Spoken like someone who has never developed a training program and then worked with the regulator to get it approved. You can't just magically declare you have a differences program and poof it exists. FedEx has an AQP training program for each airframe AND a Part 142 Training Program. Though similar, they are separate programs with separate approvals and manuals etc. We do not have a differences program in the 75 listed on our training website, so I doubt it exists. AA's 757's had the V-bar flight director, we have cross pointers...a difference that could potentially make those at our certificate management team at the FSDO go completely nuts and demand a separate training program. The FAA uses the 8900 as their bible, which they think spells out how they should do everything. Those who have worked with the FAA soon realized that just because it says one thing in the 8900 doesn't mean everyone at the FAA interprets it the same way. The days of an LR-JET type rating covering 8 different jets is over. New common type ratings are unheard of today with new types. Long story short, you don't just go rent a sim and turn it on immediately...it takes time and resources and is usually a stop-gap.
Yes we used to train in Iceland for our Europe based pilots. I suspect we eliminated that because Iceland is quite literally one of the most expensive places on earth to send someone for training.
Think we are the only company planning to hire a lot of pilots in the coming years? Good luck, you'll be competing with every domestic and most international carriers for "renting" that extra capacity.
We are not anywhere close to the size of Southwest's pilot group AND we have multiple fleet types which creates staffing inefficiencies with regard to training.
I'm aware that hiring one pilot is less expensive than building a new sim building and buying sims. I said marginal pilot for that specific reason. Lets say a sim theoretically provides the capacity for 90 pilots per year. Hiring the 52nd through 59th pilot is relatively cheap.
Ever wonder why Southwest will not pursue outsourcing? Historically it was because a regional carrier will not work in a point to point system in an efficient way, as it does for the hub and spoke carriers. Now, I suspect staffing needs will be an additional constraint that will absolutely hammer the regionals (which makes me happy) and may require legacies to add A220's ERJ 195's to their fleets and staff in house.
My point is, and my questions remains unanswered, does ANYONE know the terms of the ATLAS contract? I certainly don't. I suspect none of y'all do either. Therefore you cannot tell me that it is 100% cheaper to outsource. In my opinion, FedEx is holding back airplanes and pilots to protect their system. Covid has created shocks in our pilot group with regard to quarantines and pilots going out sick/close contacts removed from flying etc. In my opinion, management put a value of xxx dollars on having a certain number of airplanes and pilots committed to protecting our system in house. They saw Atlas as an option to instantly increase coverage/capacity. Why do you think it's a long term contract? Well, why was FedEx requiring long term contracts to new customers when belly freight stopped moving on passenger planes when the world stopped for a couple months? BECAUSE WE COULD. Well, Atlas stands in a position to demand a long term contract because if we don't they can easily find someone who will right now. If you haven't noticed, the supply chain is seriously strained and people are paying whatever it takes to get their products moving.
Anyways, I don't think I'll change any minds. I already said I'd prefer fedex planes and pilots to fly fedex packages and I'll always feel that way. I simply think the decision was more complex than company posturing before a contract and I think the costs are likely much closer than people think.