Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

PDT reduce fleet, furloughs in the future.

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
I doubt that it is a negotiating tool. I don't think our contract will change much, but if you did not put a high priority on the the reserve language in the survey, you may want to rethink it. I seem to to vote no for everything, but it allways passes.
 
A little bird told me PDT is going to get Q-400's.

BTW Olympus593, i want to marry your avtar.
 
I have heard nothing regarding LTPs at PDT. I think any bird who has been whispering about Q's at PDT has been drinking heavily.
 
The initial cost is as expensive, but the operating cost much less. Oh and it's bull or a miss informed bird.

Maybe ex j-41 was just fooling around, but seriously, is it that far-fetched (you guys getting some Q400s)?? what better replacement??
 
I appreciate your optimism, but there in no money for new airplanes and no real need with all the 50 seat rjs contracts in place. Mgt has even stopped dwindling the carrot.
 
During a time where the airlines are on the up and up it makes sense, but right now LCC is bleeding. The last thing they will want to do is put craploads of money into a regional aircraft. I like the piedmont dudes, and would like to see it, but I just don't see it happening. If the Q400s show up in the next year, expect it to be flown by a contactor. BTW, trust me I feel for you dudes, in the last 4 years my regional has gone from over 85 aircraft to 70, so I think I say it for most AWAC'rs, hope this is just a ploy and nothing more.
 
well for it's worth, we all seem to be bad at predicting what this company will do.

We were all freaking out that we'd lose the -300's because they were soooo expensive and in demand. The company nonchalantly gets renewals on those but then balks on the -100's??? What the hell?

Maybe, at a time when it seems most unlikely, we will actually get new airplanes. Something dramatic would have to happen at some other feed carrier, but stranger things have happened. No ill will towards Mesa of course................

What I want to know is why, all of a sudden, we are getting scheduled down to 47 lines of flying at the beginning of the freaking summer. We will have only lost 4 planes... I can't believe they are cutting the small potatoes side of the business to save money... Fing MBA's who couldn't hack it in freshman accounting class!!!
 
Typical reactionary Piedmont / USAir management. You're exactly right ZASCA. Load up with fuel hungry RJ's, and dump the props. They'll be kicking themselves once again when the economy recovers and oil hits $150 a barrell again. Typical stupid management.

In the meantime, that's seriously stupid on the part of Farrow sending out that letter. If I were still on the property, I'd be REAL motivated to do all I could to help out. Then again, you should expect no less from the destroyer commander who tried to use his boat as a landing craft....
 

Latest resources

Back
Top