UPS-What's new?
05-01-2008 | 12:45 PM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
From: Brown
I assume the 747-400 and the 747-8 can and will carry more than a 777. But with oil as high as it is, I wonder if UPS won't shy away from the potential A380 freighter and more 747s in favor of 777s. It would be more fuel efficient obviously and since Fred is getting them we could too.
05-01-2008 | 05:51 PM
#22
Banned
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
I assume the 747-400 and the 747-8 can and will carry more than a 777. But with oil as high as it is, I wonder if UPS won't shy away from the potential A380 freighter and more 747s in favor of 777s. It would be more fuel efficient obviously and since Fred is getting them we could too.
Anyone have the UPS handout that was passed around during Capt's training?
05-01-2008 | 06:42 PM
#23
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 846
Likes: 1
From: UPS Captain
I don't think that is a good assumption. I have seen data that shows the 777 can go from mainland China to MEM / SDF with a usable load while the 747 variants can not. However, I'm unable to produce that data.
Anyone have the UPS handout that was passed around during Capt's training?
Anyone have the UPS handout that was passed around during Capt's training?
777 Freighter 4,885 NM 226k Payload
747 400 4,450 NM 248k Payload
747 800 4,420 NM 280k Payload
FYI.
05-01-2008 | 06:49 PM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
From: Brown
I know FDX is planning to fly their 777s from Hong Kong to MEM. It looks like from the data above that the 747-8 would be a better alternative since it carries more and has a range only 400 miles shorter.
UPS still has not named a replacement for the A380 cancellation and the new 767s were not originally planned to replace the DC-8s. We have downsized a lot of aircraft in the last 18 months and not received enough -400s and MDs to make up the difference. This summer and peak will be interesting.
UPS still has not named a replacement for the A380 cancellation and the new 767s were not originally planned to replace the DC-8s. We have downsized a lot of aircraft in the last 18 months and not received enough -400s and MDs to make up the difference. This summer and peak will be interesting.
05-01-2008 | 06:58 PM
#25
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 846
Likes: 1
From: UPS Captain
Without a doubt. I know we are leaving freight on the ramps in the international theater....on the domestic side....not so much
05-02-2008 | 03:01 AM
#26
Banned
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
I know FDX is planning to fly their 777s from Hong Kong to MEM. It looks like from the data above that the 747-8 would be a better alternative since it carries more and has a range only 400 miles shorter.
Not necessarily. The driving factor for FDX is probably costs, IE at what cost to move a certain amount from China to MEM. While the 747-8 might fly further under the example given it might not be able to do variations of load quite so well. Also while the 747 version goes 400nm's further, at what fuel cost as compared to the 777? I've also heard that the load bins used by FDX do not fit well in the Whale.
UPS still has not named a replacement for the A380 cancellation and the new 767s were not originally planned to replace the DC-8s. We have downsized a lot of aircraft in the last 18 months and not received enough -400s and MDs to make up the difference. This summer and peak will be interesting.
Not necessarily. The driving factor for FDX is probably costs, IE at what cost to move a certain amount from China to MEM. While the 747-8 might fly further under the example given it might not be able to do variations of load quite so well. Also while the 747 version goes 400nm's further, at what fuel cost as compared to the 777? I've also heard that the load bins used by FDX do not fit well in the Whale.
UPS still has not named a replacement for the A380 cancellation and the new 767s were not originally planned to replace the DC-8s. We have downsized a lot of aircraft in the last 18 months and not received enough -400s and MDs to make up the difference. This summer and peak will be interesting.
All the above is opinion only.
GW has nothing to do with anything I wrote.
05-02-2008 | 04:08 AM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 732
Likes: 0
05-02-2008 | 04:09 AM
#28
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 846
Likes: 1
From: UPS Captain
Cost is a big thing with everyone. No question the 777 is the most efficient cost per pound of revenue out there. Only problem is no one can get them. If you look at Range, Payload, Pallet size/volume.....the 777 is easily choice A for most carriers. Other things come into play as well. I guess we will have to wait and see what the 787 freighter numbers are 
05-02-2008 | 05:26 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,702
Likes: 0
From: 767 captain
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
