Delta Interview

[~~~^~~~]

737Pylt:

This thread is intended to help people interested in getting on board at Delta with positive information. I think everyone is bored to death with an arguement that started in 1999. If you want to keep it going, PM me. But for the record - you won. There are 10 DCI carriers in our only hub and ASA is positioned to be replaced by non-ALPA pilots. All the destruction we saw coming is now a fact and soon to be a footnote in history. It is a shame. But at least I participated in an effort to try to save our airline and by extension a small part of the profession. I continue to believe "inclusive scope" which would result in all Delta flying being performed by Delta pilots (who would be junior to you) is the right direction - but - now that non-ALPA pilots perform most of the 49% of Delta flying done by subcontractors it will probably never happen. You won, you won, you won. How many times must I repeat the same drivel before you accept, you won? Those who wanted an inclusive union, lost. The indians will take back the West before small jet pilots can try to attain scope that would protect their jobs and raise the floor of this profession.

Again, this thread is to try to help people who are trying to get on board with a great airline. Will you contribute anything? You have experience we don't have.

 

[Blucher]

737Pylt:

This thread is intended to help people interested in getting on board at Delta with positive information. I think everyone is bored to death with an arguement that started in 1999. If you want to keep it going, PM me. But for the record - you won. There are 10 DCI carriers in our only hub and ASA is positioned to be replaced by non-ALPA pilots. All the destruction we saw coming is now a fact and soon to be a footnote in history. It is a shame. But at least I participated in an effort to try to save our airline and by extension a small part of the profession. I continue to believe "inclusive scope" which would result in all Delta flying being performed by Delta pilots (who would be junior to you) is the right direction - but - now that non-ALPA pilots perform most of the 49% of Delta flying done by subcontractors it will probably never happen. You won, you won, you won. How many times must I repeat the same drivel before you accept, you won? Those who wanted an inclusive union, lost. The indians will take back the West before small jet pilots can try to attain scope that would protect their jobs and raise the floor of this profession.

Again, this thread is to try to help people who are trying to get on board with a great airline. Will you contribute anything? You have experience we don't have.

Thank you, Fins. That is without a doubt the best post I have ever read on this board. Bravo, sir, bravo!

-Blucher

 

[737 Pylt]

737Pylt:

This thread is intended to help people interested in getting on board at Delta with positive information. I think everyone is bored to death with an arguement that started in 1999. If you want to keep it going, PM me. But for the record - you won. There are 10 DCI carriers in our only hub and ASA is positioned to be replaced by non-ALPA pilots. All the destruction we saw coming is now a fact and soon to be a footnote in history. It is a shame. But at least I participated in an effort to try to save our airline and by extension a small part of the profession. I continue to believe "inclusive scope" which would result in all Delta flying being performed by Delta pilots (who would be junior to you) is the right direction - but - now that non-ALPA pilots perform most of the 49% of Delta flying done by subcontractors it will probably never happen. You won, you won, you won. How many times must I repeat the same drivel before you accept, you won? Those who wanted an inclusive union, lost. The indians will take back the West before small jet pilots can try to attain scope that would protect their jobs and raise the floor of this profession.

Again, this thread is to try to help people who are trying to get on board with a great airline. Will you contribute anything? You have experience we don't have.

Fins:
Check your PM's

737

 

[Heavy Set]

I hope fins does get on with Delta. My friends over there think good things are coming up for them, with expansion and growth around the corner. It appears they have gotten their financial side in order, and will be able to compete better in the future. Yes, it probably stung getting to this point, but hopefully they are on the right track.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

I believe that FINS will be a Delta pilot in the next few months. Congrats to him and all that are on there way over here.

 

[FDJ2]

737Pylt:

But at least I participated in an effort to try to save our airline and by extension a small part of the profession. I continue to believe "inclusive scope" which would result in all Delta flying being performed by Delta pilots (who would be junior to you) is the right direction - but - now that non-ALPA pilots perform most of the 49% of Delta flying done by subcontractors it will probably never happen.

Don't kid yourself Fins, you participated in an effort to abrogate the collective bargaining agreement of an airline you now aspire to join.

Your lawsuit would not have created brand scope, it would have decimated any meaningful scope on any aircraft and you know it.

If the RJDC were to prevail, no scope language could be written that would prevent or limit the outsourcing of DL code on all equipment.

The RJDC sponsored litigation does not differentiate between wholly owned or not, ALPA or not, but what it does do is paint with a broad brush in its efforts to deny pilot groups the right to negotiate scope with their employer. BTW, you were never an employee of DAL.

The RJDC litigation does not support a single list, as a matter of fact the relief section asking for a single list was pulled out of the lawsuit by the RJDC shortly after the mainline started to furlough, which only serves to highlight the self centered nature of the lawsuit to begin with.

You have consistently tossed disparaging commens towards DAL pilots and their MEC and now you want to join them, that is just a little hypocritical.

 

[CesnaCaptn]

1. 220 ish. I do not have a heading card in front of me but that is a quick quess. Pencil methood point to point.

2. Without knowing the aircraft TAS it is not accurate. This would allow you to decide your crab angle. Thus one can only guess the answer would be something less than 090 but likely more than 060.

Drift angle = cross wind component * 60 / TAS

ergo 50 knots cross wind ( full component at 90 deg off heading) * 60 / TAS

assume TAS 300

DA = 50 * 60 / 300 = 20 deg

090 - 20 = 070

Slinky

Does * equal "times?" If so, then by the work shown it should be 50 times 60 which equals 300 divided by 300, which equals 1. What am I missing?

