CAL/UAL Solution

[waveflyer]

The 787 was designed to be a complementary type?
I know everyone thinks the 777 is a shiny new jet- but it's close to 20 years old...

 

[macdu]

To summarize your solution:

- me
- you



I don't care what you say, that's funny, I needed a laugh today.

 

[Flightdawg]

To summarize your solution:

- me
- you

Good summation! :laugh:

Seriously, if UAL is such a sinking ship, then the better suggestion is to skip the merger completely. Let UAL fail and buy up the pieces later like UAL did with Pan Am.

As for the name change, United is more fitting of a global airline than Continental. It's a marketing PR thing. Nostalgia has little place in business.

 

[bluefin]

They know UAL is not a sinking ship. They are afraid to face the facts that 1/3 of the pilot force is new 2005-2007 and they may not come out so rosey. Due to praters lack of listening to the majority I am going to sit this one out and watch from the side lines for a LOOOONG time. Awesome career, LIVING THE DREAM BABY!!!!!!! thanks prater and swa.

 

[SuperFLUF]

The 787 was designed to be a complementary type?
I know everyone thinks the 777 is a shiny new jet- but it's close to 20 years old...

Boeing planned from the start to design the 787 to be flown by 777 crews with a short differences training course. The latest word from Boeing is 5 days of differences training. CAL is planning on using the 777 crews but with a more extensive training course.

 

[WolfManPack]

This guy is pretty f-ing hilarious (if you don't take anything seriously).

Pjuice hahahahhaha

Agreed, I've enjoyed reading his, obviously satirical (sp?) posts for a long time. For the most part it's SNL level stuff.

 

[FDJ2]

The 787 was designed to be a complementary type?
I know everyone thinks the 777 is a shiny new jet- but it's close to 20 years old...

Here's some 777 history from Boeing's website.

http://www.boeing.com/history/boeing/777.html

The Model 777, the first entirely new Boeing airplane in more than a decade, was the first jetliner to be 100 percent digitally designed using three-dimensional computer graphics. Throughout the design process, the airplane was "preassembled" on the computer, eliminating the need for a costly, full-scale mock-up.

The 777 program was launched in October 1990 with an order from United Airlines. In June 1995, United flew its first 777 in revenue service. The Boeing board of directors authorized production of the 777-300 on June 26, 1995, and the first 777-300 was delivered to Cathay Pacific Airways in June 1998.

The 777 is the widest, most spacious airplane in its class and includes improvements in airfoil technology, flight deck design, passenger comfort and interior flexibility. Its greater payload and range capability result in lower operating costs to airlines, and its standard equipment includes many features that are optional on other airliners.

The airplane is larger than all other twinjet or trijet airplanes but smaller than the 747. It brings the twin-engine economic advantage to medium- and long-range markets. The 777 currently is available in five models: 777-200, 777-200ER (extended range), 777-200LR (longer-range), 777-300 and the 777-300ER. The 777-200 can take 305 passengers 5,210 miles; the 777-300 can carry 368 passengers 5,955 miles. Launched in February 2000, the 777-200LR and 777-300ER can fly 8,818 or 7,175 miles, respectively. The 777-300ER rolled out Nov. 14, 2002

 

[thor2j]

Boeing planned from the start to design the 787 to be flown by 777 crews with a short differences training course. The latest word from Boeing is 5 days of differences training. CAL is planning on using the 777 crews but with a more extensive training course.

Completely wrong. Boeing had no intentions of making a common type. The airlines were the ones pressuring Boeing to do it. There is nothing for Boeing to gain by doing this. To this day, it is not decided. Boeing is still leaning toward making it seperate while the airlines pressure the other way.

 

[coogebeachhotel]

So a 20% 777 pilot would be a 20% 777 pilot on combined list?

 

[SuperFLUF]

Completely wrong. Boeing had no intentions of making a common type. The airlines were the ones pressuring Boeing to do it. There is nothing for Boeing to gain by doing this. To this day, it is not decided. Boeing is still leaning toward making it seperate while the airlines pressure the other way.

Your source?

