Fleet Discussion and News
#122
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.
#123
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...
#124
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,253
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.
#125
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,266
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...
Shack.
#127
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2016
Posts: 36
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
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.
#128
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?
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.
#129
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,785
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.
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.
This is a safety issue that requires standing up for what is right.
#130
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,266
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.
This is a safety issue that requires standing up for what is right.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post