What about this questions:

You are flying at 0.86 Mach, and you elect to slow down for operational
purposes. Below what airspeed do you have to advise ATC? 0.85, 0.84, 0.83, 0.82. The answer shown is .84 the equivalent to ten knots.

Is that correct? 5-3-3 (e) of the aim states,"Change in the average true airspeed (at cruising altitude) when it varies by 5 percent or 10 knots (whichever is greater) from that filed in the flight plan." I would think that the 5% part of the rule would apply at this speed and the answer would be .82.

 

[terryhfly]

That is one of the questions on the test. By the way

 

[Truckdriver]

Does * equal "times?" If so, then by the work shown it should be 50 times 60 which equals 300 divided by 300, which equals 1. What am I missing?

What about this questions:

You are flying at 0.86 Mach, and you elect to slow down for operational
purposes. Below what airspeed do you have to advise ATC? 0.85, 0.84, 0.83, 0.82. The answer shown is .84 the equivalent to ten knots.

Is that correct? 5-3-3 (e) of the aim states,"Change in the average true airspeed (at cruising altitude) when it varies by 5 percent or 10 knots (whichever is greater) from that filed in the flight plan." I would think that the 5% part of the rule would apply at this speed and the answer would be .82.

Actually 50 * 60 = 3000. So the answer using 300 kts should be 10 degrees. I do agree with you on the other question. I would use the 10 knots when I'm flying with reference to knots and the 10% when I'm flying with reference to mach. I would say the answer is .82 mach.

Now how about this one.

You are on the 270 radial. Hold east on the 090 radial 20 DME fix, 20 mile legs. Wind is 360 @ 20kts. What radial will the bearing pointer be pointing to before you turn inbound?

And this one.

You are taking off runway 09 with the winds 360 @ 15kts. Runway mag heading is 092 and actual aircraft heading on the runway is 088. What heading do you fly on takeoff if told to fly runway heading? I would say 088.

 

[~~~^~~~]

(1) .84 Mach works out to be about 11 KTAS - seems like the best answer

(2) Without knowing your speed, you can not calculate your correction. Figure the bearing pointer is going to be towards the left rear of the aircraft, something around 220? It sounds like a question where they are wanting you to come up with a "that looks about right" answer.

(3) You are correct. Per the AIM (and Gleim test guide) runway heading is maintaining the heading the aircraft was on going down the runway WITHOUT any correction for wind.

 

[CesnaCaptn]

You are on the 270 radial. Hold east on the 090 radial 20 DME fix, 20 mile legs. Wind is 360 @ 20kts. What radial will the bearing pointer be pointing to before you turn inbound?

Am I the only one that was confused about where you are with this question? Are you east of the VOR or west of the VOR? The question states that you are on the 270 radial. How can you be holding east on the 090 radial 20 DME fix?

 

[CesnaCaptn]

Actually 50 * 60 = 3000.

Thanks for pointing that out. I sure have a lot of catching up to do.

 

[Truckdriver]

Am I the only one that was confused about where you are with this question? Are you east of the VOR or west of the VOR? The question states that you are on the 270 radial. How can you be holding east on the 090 radial 20 DME fix?

You could be on the 270 radial and then cross the station to the 090 radial and hold east. It would be a parallel entry. My thinking is what fin said. You really don't know the correction because there is no speed. You would be holding a left correction to track the radial so the pointer would be pointing slightly behind and to the left. Anyone know what the answer choices were for this one?

 

[Dr Pepper]

Just remember that some of the questions on the knowledge test are there to waste your time. Write down the question number, select an answer, move on to the next question and then come back to the ones you were not sure on. I think the one about traveling 10 degrees is only there to waste your time. The test was 42 questions for 42 minutes. The behavior test is 50 minutes and plenty of time. The cog has not time limit overall, but sections do time out.

 

[Truckdriver]

(1) .84 Mach works out to be about 11 KTAS - seems like the best answer

5% of .84 is greater than 10kts. So according to the AIM, wouldn't you tell ATC when your speed differs by 5% in this case? In the real world, we just tell them when indicated drops by 10kts even if we are using mach, but for testing purposes I'm not sure what I would say. It's either .84 or .82.

 

[Truckdriver]

.......

 

[slinky]

OOPs you are right. Sorry about the typo...

50*60/300 =10
so it would be 080

slinky

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Like one other person posted. Big Picture guys. Take a WAG and come back to it if you have time.

 

[Stifler's Mom]

Don't worry about the cog. test. It was actually the easiest part of the day. The one that has you list the numbers backward were all single digit numbers. The test that has you rember the key (@=2, ^=7) is repeated a couple times later in the test so rember it. If you play vidio games this test is pretty easy. You have to do different things with both hands at the same time.

The aviation test was 40 questions in 40 min. Most of the questions were from the gouge. Some were the same type of question but with some changes. You just need to read the question and think about it.

If I can answer an specific questions I will try and remember. But if I help you, you had better get hired. That way in some small way I could live vicariously through you.

I knew all these years of surfing the internet for porn would finally pay off. :blush:

 

[Truckdriver]

So does mach increase or decrease with altitude? I thought that it decreased because if you are going mach 1 at 1000 feet you are going much faster than if you are going mach 1 at 36,000 feet. Why are the fellas on the gouge saying mach increases with altitude? TAS is greater with altitude and the speed of sound is lower so are they saying that mach NUMBER increases with altitude even though actual mach decreases?