I'm just going by the info that Boeing has been putting out. I was on a blastmail list for Sonic Cruiser development info and when that was killed I ended up being on Boeing's "world design team" mailing list (like quite a few others I'm sure). They used that public group for surveys and polling to make some public opinion based decisions on the (stupid) name and interior design features. They hosted online chats with engineers and the chief pilots.
When the cockpit design was revealed and in a few of the online chats they stated how it was designed so that 777 pilots could fly it with minimal differences training. That was quite a few years ago.

 

[SuperFLUF]

So a 20% 777 pilot would be a 20% 777 pilot on combined list?

Not exactly.
People bid equipment and seat for all sorts of reasons and at each airline the equipment is not staffed in pure seniority order at either airline. The merger policy does not allow any "leapfrogging" of a pilot over pilots they were junior to at their airline.
So, a junior pilot at CAL who is a 777 FO doesn't get moved ahead of a pilot senior to him or her who is a 737 FO in a more desirable or at a more desirable seniority level (especially with the ravages of PBS).

The way I understand it (and this is over simplified) is that the SLI would start of with a simple relative seniority integration and then is modified for certain seniority segments of the list based on things like the widebody ratios, career expectations, longevity.....etc.

 

[Fubijaakr]

You obviously don't know anything about ALPA merger policy. DOH means almost nothing.

DoH is not part of the ALPA Merger policy. Look it up.

 

[scoreboardII]

Blufin, don't drag and bash SWA into this mess, you turned them down, remember?

Question for Southwest pilots........
Views: 1,436
Posted By bluefin

Question for Southwest pilots........

Back in 2000 I was offered an interview, but declined (which I regret deeeeply)because I was hired at one of those legacy carriers and was in training. I am reluctant to put money down on a type...

 

[densoo]

Completely wrong. Boeing had no intentions of making a common type. The airlines were the ones pressuring Boeing to do it. There is nothing for Boeing to gain by doing this. To this day, it is not decided. Boeing is still leaning toward making it seperate while the airlines pressure the other way.

(Speed Lines Media) by Walter Varney, 4/1/2010 -- The airline today announced FAA approval of a common type rating for the B-777 and the soon to be delivered B-787. The common type rating will save on training costs and allow operations with fewer pilots which is in keeping with the airline's evironmental position of lowering its carbon footprint.

In a related development, the airline said it is very close to an agreement with the FAA to have a common type rating across its entire aircraft fleet. With today's retirement of its last 737-300, or so-called "round dial" aircraft, all of the airline's aircraft now are EFIS "glass cockpit" displays Boeing aircraft. Since all 737 pilots are already qualified on all five models of the aircraft, the airline is taking this "universally assignable" pilot concept to the next level--all pilots qualified in all aircraft.

Once pilots accomplish a two-hour online training module from the comfort of their own home, they will be awarded the "B-Type" which stands for "Boeing Type Rating," and will be able to fly any Boeing aircraft on the airline's property, which include the B737, B757, B767, B777, and soon the B787.

"The flexibility this allows is obvious," said a company spokesman. "If a 787 pilot gets stuck at the security checkpoint and isn't available for the New York to Hong Kong flight, then a Boston-bound 737 pilot can be pulled off the plane on the adjacent gate to operate the 787 to the Far East, allowing for uninterrupted and ontime operations for our passengers."

This kind of outside the box thinking may be exactly what the airline needs as the combined carriers compete against the mega-carrier Delta, which has separate training and scheduling in all types and subtypes of aircraft, and also has separate training and pilot pools for domestic and international operations.

"While some say it is safer for pilots to operate a single type of aircraft in a geographic area they are thoroughly familiar with," the spokesman said, "it is far cheaper to have all pilots operate in all areas and with all aircraft that they are just somewhat familiar with."

The stock closed up today on the news.

 

[thor2j]

Your source?

I'm just going by the info that Boeing has been putting out. I was on a blastmail list for Sonic Cruiser development info and when that was killed I ended up being on Boeing's "world design team" mailing list (like quite a few others I'm sure). They used that public group for surveys and polling to make some public opinion based decisions on the (stupid) name and interior design features. They hosted online chats with engineers and the chief pilots.
When the cockpit design was revealed and in a few of the online chats they stated how it was designed so that 777 pilots could fly it with minimal differences training. That was quite a few years ago.

Boeing 787 engineers