2015 Pilot Discussion.

[nevergiveup]

Let's hope TWA does their magic, the APA is in no hurry either it seems, It would be great to tie this deal up for another 5 years at least.

Agreed!

 

[nycbusdriver]

Ok here's what you are not getting. This was a new aircraft type in early 2009. They (A330-200) mostly did CDG prior to July 2009 when PHL - TLV started. So the A330-300 could not do TLV without a fuel stop, with me so far? Reliability testing was done during this time and proving flights ( as well as reliability data supplied by Airbus). You don't start a long range flight for which you don't have a substitute aircraft for because you have taken a lot of money from folks purchasing tickets on the TLV route. If you have an aircraft hiccup, maintenance, aircraft damage, or whatever, you have no way to accommodate the passengers. Your reputation is then ruined and people will not book your flights after poor or nonexistent performance. Consider if the A330-200 damaged aircraft in CLT had happened on July 2 2009? What would you do then? The flights are too long with too much ground sit time to run a reliable operation with just two aircraft. Operational reliability studies were done and the decision of starting service to TLV in July 2009 were based on studies that indicated more than two aircraft would be required to maintain acceptable reliability of operations. The third aircraft was often flown PHL - SJU or to PHL -CDG ( somewhere that it could be pulled from in case of maintenance required ) and then an 330-300 substituted for those flights. You don't start a new ultra long range operation without some type of reliability program as plan B. Unless of course you don't care about reliability concerns. Now we have many 330-200s that can easily be swapped around in case of maintenance outages, but you still need 3 airframes to run a reliable operation.

 
Yes, but the spare for TLV serves as the spare for every other 330 route.  Every other city in Europe served by a 330, of either type, would, by your logic, require a spare.  So that would mean every city in Europe, rather than being serviced by one a/c, would require two. 
 
Aside from that, we have seen TLV flight cancel for mechanical reasons, and the sun still rose and no one ended up having to live permanently in TLV against their wishes.
 
If the TLV cyle is 48 hours (which it is,) look at the numbers.  The block time for a TLV round trip is 24+00.  Subtract that from a 48 hour cycle, and it leaves 24+00 of ground time.  Even a fuel stop for a subsituted -300 would not cause a hiccup, because there is so much slop in it.   There is 8+15 on the ground in TLV, and 15+45 on the ground in PHL.    Even with a fuel stop westbound, the flight would arrive in PHL about 2 hours late, and still have enough sit time to do a SJU turn and be back in PHL for TLV that night.
 
It's really simple math...it takes TWO aircraft to do the route.  There is no "spare TLV" aircraft, per se.  There are spares, but they are not assigned to a particular route.  Besides that, how much good is a spare sitting in PHL or even CLT, if the broken airplane is TLV?
(And there are no spares anywhere on the east side of the Atlantic.)

 

[nycbusdriver]

Let's hope TWA does their magic, the APA is in no hurry either it seems, It would be great to tie this deal up for another 5 years at least.

 
THAT would be perfect.  

 

[FL430]

Yes, but the spare for TLV serves as the spare for every other 330 route.  Every other city in Europe served by a 330, of either type, would, by your logic, require a spare.  So that would mean every city in Europe, rather than being serviced by one a/c, would require two. 
 
Aside from that, we have seen TLV flight cancel for mechanical reasons, and the sun still rose and no one ended up having to live permanently in TLV against their wishes.
 
If the TLV cyle is 48 hours (which it is,) look at the numbers.  The block time for a TLV round trip is 24+00.  Subtract that from a 48 hour cycle, and it leaves 24+00 of ground time.  Even a fuel stop for a subsituted -300 would not cause a hiccup, because there is so much slop in it.   There is 8+15 on the ground in TLV, and 15+45 on the ground in PHL.    Even with a fuel stop westbound, the flight would arrive in PHL about 2 hours late, and still have enough sit time to do a SJU turn and be back in PHL for TLV that night.
 
It's really simple math...it takes TWO aircraft to do the route.  There is no "spare TLV" aircraft, per se.  There are spares, but they are not assigned to a particular route.  Besides that, how much good is a spare sitting in PHL or even CLT, if the broken airplane is TLV?
(And there are no spares anywhere on the east side of the Atlantic.)

No other European or South American destination has a pharmaceutical cargo contract that requires the timeliness and completion factor that you are not even considering, that is why access to the third aircraft is required. Sometimes the company does take a hit because of mechanicals and sometimes because of operational requirements like adding fuel because of strong headwinds necessitating bumping cargo weight. These are already factored into this completion factor that the company has to maintain. I know there is no spare TLV aircraft, but there is usually another330-200 heading to Europe that they can reschedule to TLV in case of a mechanical. You do know of the pharmaceutical contract requirement don't you?

 

[FL430]

I don't think they worry about reliability as much as you think. July 2, 2009, we had two A-330-200 aircraft, 279 and 280. They sent 279 to SJU that day. 280 flew TLV without a backup and without ACARS. It was also the ETOPS certification flight. Two A-330s serviced TLV, RIO & GRU each. A third airplane is nice, but not essential.

