could enable the company to change or cancel key contracts, obtain financing and take other important actions to implement the turnaround plan, all while continuing normal business operations.
What happens next is not yet clear. Our hope is that we can reach agreement with all of the necessary parties on the changes we need to implement our turnaround plan and ensure the company’s continued viability. It is also possible that we may ultimately conclude the best way for us to achieve our goal is to use the court-supervised Chapter 11 process which, as you know, many other airlines have used successfully in recent years. Going that route could enable the company to change or cancel key contracts, obtain financing and take other important actions to implement the turnaround plan, all while continuing normal business operations.
01-21-2012, 05:34 PM
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Maybe this has gotten some attention here, but after going back a few pages I didn't see it. I'm talking about the Touch & Go--Rumor control: What’s Up With This TWA Lawsuit I’ve Heard About?
So to sum up DALMEC's position about the TWA-ALPA lawsuit: The courts ruled against us but they were wrong and we were right. Nice defense. Maybe if they were just willing to admit that they erred they might learn something other than how do we try to convince others we're right even when we're just taking care of ourselves (ourselves being ALPA and not the people they're supposed to be representing). This isn't rumor control this is propaganda.
So to sum up DALMEC's position about the TWA-ALPA lawsuit: The courts ruled against us but they were wrong and we were right. Nice defense. Maybe if they were just willing to admit that they erred they might learn something other than how do we try to convince others we're right even when we're just taking care of ourselves (ourselves being ALPA and not the people they're supposed to be representing). This isn't rumor control this is propaganda.
Carl
01-21-2012, 05:41 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Posts: 117
Maybe this has gotten some attention here, but after going back a few pages I didn't see it. I'm talking about the Touch & Go--Rumor control: What’s Up With This TWA Lawsuit I’ve Heard About?
So to sum up DALMEC's position about the TWA-ALPA lawsuit: The courts ruled against us but they were wrong and we were right. Nice defense....
So to sum up DALMEC's position about the TWA-ALPA lawsuit: The courts ruled against us but they were wrong and we were right. Nice defense....
T
01-21-2012, 06:47 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 581
The aircraft fleet booklet show 618 total RJ's in the Delta system as of 1/1/12. That number is continuing to decline, as there is only 1 delivery scheduled for this year and CMR is forecast to shed at least 24 CRJ-100/200 by this fall. I believe there will be a lot more change in that segment of the industry. Pinnacle Corp and Republic are both having signficant financial problems, and Skywest, Inc isn't making any money.
I know Delta's party line is "...we are retiring regional jets at a record pace...". But from 10/1/2010 to 10/1/2011 that "record pace" was a blistering 19 50-seat RJs.
It's my understanding that DAL has agreements with the various DCI carriers and that each has a certain number of aircraft under contract and those numbers decline over time.
If it's not too much trouble, could you (or anyone else who knows) please post how many DCI aircraft are under contract each year for say the next five years.
I'd also appreciate it if you would elaborate what your expectations of "change within that segment of the industry" are.
01-21-2012, 07:03 PM
meh
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 828
SLC departures-- even more fuel for the fire, sometimes there are THREE opinions on what to do.
Was flying the SID out of SLC couple weeks ago, 230 kts to some point, then 250kts at FL240 further on (I think, or close). Got "maintain 230 kts" on the PDC. So that should over-ride the SID, now I'm maintaining 230 kts forever until told otherwise...
Passing 11,000 or so, controller says , "Resume Normal Speed". So I punch 250k into the FMC. Capt says "What are you doing? He said resume normal speed."
I say, "Yep, and normal speed is 250 until the next restriction on the SID then I'm going to Econ climb."
"No..." (Captain reaching over and setting 300ish econ climb), "Normal speed is econ climb, there are no restrictions."
"Hmmm," say I, "That would be great-- but I've got some question in my mind on that... can you ask him if the 250kt restriction at 240 is also removed?"
"No, I can't, it's removed, that's how we do it here. Fly 300."
