Stable wide-body fleet
04-12-2016, 08:52 AM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: A350 Both
Posts: 7,292
You are arguing with yourself.
Using easks, who is out of compliance? Delta.
Using BHs who would be in compliance? Delta.
This is under our current contract.
Easks are our leverage.
Additionally, if we switch to BHs in our JV language with AF/KLM and then write new JV language with, for example China Eastern (who BTW last week announced they were increasing their China-US flights by 50%) the language would certainly be written using Block Hours instead of EASKs.
Its pretty easy to see around that corner.
Using easks, who is out of compliance? Delta.
Using BHs who would be in compliance? Delta.
This is under our current contract.
Easks are our leverage.
Additionally, if we switch to BHs in our JV language with AF/KLM and then write new JV language with, for example China Eastern (who BTW last week announced they were increasing their China-US flights by 50%) the language would certainly be written using Block Hours instead of EASKs.
Its pretty easy to see around that corner.
04-12-2016, 08:54 AM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: A350 Both
Posts: 7,292
The answer to your question is 0. 0 new wide body airframes. The one to be delivered are replacements. As far as Block hours vs. EASKs, EASKs period. Delta sells seats not hours.
The more seats we fly for Delta the better. With block hours the incentive is for management to use other operators larger gauge airplanes. To keep Delta pilots flying the operations Delta is able to sell we need to protect our production. Seats are what we produce, not hours. The airframe used to produce a number of seats is continually being adjusted, there is no one for one trade. Total seats could be a number of B757s or a single A333. Which is better for us, 2 B757 operations or 1 A333? Either way EASKs work out better.
Management has repeatedly told the investment community we are going to have about $3.5 billion a year in capital investment. With the orders we have and the narrow-body fleet renewal about to be announced, that leaves no additional money for wide-body growth airplanes.
The more seats we fly for Delta the better. With block hours the incentive is for management to use other operators larger gauge airplanes. To keep Delta pilots flying the operations Delta is able to sell we need to protect our production. Seats are what we produce, not hours. The airframe used to produce a number of seats is continually being adjusted, there is no one for one trade. Total seats could be a number of B757s or a single A333. Which is better for us, 2 B757 operations or 1 A333? Either way EASKs work out better.
Management has repeatedly told the investment community we are going to have about $3.5 billion a year in capital investment. With the orders we have and the narrow-body fleet renewal about to be announced, that leaves no additional money for wide-body growth airplanes.
04-12-2016, 08:56 AM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: A350 Both
Posts: 7,292
A couple of additional thoughts against your argument: When we start seeing 737 service across the Atlantic, don't you think Delta would join that down gauging in a heart beat? Also, if the demand is there right now with the larger gauge aircraft, don't you think the capacity will need to be filled by additional airframes to compensate for the 747/380 capacity?
04-12-2016, 08:58 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: A350 Both
Posts: 7,292
04-12-2016, 09:26 AM
#25
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
04-12-2016, 09:42 AM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: A350 Both
Posts: 7,292
You tell me. What do you think they will be replaced with? 767s are out. The A321 holds fewer people, and doesn't really have international performance AFAIK. That leaves 330s. So tell me what I am missing here. We should be ecstatic if the company replaces the 757s with 737s in order to keep the number of pilot jobs commensurate with EASKs, but I believe that bigger airplanes than the 757s will be the replacement. The real wild card is what happens on the other side of the Atlantic, and it is true that we have even less control over that than we do what Delta does. But is it not logical to think they will be replacing their 747s with 330s at the biggest?
04-12-2016, 10:19 AM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Position: stake holder ir.delta.com
Posts: 10,534
EASKs are the universal measuring stick. If you haven't noticed we are reducing gauge. The reason for reducing gauge is to allow more flexibility.
Delta management is also reducing gauge at their subsidiary VA. What you don't get is other than AF/KLM Delta is in control. 4 engines and upper decks are out and will not return.
EASKs are THE universal metric for production. Block hours are the noose around our larger gauge, 1 B744 = 1 A321. Changing from one to another is chasing our tail.
Delta management is also reducing gauge at their subsidiary VA. What you don't get is other than AF/KLM Delta is in control. 4 engines and upper decks are out and will not return.
EASKs are THE universal metric for production. Block hours are the noose around our larger gauge, 1 B744 = 1 A321. Changing from one to another is chasing our tail.
04-12-2016, 12:05 PM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 360
I think many of us are in fact seeing the forest, it's just a different forest than the one you and the company are looking at.
04-12-2016, 12:51 PM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: A350 Both
Posts: 7,292
Is that why the company asked for EASK to BH conversion in the failed TA, out of the goodness of their hearts...looking out for the pilot group's long term interests?
I think many of us are in fact seeing the forest, it's just a different forest than the one you and the company are looking at.
I think many of us are in fact seeing the forest, it's just a different forest than the one you and the company are looking at.
Another fascinating thing about this particular argument is that many have said that Anderson played chess while ALPA played checkers. How many moves ahead have you thought? Or do we still have pieces to be "kinged"?
My contention is that the other side of the equation is going to be downsizing airframes. That reduces their ASKs. How do we recoup those losses?
Block hours are pilot positions. 1 DAL 757 = 1 AF 747/380
ASKs are airplane size dependent. In this case, smaller wins because it takes more of them to make up the seat deficit. Again, I will ask what you believe the replacement across the Atlantic for the 757 will be. If you believe it will be a smaller airframe, then your argument wins. Then I will ask what the eventual replacement for the 767 will be. Same result.
I know I am not going to change any minds, but at least you should be thinking about down the road. And if my position is insulting to some, as it appears to be, you need to lighten up. It is just a discussion.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
