Guess Gary Kelly thinks AirTran does 1 thing better than Southwest

[scoreboardII]

shutdown both motors at LAX on the taxiway? Riiiiight.... Ground will let you do that fer sure.

 

[PropPiedmont]

uh... then why didn't you shut one down? You do know they want you to shut it down after 3 mins, right? It could have been a situation where it was tight getting into a gate and the cpt chose to operate both engines to get into the gate. Even then, for 45 mins? Shut them both down... There is a checklist for that too. That would be a choice of the pilots, not that the company would not let them. Completely different.

Have you ever tried to tell a SWA captain what to do? I'm merely an FO at this Captain's airline. Im here to satisfy insurance requirements and that is all.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Single engine taxi at SWA will save more than .5 Billion a year at current fuel prices. That figure came from SWA Flight Ops to AirTran flight Ops last week.


Guadalupe Captain

Half a billion? Um, yeah, sure.

Single engine taxi vs two engine is a wash. Any money saved gets wasted when the second engine won't start for some reason and you're miles from the mechanics. Also, it's not as safe.

Single engine taxi is for bozos and prop dawg commuter pilots that need to get that spinning blade stopped for the rampers.

So AT thinks single engine taxi is something they bring to the table. Geez, really digging around on the bottom of the barrel, eh?

 

[CaptainKiwi]

Have you ever tried to tell a SWA captain what to do? I'm merely an FO at this Captain's airline. Im here to satisfy insurance requirements and that is all.

If you really believe that, it's sad. You might as well sit in the back and be a passenger...

btw, not tell them what to do, but mearly suggest. Yes, I have suggested several times. It is two pilots working together, not a cpt draggin along his dog on a leash

If you didn't notice, when that cpt does something wrong and you didn't say anything. Your in the sling too.

 

[jonjuan]

If you really believe that, it's sad. You might as well sit in the back and be a passenger...

btw, not tell them what to do, but mearly suggest. Yes, I have suggested several times. It is two pilots working together, not a cpt draggin along his dog on a leash

If you didn't notice, when that cpt does something wrong and you didn't say anything. Your in the sling too.

He didn't say he did something that was unsafe. He said if the CA wants to burn dino fuel waiting for the gate, then that's his perogative. Gary will keep paying him the same whether or not he says anything.

 

[Ty Webb]

Half a billion? Um, yeah, sure.

Single engine taxi vs two engine is a wash. Any money saved gets wasted when the second engine won't start for some reason and you're miles from the mechanics. Also, it's not as safe.

I've only had one time that the second engine wouldn't start in 6 years. What kind of equipment are you operating, Bobby boy? A Lawn Boy?

Single engine taxi is not as safe? Without proper judgment and technique. Which one(s) are you lacking, Bobby?
:laugh:

 

[Bob Dylan]

I've only had one time that the second engine wouldn't start in 6 years. What kind of equipment are you operating, Bobby boy? A Lawn Boy?

Single engine taxi is not as safe? Without proper judgment and technique. Which one(s) are you lacking, Bobby?
:laugh:

Thanks for proving my point- so if you and every other pilot had even just one, the costs associated with cancellations, missed connections and anything else that could have been avoided had you got them both spinning at the gate are far greater than the tiny fuel savings from single engine taxi.

Yes, Ty, distractions while taxiing are very real, or maybe all you Chuck Yeager types at Guadaloupe don't get distracted or have to worry about runway incursions. I also wonder how much savings is pissed away when a Guadapoupe pilot cooks an engine he's starting while taxiing because he couldn't shut it down quick enough.

Only clowns and bozos think you save a lot of $$ doing single engine taxi.

 

[CaptainKiwi]

Gary will keep paying him the same whether or not he says anything.

Until the airline doesn't exist...

 

[Ty Webb]

Thanks for proving my point- so if you and every other pilot had even just one, the costs associated with cancellations, missed connections and anything else that could have been avoided had you got them both spinning at the gate are far greater than the tiny fuel savings from single engine taxi.

If the second engine doesn't start, you would just taxi back to the gate. No big deal, buddy. FWIW, my engine not starting was part of a 2-engine taxi, coming out of deice (R ignitor failure) so it wasn't even SE taxi.

Yes, Ty, distractions while taxiing are very real, or maybe all you Chuck Yeager types at Guadaloupe don't get distracted or have to worry about runway incursions. I also wonder how much savings is pissed away when a Guadapoupe pilot cooks an engine he's starting while taxiing because he couldn't shut it down quick enough.

Are you even an airline pilot? Sure doesn't sound like it. . . . Captain taxis, FO starts the engine. You're a goofball. Just stop before you embarrass yourself further. What's next, a "mag check"? :laugh:

 

[jonjuan]

Until the airline doesn't exist...

Lol- don't be such a hater. 39 straight years of profits will back me up.

 

[GuppyWN]

Have you ever tried to tell a SWA captain what to do? I'm merely an FO at this Captain's airline. Im here to satisfy insurance requirements and that is all.

It's "our" jet, not mine. If/when we fly together I expect you to contribute. In return I'll do your walk-arounds.

Gup

 

[SWA/CA]

It dat what the trannies bring to the table? A request and desire to do the single engine taxi?

This is the same topic/idea that our Number One dude in Chicago could not talk the Company into. He has tried to over several years talk them into allowing us to do this. Good luck trannies... you got a better shot at being SWAPA Pilots someday then you do talking the Geniuses in Dallas into doing a SE taxi.

And I would bite my lip and never say "well at my pervious airline" - they hate that.

 

[livintheredream]

Half a billion? Um, yeah, sure.

Single engine taxi vs two engine is a wash. Any money saved gets wasted when the second engine won't start for some reason and you're miles from the mechanics. Also, it's not as safe.

Single engine taxi is for bozos and prop dawg commuter pilots that need to get that spinning blade stopped for the rampers.

So AT thinks single engine taxi is something they bring to the table. Geez, really digging around on the bottom of the barrel, eh?

Super TOOL!!!

 

[The Prussian]

Gary Kelly: We want to be very measured about any radical changes that we're contemplating, because what they've got works pretty darn good. AirTran flies its planes more full, more often, and with less overheadthan Southwest -- all things Kelly says his airline needs to do better in order to grow.
http://marketplace.publicradio.org/...am-can-southwest-learn-anything-from-airtran/

Come on, guys...get with it! Only the first sentence of that "quote" was Gary Kelly. The second sentence was an editorial "conclusion" by Jim Burress of Marketplace........in Atlanta! (!!?!)

Secondly, if single engine taxi saved us even 5 million, let alone half a billion,...don't you think we would have adopted it at least 25 years ago??? Just sayin........GOLLY!!

 

[OHGOON]

Secondly, if single engine taxi saved us even 5 million, let alone half a billion,...don't you think we would have adopted it at least 25 years ago??? Just sayin........GOLLY!!

woops, someone is still under the delusion that anyone in aviation is motivated or even acts on common sense....:laugh: