FDX-Holy HULL-LOSS Batman!!!
02-27-2009, 03:12 PM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: 767 Cap
Posts: 1,306
Info I posted on another related thread.
I think they are using a different metric/different verbiage.
....at least I hope so.
************************************************** **
OK --- first thought, what's up with now publishing an "Operating Fleet Plan" vs the previous "Fleet Plans".
At first blush, it looks like the overall fleet shrinks significantly; however, does the word "Operating" imply this reflects the # of jets we actually plan to fly each day (i.e. Mon~Fri) vs the # we own/lease?
It is my understanding, that as of Jan 09 there were 80 727s on property and we "scheduled" 57 per day ---- note, the difference between # on property vs. # scheduled.
Comparing the # of jets posted in the Nov 2008 "Fleet Plan" (FP) vs the Feb 2009 "Operating Fleet Plan" (OFP) we have:
Acft -- FP-May 09 ~ FP-May 10 / OFP-May 09 ~ OFP-May 10
727 -- 78 ~ 69 / 50 ~ 52
757 -- 9 ~ 21 / 7 ~ 16
A300 -- 122 ~ 124 / 99 ~ 84
MD10 -- 73 ~ 80 / 60 ~ 57
MD11 -- 58 ~ 60 / 48 ~ 50
777 -- 0 ~ 4 / 0 ~ 4
What are our current ulitization rates of other acft besides the 727?
I think this data is important to fully understand how much the fleet is actually shrinking.
Discuss.
I think they are using a different metric/different verbiage.
....at least I hope so.
************************************************** **
OK --- first thought, what's up with now publishing an "Operating Fleet Plan" vs the previous "Fleet Plans".
At first blush, it looks like the overall fleet shrinks significantly; however, does the word "Operating" imply this reflects the # of jets we actually plan to fly each day (i.e. Mon~Fri) vs the # we own/lease?
It is my understanding, that as of Jan 09 there were 80 727s on property and we "scheduled" 57 per day ---- note, the difference between # on property vs. # scheduled.
Comparing the # of jets posted in the Nov 2008 "Fleet Plan" (FP) vs the Feb 2009 "Operating Fleet Plan" (OFP) we have:
Acft -- FP-May 09 ~ FP-May 10 / OFP-May 09 ~ OFP-May 10
727 -- 78 ~ 69 / 50 ~ 52
757 -- 9 ~ 21 / 7 ~ 16
A300 -- 122 ~ 124 / 99 ~ 84
MD10 -- 73 ~ 80 / 60 ~ 57
MD11 -- 58 ~ 60 / 48 ~ 50
777 -- 0 ~ 4 / 0 ~ 4
What are our current ulitization rates of other acft besides the 727?
I think this data is important to fully understand how much the fleet is actually shrinking.
Discuss.
I agree with your premise. For one thing, the document on Vips, Fleet Status, is outdated. If you look at the PDF files on that page, they are dated 102808 IIRC. The latest version on the MX website is dated 021909. It lists 360 total aircraft. However, that includes the 3 operating and 5 parked DC10s. It also includes 7 parked 310s and the 5 727s we lease to Morningstar in Canada. It also includes various planes that are down for heavy maintenance. While this 360 is the total we have on our Ops Spec, we are obviously operating quite a few less.
02-27-2009, 07:48 PM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 102
Info I posted on another related thread.
I think they are using a different metric/different verbiage.
....at least I hope so.
************************************************** **
OK --- first thought, what's up with now publishing an "Operating Fleet Plan" vs the previous "Fleet Plans".
At first blush, it looks like the overall fleet shrinks significantly; however, does the word "Operating" imply this reflects the # of jets we actually plan to fly each day (i.e. Mon~Fri) vs the # we own/lease?
It is my understanding, that as of Jan 09 there were 80 727s on property and we "scheduled" 57 per day ---- note, the difference between # on property vs. # scheduled.
Comparing the # of jets posted in the Nov 2008 "Fleet Plan" (FP) vs the Feb 2009 "Operating Fleet Plan" (OFP) we have:
Acft -- FP-May 09 ~ FP-May 10 / OFP-May 09 ~ OFP-May 10
727 -- 78 ~ 69 / 50 ~ 52
757 -- 9 ~ 21 / 7 ~ 16
A300 -- 122 ~ 124 / 99 ~ 84
MD10 -- 73 ~ 80 / 60 ~ 57
MD11 -- 58 ~ 60 / 48 ~ 50
777 -- 0 ~ 4 / 0 ~ 4
What are our current ulitization rates of other acft besides the 727?
