Cargo Scope
 

Saw this in the cargo section, crossposted it here.
https://www.aircargonews.net/technol...079547.article

In a previous job I was hauling jetloads of UAL freight across the pacific, the lack of scope regarding our cargo results in far more outsourcing than most polits here realize.

United knows cargo.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...98fdacb6_b.jpg

Nice DC-10.

We will see the widebody turns go poof out of sju and we will be busy discovering years of petty politics in our own union.

Just an optical illusion my friend.

After they sold those to FedEx the running joke was “there’s no money in cargo!”

The difference is we need bodies above the cargo hold to justify those flights. If the people aren’t flowing, just belly freight doesn’t pay the bills. The exception was during Covid when the cargo rates went through the roof due to limited capacity. Look at FedEx and see the problems they are having. Cargo doesn’t necessarily rule the margins the way it once did.

Purple is still making money hand over fist. Most of the issues the pilot group there are facing is due to hostile management and no scope protecting flying outside the contiguous 48 states.

Were these flights flown by regular -10 crews?

The DC-10 Freighter was an ANC based bid available to the general pilot population. It started in early 1997 and shut down in the Fall of 2000.

Uhh....no. Cargo makes money for us whether there are people on board or not. Like many things, depends on where you go. A 777-300ER can make money with no people.

In nearly all (if not all)of our markets carrying people is more profitable than cargo. In some markets the cargo adds the incremental profit that makes the route work.

Simply 'making money' isn't enough in this game.

I’m pretty sure “simply making money” is the most important thing in this game (as long as you’re not leveraging your future). You can ask Spirit what happens when you stop simply making money.

You should stick to running lemonade stands.

uh yes…while it may work occasionally (SFO-SYD etc) we don’t have the ability to have cargo only flights. The exception was during COVIF. In relation to the post I responded to, the poster said he flew united cargo on his cargo only flights. I am pretty sure it was to locations we couldn’t send a passenger flight as we need that above the wing to justify the market. Any additional cargo with that above the wing is a bonus. Hope that helps you understand. Haven’t seen a route announcement that we will.be adding a flight solely for the cargo opportunities.

It was NRT LAX.

We have one trip a day NRT LAX. Half the time those trips cancel due to the crew unwilling to extend after a maintenance delay or crew refusal for a reading light in the rest area. Was this delayed cargo? Do you know if that was the only segment it was flying? Was our flight weight restricted? I’ve seen them cut a pallet of cargo when captain adds fuel so he could fly .88 and make his RNO commute flight.

Your argument is so sound that you have to turn to trying to insult people.

There is a reason that Lufthansa, Emirates and others have dedicated cargo operations. Maybe their management teams should go back to running lemonade stands.

Multiple jet loads for months in a row but I must have been hallucinating.

People say Cargo drives everything you can't make money in any route unless it has Cargo, yet we (and like the entire industry which will soon become the norm rather than the exception) take narrowbody planes across the Atlantic.

I have been told in a classroom on company property that if Polarius or whatever the " nomenclature du jour" the entire cost of the flight is paid for...............
but like what if everyone used points to upgrade?

I have been told that Hawaii is pretty much a money losing market and is only kept so as to reward or entice Mileage plus explorers to cash in thier rewards as they continue to chase thier next status.

I don't really know........not really part of my job to know that. I just kind of focus on ending up where where it says on the peoples boarding passes......and if can do so safely then maybe do so within 14 minutes after the time that's listed.

The same people that love to quote wolf saying “there’s no money in cargo” also like to quote “we fly they manage”… anyone throwing around absolutes like they fully understand the finances behind it are ignorant of the risk/reward. It’s a fickle market that requires a huge investment with cut throat competition. It would probably take 10 years of forecasted high revenue cargo for us to really gamble on it from a company level. Pilots are available and there are a lot of acme cargo operations with their sights set on those same contracts. It’s a nuanced argument either way.

Answer this question. Is ROI measured as "YES/NO"? If you answer correctly you'll understand my argument. In this industry you have to make the most money possible with your capital & labor. Making $100,000 on a cargo segment doesn't cut it when the same assets can make more flying passengers with belly cargo. As someone else rightfully pointed out, there are a lot of lower cost options in the cargo market. We can and will cherry pick high yield cargo when it makes sense. There's no way we'll operate a fleet of dedicated freighters.

FWIW we are not structurally the same as the carriers you mentioned. They can probably pull off freighter ops for the same reason they can operate A380s. You can find a detailed answer right from the source if you're really interested. The execs have been very open about our cargo business.

They won’t allow everyone to use points to upgrade. The point upgrades are very limited. They will offer the opportunity to pay for upgrades to non point upgrade customers when they check in on the off chance Polaris is not fully booked. A point upgrade to Polaris on an international flight is rare air if you read any of the travel blogs.

