Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
03-31-2012, 07:38 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,038
What is that thing, a B-25?
Not a Beech, AT-10.
Not a Beech, AT-10.
03-31-2012, 07:41 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,038
Recap, rumor is we've gotten a 717 deal with SWA in place, that the terms for Delta are highly highly favorable and DALPA is being asked for scope concessions to bring it on the line, right?
But since we're giving scope up on the bottom end we need to do it on the top end and with all the JV's it sure seems as if we are sharing those super premium widebodies.
Therefore, what belongs to mainline is 150-300 seats. The rest is to be outsourced or shared.
If the scope concession rumor is true.
In essence, DAL has secured 717s but to bring them to mainline is to make a concession to us so what will we concede in return?
Now, if this is true, what does that say?To me it says the demarcation line between DCI and mainline is not at the 76 seat limit where we think it is.
To me it says like the DC9-30 is no different than the 65 seat DC9-14 that preceded it decades ago. Once off the mainline property is never to come back unless its outsourced.
The 717 is a DC9-30 in size, so to bring it to mainline is to make a concession.
I guess whoever mentioned that they didn't want to see anything smaller than the MD-88 at mainline is getting their way minus the grandfathered fleet of 737-700s and A319s and outgoing DC9-50s:
So the mainline vs DCI demarcation line is probably 150 seats or less minus grandfathered equipment:To me it says like the DC9-30 is no different than the 65 seat DC9-14 that preceded it decades ago. Once off the mainline property is never to come back unless its outsourced.
The 717 is a DC9-30 in size, so to bring it to mainline is to make a concession.
I guess whoever mentioned that they didn't want to see anything smaller than the MD-88 at mainline is getting their way minus the grandfathered fleet of 737-700s and A319s and outgoing DC9-50s:
But since we're giving scope up on the bottom end we need to do it on the top end and with all the JV's it sure seems as if we are sharing those super premium widebodies.
Therefore, what belongs to mainline is 150-300 seats. The rest is to be outsourced or shared.
If the scope concession rumor is true.
The CRJ and the EMB are 100 to 122 seat TYPE CERTIFICATES. Management, the FAA and every one else in the business sees these airplanes as Types. Using that metric Giambusso, then Moak, ceded 100 seat flying a decade ago.
ALPA has been playing this game of "we want to fly this and will protect those jobs" and "we don't want to fly that and we will try to limit them" for years.
We will see what happens. ALPA has a tough road these next 12 to 24 months. I am sure they are aware their future on the property depends on how Section 1 is handled. Combine this threat with the TWA lawsuit and ALPA is facing challenges which are existential.
03-31-2012, 07:48 AM
Sho me da money!
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: B25, Left
Posts: 947
Yes B-25, and thanks to Tallmantz aviation in the late 60's early 70's, 30 or so airframes were saved for the movie Catch-22. This is one of them and on the West Coast several flying today are from that movie. Have flown with a few low time Private Multi pilots (some owners) in this aircraft and they do surprisingly well. Speed is your friend in this plane, but the most fun I have ever had flying. Thank god my wife gets it, and as long as I take the kids so she can go to the SPA we are good!
03-31-2012, 07:52 AM
Sho me da money!
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: B25, Left
Posts: 947
Excellent post and it correlates with a point we've been making for years ...
The CRJ and the EMB are 100 to 122 seat TYPE CERTIFICATES. Management, the FAA and every one else in the business sees these airplanes as Types. Using that metric Giambusso, then Moak, ceded 100 seat flying a decade ago.
ALPA has been playing this game of "we want to fly this and will protect those jobs" and "we don't want to fly that and we will try to limit them" for years.
We will see what happens. ALPA has a tough road these next 12 to 24 months. I am sure they are aware their future on the property depends on how Section 1 is handled. Combine this threat with the TWA lawsuit and ALPA is facing challenges which are existential.
The CRJ and the EMB are 100 to 122 seat TYPE CERTIFICATES. Management, the FAA and every one else in the business sees these airplanes as Types. Using that metric Giambusso, then Moak, ceded 100 seat flying a decade ago.
ALPA has been playing this game of "we want to fly this and will protect those jobs" and "we don't want to fly that and we will try to limit them" for years.
We will see what happens. ALPA has a tough road these next 12 to 24 months. I am sure they are aware their future on the property depends on how Section 1 is handled. Combine this threat with the TWA lawsuit and ALPA is facing challenges which are existential.
03-31-2012, 07:53 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,038
The B25 is neat, but how would you ever afford to put AvGas in the thing?
Here's a couple photos of an A36, which we currently use for business travel in one of my three jobs. (although ours is not a G Model, but these pictures were easier than hosting my own) We copied the 2007 paint scheme. The only thing that makes it affordable is that it is in a partnership.
... and the interior makes the wives happy ...
Here's a couple photos of an A36, which we currently use for business travel in one of my three jobs. (although ours is not a G Model, but these pictures were easier than hosting my own) We copied the 2007 paint scheme. The only thing that makes it affordable is that it is in a partnership.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 03-31-2012 at 08:05 AM.
03-31-2012, 08:02 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Teaching in this is always fun! Rare to find people that do not already have a round motor background, so it usually falls into the mode of JDDAS (just dont do anything stupid) Best twin trainer in the world IMHO. Clearly why the USAF hung onto them into the early 60's.
Granted not as sexy as a Mooney, I still can not afford to rent one of those!
03-31-2012, 08:10 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,038
More interesting tid bits on the AA 737 buy:
737 Cost, Not Pricing: Wells Fargo has this item about what American Airlines actually paid for the Boeing 737-800, as opposed to the list price: more than a 50% discount from $84.4m. Note that AerCap (AER) appears to have paid $40m per aircraft in a purchase-leaseback. One assumes American didn’t resell the aircraft for the price paid from Boeing but marked them up at least a little bit. We’ve heard AA’s cost was in the range of $35m but this is unconfirmed.
~$40MM Per 737, It Appears. Based on the change in YTD flight equipment additions, AER added $80MM in planes in Q4; since the only Q4 additions were two new 737-800s leased back to American Airlines, the 20-F implies a $40MM unit price. Also, based on changes in purchase commitments from 9/30/11, we believe the average 737-800 purchase price (over the remaining 33 planes as of year end) is ~$41MM. A new 737-800 typically appraises for ~$45MM.
~$40MM Per 737, It Appears. Based on the change in YTD flight equipment additions, AER added $80MM in planes in Q4; since the only Q4 additions were two new 737-800s leased back to American Airlines, the 20-F implies a $40MM unit price. Also, based on changes in purchase commitments from 9/30/11, we believe the average 737-800 purchase price (over the remaining 33 planes as of year end) is ~$41MM. A new 737-800 typically appraises for ~$45MM.
03-31-2012, 08:10 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
While talking about the "Toy Box." I did a little work on this and the owner promised we'd take it around to air shows. It had a fascinating history. Originally registered to the CIA, then operated by the World's largest cocaine smuggler. We had photos of it in SE Asia with Air to Ground munitions, and photos of it full of cocaine, even pictures of folks on it mooning the DEA (back then they could not shoot it down, but they could run anything the DEA down to min fuel). I was planning a heck of a story board:
The previous owner who used it for drug running was this guy:
Drug Smuggler- Rik Luytjes
Not to glamorize that sort of thing. But the airplane was purpose built for shenanigans. 350 feet was plenty to get 3,000+ lbs of payload aloft and fly it at 200+ knots for over 1,000 miles. Used, illegally, it made Central America to Scranton PA, non stop. It was a very capable airplane, but had some quirks. Unfortunately the owner sold it ... would have been fun to load up ten friends & head down to the islands in.
As you can see, the main gear hang low in flight and have a lot of travel. When landing the wheels would physically be on the ground, but it would definitely still be flying. As sold to the CIA, there was no lock out for Beta on the prop. Getting it into reverse while still 3 feet in the air would result in the airplane trying to swap ends.
If I won the lottery, I would be making some phone calls to see if the current owner wants to sell. It is about the most useful, fun, relatively cheap to operate war-bird I know of.
The previous owner who used it for drug running was this guy:
Drug Smuggler- Rik Luytjes
Not to glamorize that sort of thing. But the airplane was purpose built for shenanigans. 350 feet was plenty to get 3,000+ lbs of payload aloft and fly it at 200+ knots for over 1,000 miles. Used, illegally, it made Central America to Scranton PA, non stop. It was a very capable airplane, but had some quirks. Unfortunately the owner sold it ... would have been fun to load up ten friends & head down to the islands in.
As you can see, the main gear hang low in flight and have a lot of travel. When landing the wheels would physically be on the ground, but it would definitely still be flying. As sold to the CIA, there was no lock out for Beta on the prop. Getting it into reverse while still 3 feet in the air would result in the airplane trying to swap ends.
If I won the lottery, I would be making some phone calls to see if the current owner wants to sell. It is about the most useful, fun, relatively cheap to operate war-bird I know of.
That looks like a pilatus porter. I have seen one land on a helipad on top of a mountain and take off again on a windy day. Very cool.
Actually its a Helio HST-550, I just looked it up. Clearly, its origins are in the porter though.
Last edited by scambo1; 03-31-2012 at 08:32 AM.
03-31-2012, 08:13 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
Well gloopy sink flamer and george all say that it would be a loss to allow any more jets in the 51-76 seat range even if other areas of scope were to be improved significantly.
I believe limiting and eventually eliminating all off-list DCI pilots... Let the company operate the airline on multiple certificates, as long as there are Delta Pilots in the cockpits!!!
I wonder if the silent masses feel the same.... We can only hope!
I believe limiting and eventually eliminating all off-list DCI pilots... Let the company operate the airline on multiple certificates, as long as there are Delta Pilots in the cockpits!!!
I wonder if the silent masses feel the same.... We can only hope!
Trading scope for scope is a zero sum gain, it's not a win.
You're right on, all Delta operated/controlled/scheduled or otherwise produced flying needs to have Delta pilots at the controls regardless of what certificate is used.
The Teamsters at Republic even managed to work towards that solution, warts and all, because they realized the danger of the alternative.
Cheers
George
03-31-2012, 08:13 AM
Sho me da money!
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: B25, Left
Posts: 947
The B25 is neat, but how would you ever afford to put AvGas in the thing?
I'm sticking with my current "Company Car" (although ours is not a G Model, but these pictures were easier than hosting my own) We copied the 2007 paint scheme.
... and the interior makes the wives happy ... the club seating does eat into cargo space though.
I'm sticking with my current "Company Car" (although ours is not a G Model, but these pictures were easier than hosting my own) We copied the 2007 paint scheme.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