I know all of this. See the previous post about completion factor. RIO, and GRU flights aren't as long as TLV nor does the aircraft sit as long as TLV. Neither of these flights have the lucrative pharmaceutical cargo contracts as well, hence the priority of TLV. Ck airman flew the first two flights over to TLV and I believe EB and JT flew the flight you mentioned above. Availability of the third aircraft was added shortly after the TLV start date because of an engine financing issue that Kirby had to make a trip to Paris to resolve.

 

[CAVOK]

I know all of this. See the previous post about completion factor. RIO, and GRU flights aren't as long as TLV nor does the aircraft sit as long as TLV. Neither of these flights have the lucrative pharmaceutical cargo contracts as well, hence the priority of TLV. Ck airman flew the first two flights over to TLV and I believe EB and JT flew the flight you mentioned above. Availability of the third aircraft was added shortly after the TLV start date because of an engine financing issue that Kirby had to make a trip to Paris to resolve.

Interesting discussion; all management problems. I never even considered them. But, damn, I love those routes. Damn, I love that airplane. CPDLC!

 

[CAVOK]

Interesting discussion; all management problems. I never even considered them. But, damn, I love those routes. Damn, I love that airplane. CPDLC!

Did I mention, damn, I love that paycheck? That is one important limitation number to remember.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

Interesting discussion; all management problems. I never even considered them. But, damn, I love those routes. Damn, I love that airplane. CPDLC!

. Cactus Pilots Dumb Little Contributors, yup say it every time just before shanwick next! MM

 

[CAVOK]

. Cactus Pilots Dumb Little Contributors, yup say it every time just before shanwick next! MM

Not Cactus for long! That was a dumb decision for the sake of appeasing the west pilots. The European controllers just couldn't pronounce the word, especially the French. They would just resort to "alpha whiskey echo" in exasperation. But, I don't really care about the call sign as long as the routes, airplanes and pay rate are still in place.

You will just have to own the "cactus pilot dumb little contributor" moniker yourself, CPDLC. Thank you very much.

 

[FL430]

 Even a fuel stop for a subsituted -300 would not cause a hiccup, because there is so much slop in it.  



Have you ever seen an A330-300 dispatched to or from TLV?

 

[EastCheats]

Not Cactus for long! That was a dumb decision for the sake of appeasing the west pilots. The European controllers just couldn't pronounce the word, especially the French. They would just resort to "alpha whiskey echo" in exasperation. But, I don't really care about the call sign as long as the routes, airplanes and pay rate are still in place.
You will just have to own the "cactus pilot dumb little contributor" moniker yourself, CPDLC. Thank you very much.

You refer to baggage handlers as bag smasherrs and now European controllers can't pronounce a callsign. Maybe the problem is not with the callsign...(picture a sarcastic smiley thing laughing at you for being the ugly American)

 

[EastCheats]

Well stated.  Exactly correct.  The more delay, the better for everybody, especially for those pros trying to keep their desert kingdom all for themselves.

Avoid arbitratiors because they are evil and biased against East pilots.

 

[traderjake]

East ALPA  - "I want a pony for Christmas"
 
Nic - "You're not getting a pony, tell me what else you want"
 
East ALPA  - "I want a pony"
 
Christmas Day:
 
East ALPA - "Why did I get this stupid baseball mitt?, I wanted a football............NIC must hate East pilots"

 

[nycbusdriver]

No other European or South American destination has a pharmaceutical cargo contract that requires the timeliness and completion factor that you are not even considering, that is why access to the third aircraft is required. Sometimes the company does take a hit because of mechanicals and sometimes because of operational requirements like adding fuel because of strong headwinds necessitating bumping cargo weight. These are already factored into this completion factor that the company has to maintain. I know there is no spare TLV aircraft, but there is usually another330-200 heading to Europe that they can reschedule to TLV in case of a mechanical. You do know of the pharmaceutical contract requirement don't you?

 
I am aware of the pharmaceutical cargo, but a spare in PHL, or another -200 scheduled for a different city is fairly useless if the airplane breaks in TLV, is it not?  
 
Your argument is total nonsense.  The company indeed may keep A spare A330 in PHL, or CLT, but that spare will head out to whatever city needs it, and not just TLV.
 
TLV is serviced by TWO aircraft, not three.  Spares do not come into the picture.
 
If the cargo was that important, then passengers would be denied boarding in favor of the cargo, but that is not the case.  Having flown TLV-PHL iwthin the past week, and having the dispatcher mention that he left 9,000 pounds of cargo on the ramp (with a full load of pax) would lead me to believe that the cargo contract is not as precious as you say.  And it certainly is not lucrative enough to have an extra $100 million dollar airplane hanging around to protect it.

 

[nycbusdriver]

 Even a fuel stop for a subsituted -300 would not cause a hiccup, because there is so much slop in it.  



Have you ever seen an A330-300 dispatched to or from TLV?

 
Never, but you are the one who brought it up, not me.