Lots of US airlines have had dedicated cargo operations. Most were not successful or at best marginally profitable in the good years. The biggest problem is you are competing with yourself on a low yield product. Thats never a good idea. Current international air freight rates are mostly in the 1 to 2 dollars a pound range. A discussion on Lufthansa cargo is included below. On the subject of narrow bodies over the Atlantic for the most part they are not profitable. Look at how JetBlue is doing in the best international market to Europe in 30 years. They are useful as place holders in the winter and for network reach in some situations.

"Lufthansa management forecast a slight increase in demand for 2024, with profit levels staying about the same, despite robust airfreight volumes across the industry so far this year. Market researchers report air cargo volumes jumped about 14% in January and an additional 11% in February compared to the same periods in 2023.

A major headwind for cargo was the company’s injection of more passenger flights, which raised the amount of cargo capacity across the network by 7% and weighed on pricing. In fact, volume of 7.5 billion freight ton-kilometers was 3% higher than the previous year, while yields fell 39.3% — an indication the top line was most harmed by falling rates. Increased capacity was reflected in a 1.9-point drop in the cargo load factor, meaning less than 60% of available cargo space was filled."

I have time for APC......don't know if I have time for that.

I mean maybe you are right.......I'm just having a hard time figuring out why there have been over 550 orders spread across 25 carriers for the a321xlr if all they are going to do is loose money or be winter time placeholders.

There are a few other routes they can be flown on. Also cost dynamics are quite different for European carriers. Their pilot cots over the pond are probably ⅓ the cost for US airlines.

Have you flown SA on international flights lately? 24 hours out, the Upgradeable Premiers populate like a domestic flight!! These "PlusPoints" started during the pandemic, are wildly popular with the muckity mucks. Polaris tends to fill up like DEN-IAH on a Friday.

From Nerd Wallet:

PlusPoints act as upgrade certificates for your flights, and they work on both domestic and international routes. Depending on your fare class, it can cost as little as 40 PlusPoints to upgrade from economy class to Polaris business class on a long-haul international route.

Once you reach Premier Platinum or Premier 1K, you'll immediately receive PlusPoints based on your status: 40 PlusPoints when you reach Premier Platinum and 280 more when you reach Premier 1K. These are ANNUAL allotments.

Yes I have. The customers select plus points upgrade when they book the ticket. It’s not usually instantaneous they get their upgrade . No guarantee they get a seat upgrade. They will sell upgrades for non plus points up to check in cutoff time. Yes the list may be long but not all get seats. Also those plus points come with a minimum spend to achieve them. They aren’t gifted. Money exchanges hands and large amount for the chance to upgrade.

How many empty Polaris cabins do you see prior to the upgrade list being cleared one hour before departure? The ability to revenue control the inventory has been better at United than it has ever been. If you yourself really want a Polaris seat for your vacation buy yourself a seat.

ugggghhhhhh.... they certainly earn less than us, but 1/3......I'm rubbing my chin.

I am guessing 150 for the CA and 100 for the copilot. 250 total plus a very skinny benefits package. 370 for the CA and 240 for the copilot and relief pilot. 250 verses 750 plus a much more generous benefit package. Granted that the larger carriers in Europe pay more but they don't seem that interested in the AirFrame.

And that's my point. The Polaris upgrade list was mostly identical to the standby list on International flights before PlusPoints. Getting Polaris was easy. Now that's not always the case. If there are Polaris seats available come upgrade time, the upgrade list is sometimes long with 1k/platinum Pluspoint upgrades.... the Standbys start 6 or 10 numbers down the list. Oh well. It was GREAT while it lasted. And 27 years in, it's still pretty good.

is this also like 1989 as well?

Google pay rates in Europe. The carriers who might use the airframe across the pound pay poorly.

an Aerlingus Captain is NOT earning less than a 2 year narrowbody FO at United. Also in your example above the European crew is unaugmented, while the US crew is augmented but the rates (simple addition) do not equal the sum.

It's ok man,...you ve like fumbled through every question and sort of moved the goalposts.
I don't have a degree is RASM/CASM either.....and it just proves to me that when it comes to all the economics of air travel.......there is stuff that we as pilots just don't know.........and there is no shame in that.

Europeon airlines by regulation and their contracts use two pilots across the pond to anything east of the Mississippi which is where the XLR would fly. Aer Lingus is probably the highest paid of the airlines who might use the airframe.

hmmm I guess the TAP crews I see at BOS and EWR.....maybe that third other FO I always see is just commuting or doing a LOSA audit...........

They are allowed to fly legs up to 10 hours with a two man crew. That is how the airlines I am aware of staff and there have been numerous threads on APC discussing it. AirFrance, KLM, Lufthansa, Virgin ect... use two man crews.

and then a three man crew if it’s south of the Gulf of America, right?

If it's over 10 hours yes. I doubt the XLR has any capability over 10 hours.