We then had some discussion on what "normal speed" meant, where I basically said that if there was ANY question in my mind, the correct answer was to ASK the controller for clarification, and how could ensuring no confusion ever be wrong? He was a bit miffed at me...
Good guy to fly with otherwise, but I've never had anyone ever argue about ensuring a clearance was understood correctly before.
“Resume Normal Speed”
Instructs the aircraft to comply with the speeds published on the SID.
“Delete Speed Restrictions”
Instructs the aircraft to disregard all previously issued speeds including speeds on upcoming portions of the RNAV SID.
Was flying the SID out of SLC couple weeks ago, 230 kts to some point, then 250kts at FL240 further on (I think, or close). Got "maintain 230 kts" on the PDC. So that should over-ride the SID, now I'm maintaining 230 kts forever until told otherwise...
Passing 11,000 or so, controller says , "Resume Normal Speed". So I punch 250k into the FMC. Capt says "What are you doing? He said resume normal speed."
I say, "Yep, and normal speed is 250 until the next restriction on the SID then I'm going to Econ climb."
"No..." (Captain reaching over and setting 300ish econ climb), "Normal speed is econ climb, there are no restrictions."
"Hmmm," say I, "That would be great-- but I've got some question in my mind on that... can you ask him if the 250kt restriction at 240 is also removed?"
"No, I can't, it's removed, that's how we do it here. Fly 300."
We then had some discussion on what "normal speed" meant, where I basically said that if there was ANY question in my mind, the correct answer was to ASK the controller for clarification, and how could ensuring no confusion ever be wrong? He was a bit miffed at me...
Good guy to fly with otherwise, but I've never had anyone ever argue about ensuring a clearance was understood correctly before.
“Resume Normal Speed”
Instructs the aircraft to comply with the speeds published on the SID.
“Delete Speed Restrictions”
Instructs the aircraft to disregard all previously issued speeds including speeds on upcoming portions of the RNAV SID.
01-21-2012, 08:01 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
....If so, I could foresee a DTW 73 base that for the first time doesn't take away from the other current 73 bases because that fleet is going to grow. I could see a draw down of 738 flying on routes where the 160 seat MD90 will do just fine and the 738 gets back to 738 type flying especially DTW.
To me, it seems like 73s are great for DTW and ATL. Airbi and 757s for the coasts and MD88s for short to mid range stuff out of all of the hubs and 90s for mid range stuff.
Sound about right? George? Gloopy? The rest of you smarty pants?
I think I'm the king of... "tower, um... did you clear us to land?" or "just verify..."
To me, it seems like 73s are great for DTW and ATL. Airbi and 757s for the coasts and MD88s for short to mid range stuff out of all of the hubs and 90s for mid range stuff.
Sound about right? George? Gloopy? The rest of you smarty pants?
I think I'm the king of... "tower, um... did you clear us to land?" or "just verify..."
There is a software upgrade that uses the spoilers for load alleviation coming that should partially help boost MTOW, the "sharklets" will help boost transcend range...
So with the current Delta jets, Networking's pure plan:
738 to the coasts
A320 in SLC and ATL
MD90 for the center
M88 for East of the Mississippi
Here's the rub:
Some markets require IFE and SatTV for competitive purposes, that means the 738 is the go-to jet for longer routes all across the country.
On 1-2 hr stage length flights any one of our jets will do...
The 739 will help draw down the remains of the 767 category flying and thin out the 7ER categories out West.
YMMV, before you know it they'll come up with a new prime directive (fly fast/slow up-gauge/down-gage etc.)
I've heard Networking has been reigned in after having pretty much carte-blache 3-4 years ago...
Cheers
George
01-21-2012, 08:03 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
01-21-2012, 09:36 PM
Banned
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Posts: 793
You're right, they won't come straight out and say it and acknowledge what took place was wrong, but instead will try to find fault with others involved. Meanwhile we're the ones whose dues will pay for their mistakes.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
