Aloha from a Hawaiian Pilot
06-03-2024, 01:40 PM
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Q400 FO
Posts: 135
I may be in the minority here, but I am really not excited about the idea of the Amazon flying. By doing contract flying it exposes us to much more whipsaw potential. If we spin up 10+ airplanes worth of crews for that contract, we likely get the shaft when the contract expires and Amazon either demands lower costs or they take their ball and go elsewhere. In the meantime we have all of those extra pilots which means stagnation.
06-03-2024, 04:34 PM
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2022
Posts: 1,155
I may be in the minority here, but I am really not excited about the idea of the Amazon flying. By doing contract flying it exposes us to much more whipsaw potential. If we spin up 10+ airplanes worth of crews for that contract, we likely get the shaft when the contract expires and Amazon either demands lower costs or they take their ball and go elsewhere. In the meantime we have all of those extra pilots which means stagnation.
06-03-2024, 06:14 PM
#53
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 40,016
That's not even remotely true. There are problably 100+ guys that commute from the east coast and have 12+ years of seniority. With the paid commutes they'd be glad to have an east coast adjacent base. Especially the LAX and SFO guys. VX hired young and there's only 40ish retirements a year.
06-03-2024, 07:07 PM
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: Precarious
Posts: 386
I may be in the minority here, but I am really not excited about the idea of the Amazon flying. By doing contract flying it exposes us to much more whipsaw potential. If we spin up 10+ airplanes worth of crews for that contract, we likely get the shaft when the contract expires and Amazon either demands lower costs or they take their ball and go elsewhere. In the meantime we have all of those extra pilots which means stagnation.
06-03-2024, 07:27 PM
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: Precarious
Posts: 386
Maybe atlas can absorb that. I don't know much about them. The point is that we don't want massive exposure to this kind of "strategic shift". As the previous poster said, staffing for 55 of those has a high risk of being a disaster for us when someone will do it 10 cents cheaper. We don't want to compete with Mesa, ATI, and the rest of the ACMI carriers. Getting rid of the existing b scale for the freight 330's is a high priority for me in the JCBA.
06-03-2024, 08:26 PM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2023
Posts: 186
Regardless, there is no other airplane in passenger service that can do what the 717 does interisland. The BR715 is unmatched in its ability to handle the rigors of quick turn interisland flying. You can’t replicate the 717 schedule with 737’s and not have engine failure issues (ask anyone from Aloha).
06-03-2024, 08:39 PM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2023
Posts: 186
It is possible we have a different definition of efficiency. I would argue over such short leg lengths (inter-island) actual fuel efficiency is less consequential. However, training costs, maintenance costs, and route inefficiencies associated with operating multiple fleet types that have overlapping capabilities lends itself to the argument that the 717 will likely be the first to go and quite quickly since that flying can easily be integrated into the current route structure.
There seems to be a notion that HA is going to get a cash infusion and then it will be business as usual for HA Pilots. I think this underestimates the nature of AAG. In fact we have a direct historical evidence of what AAG is willing to do to get their cost metrics in line with whatever spreadsheet they stare at. They will SAY a lot of things to prevent mass migration of pilots between fleets until they are ready for them to do so. But their actual actions are what matters, reality is they slashed and burned anything representing the VA route structure and obviously operating two fleet types that had overlapping capabilities was not part of their playbook. I don't believe the notion that "HA 321's have better leases" so this justifys their existence, but only time will actually tell and I hope I am wrong (I would very much like to fly a 321 someday). History has told us they are willing TO SAY whatever serves their CURRENT needs and their narratives are carefully crafted and adhered to by management types that communicate with the pilot group.
It seems clear that HA doesn't possess enough of any one fleet type to get to the efficiencies of scale required to justify the fleets costs. So unless your type provides a capability uniquely different from the 737. I would seriously consider the reality that it will go away. It is not that the 737 is supperior in any way, it is that AS has a lot of them and a lot of pilots and infrastructute that supports them. This creates efficiency.
