Originally Posted by
J Dawg
Other events? Such as the FedEx 777 flying overhead?
Furthermore, has there ever been a volcano induced certifying event in the history of the FAA, other than "Don't go there"?
Blah blah blah.
At issue is how will this affect crew planning?
I don't see a good thing about it. What used to be two crews to get a plane to Asia, with a layover in ANC (change of crew there) is now two crews without the layover; in other words better productivity for the Co over a two week paining.
The hits keep coming
It may have something to do with the 777 at Fedex as well as contingency ops.
The cost would go up considerably since you cannot carry much other than fuel on a 744. The 777 can carry fuel and payload the distance. Otherwise the 400 would have been doing this long ago. Ever notice all the 400 operators in ANC?? The 747-800 has better numbers than the 400 but nothing like the 777.
IMO: If Fedex starts operating MEM-Asia somewhere (which I am sure is the plan) the guarantee time for delivery will force UPS to make some purchase changes (remember the 380?? We never replaced it. The 400 was for the classic). Could get interesting if the economy heats up and the planets align properly!!
I would not mind seeing the 777 at UPS. As far as manning goes. If we start flying polar operations it will increase manning requirements. Two flights a month and you would be finished. 15:30 or so each way. 31 hours x 2=62. Maybe a SDF - ANC stuffer for an extra 12 to get the 75 but that is it. This would be 2 crews as well. Not much wiggle room for crew scheduling.
Ever talk to anyone at a legacy that flies the 777. 2 Round trips a month and that is it. Dont even get them started on Vacation, Carry-in, "strategic bidding"......they get all excited. 15+ hours on an airplane (not in first class) YIKES!!!!
So I think the Polar ops are a good thing. More pilots, no DH's on these flights....Just my humble opinion.
