SL6 Passes....-800 Approved by SWAPA pilots

[dicko]

You are correct. Good fact finding. My 737 experience is quite old.

I like the above guys quote where he said they "sometimes barely" make it HNL out of SFO/OAK. Because if it only happened "sometimes" it would really be bad.

But SWA thinking it is gaining something by flying -800's is what is so wrong. -800's with 50 plus more seats than a retiring -300 leads to less than a 1 to 1 replacement and therefore less jobs.

The senior at SWA have once again sold out the junior. Argue that SWAPA spin masters.

Listen man,

You've already proven that you're not the sharpest tool in the shed. The 800 "has greater range because it flies faster" .... Really. Are you even a pilot ? Send a note to 737-900 operators. Tell them they should fly the 900 on the clacker to increase its range :laugh:

I will agree that you are truly 'Lucky to have a job'.

 

[PCL_128]

But SWA thinking it is gaining something by flying -800's is what is so wrong. -800's with 50 plus more seats than a retiring -300 leads to less than a 1 to 1 replacement and therefore less jobs.

The senior at SWA have once again sold out the junior. Argue that SWAPA spin masters.

When 75% vote in favor, how is that "the senior selling out the junior? The SWAPA membership obviously saw the potential benefits, as laid out clearly by Chase earlier in the thread, and decided to go for it. With SWA's great track record, I think it's a smart bet.

SWAPO is a dictatorship as well.

Really? Seems more like a democracy to me. The membership voted, not one guy.

SWAPO funds educational issues without pilot input.

Without pilot input? Didn't SWAPA run years of polling on that issue? I think they made the wrong decision, but it was theirs to make. From what I remember, the polling at SWA was pretty clearly in favor of supporting the change. Does anyone from SWA remember the exact numbers?

 

[SKC]

Listen man,

You've already proven that you're not the sharpest tool in the shed. The 800 "has greater range because it flies faster" .... Really. Are you even a pilot ?

Not that I really want to defend him, but he wasn't the one to make that statement. It was someone else.

 

[SKC]

I like the above guys quote where he said they "sometimes barely" make it HNL out of SFO/OAK. Because if it only happened "sometimes" it would really be bad.

If you would have read far enough back, you would have seen that he said they sometimes barely make it out FULL.

 

[chase]

Jan 2007

59.71% of SWAPA pilots voted to continue Age 60 repeal.

Not sure when ALPA changed their position but I believe there was a vote but much closer as I recall. I heard they didn't allow furloughed pilots to vote....not a good decision IMHO but it wasn't my fight either.

Later that month the FAA announced proposed rule change.

 

[PapaWoody]

Not to beat a dead horse, but SWAPA's vote on Age 60 repeal was heavily influenced by the "pro's/con's" information packet that was unfairly skewed towards supporting the change. Basing it on "historical growth" of around 10%, we got such BS statements as "it will delay upgrade 6 mos. to no more than a year" and "the maximum financial impact will be about $50,000" and my personal favorite "everyone will have 5 extra years as CA". The fix was in, and imho, if SWAPA was the driving force behind age 60 repeal, the bottom 60% of our membership would have serious grounds for a misrepresentation lawsuit. That being said, once ICAO changed its 60 rule, it was inevitable that ours would, so SWAPA and Paul Emens were immaterial. I just wish they had held off til the day after old Pauly Walnuts retired. That would have been priceless.

Fraternally
PapaWoody

 

[Ty Webb]

I just wish they had held off til the day after old Pauly Walnuts retired. That would have been priceless.

Fraternally
PapaWoody

We had a similar scenario- one AT Capt (who was loathed by most FO's) was writing letters to Congressmen, testifying at hearings, doing everything he could to help get it passed before his August___ birthday.

It was coming down to the wire. . . . . . a real nail-biter. I was joking that there were two stacks of paper on Oberstarr's desk- one from this Captain pleading him to sign it, and another stack from AirTran FO's pleading with him to wait.

In the end, he missed it by six days. I'm sure he's still sulking about it, down in FLL.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

Have fun flying the -800 into MDW and LGA on a snowy runway.

MDW is a space constrained and LGW is a slot controlled airport which both need the seats.

6000 feet with poor braking action is a great -800 airport. Enjoy the new thrill.

But remember if you are hot, high, and the visibility is low stabilized approaches are for the other airlines, not SWA. You have the HUD, use the force!

 

[dicko]

Have fun flying the -800 into MDW and LGA on a snowy runway.

MDW is a space constrained and LGW is a slot controlled airport which both need the seats.

6000 feet with poor braking action is a great -800 airport. Enjoy the new thrill.

But remember if you are hot, high, and the visibility is low stabilized approaches are for the other airlines, not SWA. You have the HUD, use the force!

"LGW" .... What's London Gatwick got to do with it ?

Everybody has flown into LGA and MDW. Try to remain calm.

Lay off the chocolate and go to bed.

 

[GuppyWN]

Have fun flying the -800 into MDW and LGA on a snowy runway.

MDW is a space constrained and LGW is a slot controlled airport which both need the seats.

6000 feet with poor braking action is a great -800 airport. Enjoy the new thrill.

But remember if you are hot, high, and the visibility is low stabilized approaches are for the other airlines, not SWA. You have the HUD, use the force!

I used to think some of your stuff was mildly entertaining - you know, from a "rookie" standpoint.

I now find you just plain ignorant and offensive.

Welcome to the #2 spot on my FI Avoidance Bid.

Gup