I think this data is important to fully understand how much the fleet is actually shrinking.
Discuss.
I think they are using a different metric/different verbiage.
....at least I hope so.
************************************************** **
OK --- first thought, what's up with now publishing an "Operating Fleet Plan" vs the previous "Fleet Plans".
At first blush, it looks like the overall fleet shrinks significantly; however, does the word "Operating" imply this reflects the # of jets we actually plan to fly each day (i.e. Mon~Fri) vs the # we own/lease?
It is my understanding, that as of Jan 09 there were 80 727s on property and we "scheduled" 57 per day ---- note, the difference between # on property vs. # scheduled.
Comparing the # of jets posted in the Nov 2008 "Fleet Plan" (FP) vs the Feb 2009 "Operating Fleet Plan" (OFP) we have:
Acft -- FP-May 09 ~ FP-May 10 / OFP-May 09 ~ OFP-May 10
727 -- 78 ~ 69 / 50 ~ 52
757 -- 9 ~ 21 / 7 ~ 16
A300 -- 122 ~ 124 / 99 ~ 84
MD10 -- 73 ~ 80 / 60 ~ 57
MD11 -- 58 ~ 60 / 48 ~ 50
777 -- 0 ~ 4 / 0 ~ 4
What are our current ulitization rates of other acft besides the 727?
I think this data is important to fully understand how much the fleet is actually shrinking.
Discuss.
02-27-2009, 09:55 PM
#14
Part Time Employee
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
Posts: 1,918
In other words - they give us a number that is always changing (a/c in and out of maint, mod line, etc) so we have no basis to figure out where manning really is! I think management has their eyes on jobs in politics!
02-27-2009, 09:58 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Great White North
Posts: 391
02-28-2009, 06:16 AM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Monkey
Posts: 3,199
As pointed out by others, it does show a big shift from A300s to 757s and 777s (...and little increase in daily operating 727s), but of course the crew ratios in 777 will require much more manning.
It's pretty clear the Bus community will have the biggest direct impact, with other communities affected dependent on where the Bus guys go.
The company has stated several times they are willing to keep some level of overmanning, but they want that level to be in the "correct seats".
They are really hoping guys pick/end up in the MEM 757 because that's where they need guys to train the soonest ---- this summer! --- and of course it's NB pay.
02-28-2009, 08:25 AM
#17
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: We'll see
Posts: 32
Not that I am privy to any long term plans for the FEDEX fleet, but several folks I know in MGT have spoken about FDX long term plan which is essentially having all 777 and 757 and nothing else. Obviously this is a long time away, but it does make sense for the really long term.
02-28-2009, 12:49 PM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 482
OK --- then the total net loss is just 1 acft.
As pointed out by others, it does show a big shift from A300s to 757s and 777s (...and little increase in daily operating 727s), but of course the crew ratios in 777 will require much more manning.
It's pretty clear the Bus community will have the biggest direct impact, with other communities affected dependent on where the Bus guys go.
The company has stated several times they are willing to keep some level of overmanning, but they want that level to be in the "correct seats".
They are really hoping guys pick/end up in the MEM 757 because that's where they need guys to train the soonest ---- this summer! --- and of course it's NB pay.
As pointed out by others, it does show a big shift from A300s to 757s and 777s (...and little increase in daily operating 727s), but of course the crew ratios in 777 will require much more manning.
It's pretty clear the Bus community will have the biggest direct impact, with other communities affected dependent on where the Bus guys go.
The company has stated several times they are willing to keep some level of overmanning, but they want that level to be in the "correct seats".
They are really hoping guys pick/end up in the MEM 757 because that's where they need guys to train the soonest ---- this summer! --- and of course it's NB pay.
I can't figure out how many "operatational aircraft" we have on the books now, and what the change is from Nov 08 when the last fleet plan was.
02-28-2009, 01:22 PM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Posts: 285
Glad we let the 757 get narrowbody rates to secure that wonderful A380 rate.
One would think the negotiating committee could have thought that out.
We're likely to lose a net 50-100 widebodies in the next 15 years, how's that for hidden money? As the Bus gets pushed aside for 757s we'll have a huge net pay loss for the crewforce. We need professional negotiators yesterday.
One would think the negotiating committee could have thought that out. We're likely to lose a net 50-100 widebodies in the next 15 years, how's that for hidden money? As the Bus gets pushed aside for 757s we'll have a huge net pay loss for the crewforce. We need professional negotiators yesterday.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