Again I am catching a lot of quips on here about my position, which is totally fine, but I just want to reiterate that I don't want bad things for any pilot. I seriously hope I am wrong and this merger goes off without a hitch and everyone has fruitfull careers and if I am wrong I will gladly say so on this public forum. However, I don't think the variables point to that outcome. Especially for the current AS seniority list which is likely to get the short end of the SLI stick. I believe having a rational outlook of all the variables in front of us is key to making wise career/life decisions. I have witnessed first hand the hardship blindsided VA pilots endured as their lives were upended (much time at cruise now listening to former VA pilot stories). Possibly rational conversations about the variables at play can help mitigate some of that.
There seems to be a notion that HA is going to get a cash infusion and then it will be business as usual for HA Pilots. I think this underestimates the nature of AAG. In fact we have a direct historical evidence of what AAG is willing to do to get their cost metrics in line with whatever spreadsheet they stare at. They will SAY a lot of things to prevent mass migration of pilots between fleets until they are ready for them to do so. But their actual actions are what matters, reality is they slashed and burned anything representing the VA route structure and obviously operating two fleet types that had overlapping capabilities was not part of their playbook. I don't believe the notion that "HA 321's have better leases" so this justifys their existence, but only time will actually tell and I hope I am wrong (I would very much like to fly a 321 someday). History has told us they are willing TO SAY whatever serves their CURRENT needs and their narratives are carefully crafted and adhered to by management types that communicate with the pilot group.
It seems clear that HA doesn't possess enough of any one fleet type to get to the efficiencies of scale required to justify the fleets costs. So unless your type provides a capability uniquely different from the 737. I would seriously consider the reality that it will go away. It is not that the 737 is supperior in any way, it is that AS has a lot of them and a lot of pilots and infrastructute that supports them. This creates efficiency.
Again I am catching a lot of quips on here about my position, which is totally fine, but I just want to reiterate that I don't want bad things for any pilot. I seriously hope I am wrong and this merger goes off without a hitch and everyone has fruitfull careers and if I am wrong I will gladly say so on this public forum. However, I don't think the variables point to that outcome. Especially for the current AS seniority list which is likely to get the short end of the SLI stick. I believe having a rational outlook of all the variables in front of us is key to making wise career/life decisions. I have witnessed first hand the hardship blindsided VA pilots endured as their lives were upended (much time at cruise now listening to former VA pilot stories). Possibly rational conversations about the variables at play can help mitigate some of that.
Fuel efficiency is not the consideration with the 717 interisland. It’s maintenance and engine reliability. With the 717 planes paid for, I don’t see them going away before the end of the decade while AAG evaluates interisland.
Will the 321’s stay long term? Who knows, but it took ~7 years to get rid of VA’s with terrible lease rates. So I can’t imagine with the lack of aircraft availability, and the issues at Boeing, that AAG will be in any hurry to park HAL 321’s (especially since they are financed at super cheap rates in Yen).
Will the 717 and 321 eventually be replaced by the 737? Sure that’s the easy odds bet for AAG long term, but buying HAL for widebody international expansion is kinda outside their wheelhouse, so perhaps none of us know exactly what their long term intentions are.
Change is inevitable, and unfortunately if this merger goes through a lot of the widebody flying at HAL is likely going to change significantly for the worse.
Best thing we can do is unite to get the best JCBA we can, especially since none of us have any control over anything else.
IMUA!
06-03-2024, 08:42 PM
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2022
Posts: 155
Maybe atlas can absorb that. I don't know much about them. The point is that we don't want massive exposure to this kind of "strategic shift". As the previous poster said, staffing for 55 of those has a high risk of being a disaster for us when someone will do it 10 cents cheaper. We don't want to compete with Mesa, ATI, and the rest of the ACMI carriers. Getting rid of the existing b scale for the freight 330's is a high priority for me in the JCBA.
You're an LAX post merger guy, you weren't around for the JFK axe that fell hard on those guys.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
