Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > United
Fleet Discussion and News >

Fleet Discussion and News

Search

Notices

Fleet Discussion and News

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-03-2016, 08:22 PM
  #121  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,253
Default

The bunk thing is kind of trickling out via rumor pipe. Seems the Feds might have issues with it meeting Class One Standards. Not sure this is all inflexible union pilots fault just yet.
intrepidcv11 is offline  
Old 12-03-2016, 08:25 PM
  #122  
Gets Weekends Off
 
CousinEddie's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,085
Default

Originally Posted by intrepidcv11
The bunk thing is kind of trickling out via rumor pipe. Seems the Feds might have issues with it meeting Class One Standards. Not sure this is all inflexible union pilots fault just yet.
Won't be a problem though for foreign carriers flying our former customers in and out of the US though. Neither will other pesky 117 issues. Kind of like a football game where holding and clipping is allowed for one team but penalized for the other.
CousinEddie is offline  
Old 12-03-2016, 09:09 PM
  #123  
Gets Weekends Off
 
CousinEddie's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,085
Default

Originally Posted by b52dthdlr
i really hope that you are right concerning aircraft purchases. in light of recent announcements i will admit that i dont share you optimism. for me it was the announcement by the company that they were postponing the construction of building G at dentk. that is a big leadtime decision. if the company has made the decision that they do not need those sim bays then in my opinion it does not bode well for growth for at least the next 3-5 years by my guess...
I missed that DENTK announcement. I share your outlook in that regard. Thanks for mentioning it.
CousinEddie is offline  
Old 12-03-2016, 09:59 PM
  #124  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,253
Default

Originally Posted by CousinEddie
Won't be a problem though for foreign carriers flying our former customers in and out of the US though. Neither will other pesky 117 issues. Kind of like a football game where holding and clipping is allowed for one team but penalized for the other.
True. I would have hoped Airbus and Boeing would consider Class One rest areas to be the standard to adapt towards in the design process. Unfortunately the A350 launch customer was from Slaver's Bay...

Last edited by intrepidcv11; 12-03-2016 at 10:10 PM.
intrepidcv11 is offline  
Old 12-04-2016, 08:18 AM
  #125  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,266
Default

Originally Posted by b52dthdlr
i really hope that you are right concerning aircraft purchases. in light of recent announcements i will admit that i dont share you optimism. for me it was the announcement by the company that they were postponing the construction of building G at dentk. that is a big leadtime decision. if the company has made the decision that they do not need those sim bays then in my opinion it does not bode well for growth for at least the next 3-5 years by my guess...
I'm trying to remain optimistic. I was wondering why they would build it in the first place when there are so many empty sim bays to begin with. The green house (F building?) seemed to have a lot of empty space, plus with some of the old sims leaving that frees up space for new stuff and LCAL imports. The 747 sim will be leaving soon too with that fleet being retired. All just anecdotal peanut gallery observation.

Originally Posted by CousinEddie
Won't be a problem though for foreign carriers flying our former customers in and out of the US though. Neither will other pesky 117 issues. Kind of like a football game where holding and clipping is allowed for one team but penalized for the other.
Shack.
Grumble is offline  
Old 12-04-2016, 09:12 AM
  #126  
Gets Weekends Off
 
oldmako's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2009
Position: The GF of FUPM
Posts: 3,073
Default

Hard to say what the plans are at TK. The whole place is under re-construction, even the relatively new F building.
oldmako is offline  
Old 12-04-2016, 09:29 AM
  #127  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jan 2016
Posts: 36
Default

Edited: UAL Fleet discussion mention embedded below....I could have posted this under NAI also. I'm not trying to create thread drift. My apologies.

I think this NAI approval is the prelude to the next chapter in the evolution of the airline industry; globalization. I'm certainly not Nostradamus or trying to spread doom and gloom, this has been talked about for years by others that are more knowledgeable and astute than me.

I'm beginning to think that UAL and the other US carriers are engaging their "playbook" for this recent event. While fleet planning is certainly a component of it, I believe that the hypothetical end game is at the forefront of their decision making or will be very soon. Maybe further US industry consolidation or a push for relaxation of foreign ownership regulations to create mega-carriers etc. (Lufthansa and UAL) If our companies and profession don't adapt, we'll be left behind, this time forever, like other industries before us.

It's mental masturbation at this point to connect the dots, but certainly understandable and remaining engaged will be critical. Let's hope those that have been on the sidelines have awaken.

JMHO. Good luck to all.

Frats

Last edited by Toedrag; 12-04-2016 at 09:47 AM.
Toedrag is offline  
Old 12-05-2016, 10:10 AM
  #128  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Dave Fitzgerald's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: 777
Posts: 2,173
Default

Originally Posted by b52dthdlr
what do you suggest, that ALPA allow the company and vendors to violate our contract? our contract was written to protect us. allowing the company and others to ignore it for the sake of expediency and profit or worse, just so that we can fly a neat airplane would be foolish and have consequences far beyond this issue. tell me, what "show" are you referring to?
We can start with the flight engineer on the 737, then move to the 2-man 767. UAL actually got a 3-man 767 sim before the plane was certified. I was in that sim for my interview sim ride. It was eventually rebuilt to a 767-300.

Those are the kinds of things that can shoot us in the foot if we insist on something that the rest of the industry doesn't go along with.
Dave Fitzgerald is offline  
Old 12-05-2016, 10:34 AM
  #129  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,785
Default

Originally Posted by Dave Fitzgerald
We can start with the flight engineer on the 737, then move to the 2-man 767. UAL actually got a 3-man 767 sim before the plane was certified. I was in that sim for my interview sim ride. It was eventually rebuilt to a 767-300.

Those are the kinds of things that can shoot us in the foot if we insist on something that the rest of the industry doesn't go along with.
The A350 FCRF doesn't comply with FAR 117. This is nothing like the 737 or the 767 situations. If only United had gone with the original 777 FCRF imagine how much revenue that would not have been lost to the First Class seats required to mitigate the substandard Hart Langer closet.

This is a safety issue that requires standing up for what is right.
Flytolive is offline  
Old 12-05-2016, 11:20 AM
  #130  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,266
Default

Originally Posted by Flytolive
The A350 FCRF doesn't comply with FAR 117. This is nothing like the 737 or the 767 situations. If only United had gone with the original 777 FCRF imagine how much revenue that would not have been lost to the First Class seats required to mitigate the substandard Hart Langer closet.

This is a safety issue that requires standing up for what is right.
If this is the case, Airbus will have to fix it or no US carrier will be able to utilize it. No way they'll let that happen.
Grumble is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Guard Dude
Delta
201720
04-06-2022 07:59 AM
gooddeal
Major
25
10-18-2014 04:43 PM
vagabond
Hangar Talk
20
06-22-2011 07:02 AM
Sink r8
Major
27
01-12-2010 08:47 AM
Lipout1
Cargo
3
07-25-2007 08:43 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices