A321T

[Glenn Quagmire]

can't be nearly as much as we thank goodness Delta got rid of you a while ago.

What is really funny is that Delta did offer me a job after the strike was settled. I politely turned it down since it would have been a large pay and benefit cut from my then job. I have since moved up from that point.

I have a few of my co-workers who went back as non-mechanics (planners, etc.) and several who were recalled.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Your ignorant take on what happened at NWA is laughable, the fact that you again try to spin it with your typical anti-union sycophantic zeal is even more so.
 
 
NWA was going bankrupt, so spending money like a drunken sailor on replacements I'm sure had nothing to do with it.
 
Then there was the FAA inspector, whose warnings about  the scabs sub-standard maintenance went unheeded.
 
Then there was the associated industries backlash that most ignored.
 
 
 
Funny, dumb, stupid, idiotic ... take your pick, as all have come to mind at one point or another whenever you see fit to try and drop your latest example of drooling Delta worship into every corner of this forum.

 
I haven't disagreed with any of what you said.

AMFA still made a huge strategic error in assuming they could play hardball at NW (if NW was on the verge of BK why would you think you had any economic negotiating power) and that resulted in the loss of 5000 of NW's highest paying ground jobs.

the reason or justification doesn't matter.


the outcome is still the same.


 

does anyone know if the 321T could do LGA cross country with the configuration they have set up for the JFK-LAX/SFO flights?

based on Airbus' public charts, the 321T would probably be restricted beyond AA's current configuration - perhaps between 80 and 100 seats. so it isn't impossible but when the aircraft already has so few seats, taking a further weight restriction makes little sense.
 

can't be nearly as much as we thank goodness Delta got rid of you a while ago.

uh, DL didn't get rid of me. I left voluntarily, got paid to do so and still get paid and enjoy benefits because I voluntarily left.

I am as good as or financially better off now than I was when I was working at DL and am doing something completely different.

I made the financially risky decision to walk away but it has worked out... I don't want to go back and I don't want to 2nd guess what I would be doing if I stayed.


 

What is really funny is that Delta did offer me a job after the strike was settled. I politely turned it down since it would have been a large pay and benefit cut from my then job. I have since moved up from that point.

I have a few of my co-workers who went back as non-mechanics (planners, etc.)

not sure how your salary now compares with what DL is paying now including profit sharing, but I don't slight you for walking away and for succeeding at what you do.

I do slight you for choosing to insert yourself into business-related discussions which you have nothing to contribute to and are only participating in to crap on other people.

grow up and be enough of a man to walk away. If you don't like me, put me on ignore and then really mean it.

there are enough people who don't ignore me or can't really ignore me that I have no shortage of people who continue to converse.

Further, I do respect FWAAA. He tries to talk about business related issues and is generally one of the least emotion and most academic and rational persons with whom I disagree.

I would gladly discuss a million issues with him than one issue with some of the emotionally driven people who can't talk about a single issue without cutting someone down or who refuse to use any data to support their notion.

again, if you have nothing to say specific to the topic, just stay out.

you will do us ALL a favor.

 

[700UW]

You left over eight years ago and took the money, you have zero right to say who can and cant participate on the forums.
 
Get a life.

 

[topDawg]

 
I haven't disagreed with any of what you said.

AMFA still made a huge strategic error in assuming they could play hardball at NW (if NW was on the verge of BK why would you think you had any economic negotiating power) and that resulted in the loss of 5000 of NW's highest paying ground jobs.

the reason or justification doesn't matter.


the outcome is still the same.


 

based on Airbus' public charts, the 321T would probably be restricted beyond AA's current configuration - perhaps between 80 and 100 seats. so it isn't impossible but when the aircraft already has so few seats, taking a further weight restriction makes little sense.
 

uh, DL didn't get rid of me. I left voluntarily, got paid to do so and still get paid and enjoy benefits because I voluntarily left.

I am as good as or financially better off now than I was when I was working at DL and am doing something completely different.

I made the financially risky decision to walk away but it has worked out... I don't want to go back and I don't want to 2nd guess what I would be doing if I stayed.


 

not sure how your salary now compares with what DL is paying now including profit sharing, but I don't slight you for walking away and for succeeding at what you do.

I do slight you for choosing to insert yourself into business-related discussions which you have nothing to contribute to and are only participating in to crap on other people.

grow up and be enough of a man to walk away. If you don't like me, put me on ignore and then really mean it.

there are enough people who don't ignore me or can't really ignore me that I have no shortage of people who continue to converse.

Further, I do respect FWAAA. He tries to talk about business related issues and is generally one of the least emotion and most academic and rational persons with whom I disagree.

I would gladly discuss a million issues with him than one issue with some of the emotionally driven people who can't talk about a single issue without cutting someone down or who refuse to use any data to support their notion.

again, if you have nothing to say specific to the topic, just stay out.

you will do us ALL a favor.

Airlines don't "pay people to leave" when they like them if they are management. If you were loved so much you would still have a job or retired without a buy out. 
 

You left over eight years ago and took the money, you have zero right to say who can and cant participate on the forums.
 
Get a life.

coming from the king of driving threads OT it is so funny he tells other what they can and cant post. 

 

[topDawg]

What is really funny is that Delta did offer me a job after the strike was settled. I politely turned it down since it would have been a large pay and benefit cut from my then job. I have since moved up from that point.

I have a few of my co-workers who went back as non-mechanics (planners, etc.) and several who were recalled.

Glenn I for one find it great how well you have moved on from what happened at NWA. Ignore WT and his BS. 
Glad to here you moved on to bigger and better things. 

 

[nycbusdriver]

unless the wing and thrust to weight ratio are comparable to the 757 or 737-700, it won't change much other than having a lower fuel burn which will improve short field performance some.

 
There's a whole lot that would need to be changed.  One factor that is crucial to "balanced field length" (the ability to start the takeoff roll, and stop the airplane on the runway is something really bad causes an aborted takeoff) is the  efficiency of the brakes.  If one could magically add much bigger engines, more fuel tanks and a different wing to the A321T, it would not help a whole lot unless the main gear was changed to put four tires (and therefore FOUR BRAKE ASSEMBLIES) to get it stopped promptly.  Without that, the necessary runway lengths would not change much at all.  I am sure we've all seen those DC-10s with weird landing gear sticking out of the center of the belly of the airplane; it's not there to hold the weight, it is there to give the airplane two more sets of brakes to get it stopped in case of a rejected takeoff.
 
The A321 would need a total redesign (and would likely not even get certified under the same desgination) to ever approach the performance specs of the 757.

 

[nycbusdriver]

does anyone know if the 321T could do LGA cross country with the configuration they have set up for the JFK-LAX/SFO flights?

 
Oh, yes.  It certainly would.  Of course, there could be no passengers on board, nor any cargo in the hold.  But the airplane can certainly do it.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Glenn I for one find it great how well you have moved on from what happened at NWA. Ignore WT and his BS. 
Glad to here you moved on to bigger and better things.

once again, I have never slighted Q for moving on and succeeding.

I have serious problems with anyone who continues to drop into threads onto to spread crap and then thinks that it won't be thrown back at them in spades more than they dished out.

the fastest way to put the epic failure that was AMFA's strike at NW in the history books and leave it there is for Q to either be man enough to contribute to the topic at hand or be mature enough to walk away.
 
 

There's a whole lot that would need to be changed.  One factor that is crucial to "balanced field length" (the ability to start the takeoff roll, and stop the airplane on the runway is something really bad causes an aborted takeoff) is the  efficiency of the brakes.  If one could magically add much bigger engines, more fuel tanks and a different wing to the A321T, it would not help a whole lot unless the main gear was changed to put four tires (and therefore FOUR BRAKE ASSEMBLIES) to get it stopped promptly.  Without that, the necessary runway lengths would not change much at all.  I am sure we've all seen those DC-10s with weird landing gear sticking out of the center of the belly of the airplane; it's not there to hold the weight, it is there to give the airplane two more sets of brakes to get it stopped in case of a rejected takeoff.
 
The A321 would need a total redesign (and would likely not even get certified under the same desgination) to ever approach the performance specs of the 757.

very good point and I respect your perspective.

one of my last 757 landings at LGA was on DL and I was getting increasingly uncomfortable with how long we were floating ABOVE the runway. in a split second, the mains touched down and the aircraft stopped on a dime... exactly what G3 does at SDU and many other airports in Brazil where the runways are much shorter and with less overrun in the US.

however, the 321 does serve LGA, does it not? so normal landings shouldn't be an issue. Rejected takeoffs might be, wouldn't they, if the weight has to be limited by brake performance? and for "non-normal landings" JFK has always been the place to go for any aircraft type.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

Glenn I for one find it great how well you have moved on from what happened at NWA. Ignore WT and his BS. 
Glad to here you moved on to bigger and better things. 

 
I'll second that sentiment - the NWA/AMFA naysayers ignorance on the subject is trivial

 

[Kev3188]

3rd.

I'm happy he's landed on his feet (and then some), and is doing something he enjoys...

 

[WorldTraveler]

again, no one is doubting that many of the former AMFA/NW mechanics survived and did well.

I am glad for Q despite the fact that we lock horns on here.

I am opposed to his crap bombing threads which only incites me to reminder that the outcome of Q or any other AMFA member at NW is not the issue.

the issue is and always will be that AMFA made an ENORMOUS strategic mistake that cost 5000 of NW's highest paying ground workers their jobs - and those jobs are now in the hands of DL where mechanics are the least likely group to ever unionize.

when unions make the kind of strategic mistakes that AMFA made at NW, it isn't a surprise the labor movement in the US is in the shape of decline it is in.

and I'll be happy to quit bringing up AMFA's massive strategic failure when Q decides he will grow up and stop crap bombing my posts regarding business issues.

btw, this topic is about the 321T, not about Q, not about me, and not about AMFA.

 

[700UW]

You are the biggest off topic poster you post more about DL in other threads than you do on the DL board.

You are a hypocrite and the forum cancer.

 

[WorldTraveler]

nice for you to repeat that over and over but with nearly 31K posts, you have got to be not only one of the most active users on this forum but also by far the one that won't give up spewing your propaganda

and since Kev has been kind of enough to remind us about staying on topic (and it is a valid reminder at times), it is worth doing the same here... esp. since none of the discussion about AMFA, NW, me, or Q has the slightest bit to do with the 321T or anything related to transcons or the airlines that currently fly them

 

[robbedagain]

Q  im happy for you bro

 

[Overspeed]

I believe that you are confused, as AA is not planning to fly current-edition 321s to Hawai'i. AA is planning to fly A321neos, with the new engines, but not the existing A321s. HA is also planning to fly neos to Hawai'i. As pointed out by the busdriver, that's incorrect. A full 738 (or A321) cannot takeoff from LGA with enough fuel to fly to the west coast. When I say "full," I mean in a high-density normal configuration full of passengers and bags.  Sure, you're obviously correct. In the third quarter, between JFK and LAX, AA carried almost as many local passengers as DL but at average one-way fares more than $250 higher than DL. If the PA eliminates the perimeter rule (a really unlikely event), then AA would probably try to keep that revenue premium by flying premium seats, not high-density planes to attract Delta-like fares. Because this is a thread about the A321T, not A319s. An A319 could not carry enough premium seats to fly eoonomically between NYC and LAX. It's just too damn small.In any event, a premium-configured 738 could easily takeoff from LGA with enough fuel to make LAX. Or AA could just use premium-configured 757s.The relaxation of the perimeter rule is a far-fetched fantasy that is unlikely to happen.

AA is planning on flying 321s to Hawaii. The 321 is separated in to three subfleets. The 32T, 32H, and 32S. The H being the Hawaii ETOPS version. The 32H is currently flying domestic pending ETOPS approval with the current V2500 engine. Look it up in DECS and also notice the 321 work cards now have notations being added about ETOPS compliance.