Astar Cargo Help PLEASE!!!!!

[Chubaka]

Thanks for everyone's response to my question about the transcon. It seems to be on the up and up. Not meant to stir the pot. Just a straightforward question.

 

[Flyer8]

Just a question...

I have heard you guys arguing about reliability for a while,but have not seen any numbers..We are still flying DC-8's and average around 98% (98.5% so far this month). We do burn some gas,but people seem to appreciate the high reliability.Does the 767 beat this reliability rate? Just curious...Not stirring the pot!

 

[AV8OR]

erich,

As you can see from a couple of the posts, it seems murky as to whether or there was a side letter getting some type of CBA relief so yall could take over the transcons. I simply trying to establish fact from rumor as to A. Whether the relief thing ever happened and..B. For what purpose? Once facts, are out there, everyone's free to form their own opinion. On this issue, I don't have one yet.

But thanks for your input.

Clipper,

1. I don't think any A-300's were parked. Credit hours(pay) went down in that aircraft.
2. The bus has been moved around several times, not sure if it was ever on a (pre-DHL buyout) ABX only run. Not on that a/c.
3. Not sure exactly. Let's see 809, couple of Boeings and I think a bus, so...maybe 4-5 total. Guys? Anybody at Astar wanna correct me there?
4. Now THAT is a very interesting question. Economical.....hmmm, that could mean a lot of things. Union contracts do sometimes have the affect of, let's say, "guiding" a company's decision on economic issues, like, whether or not to try and use a "competing" airline on the same field, OR, maybe, to use a cheaper labor airline within the same company. In thins industry, we have traditionally tried to limit the bottom of this type of "economic" decision with things like scope clauses and airline integration. As you are well though, sometimes both of those things can be hard pressed to actually see resolution. But in a one word answer, to some degreee, "yes".
5. Not sure where the quote "great new" comes from but, yes, as a matter of fact we did just vote in a new, IMO, "OK" contract. Honestly, for me, no hostility. It is what it is. Just grow a little tired of some of the "AStar was a pi$$ant airline that came up here and stole all of OUR Airborne, (which no longer existed when we got there) flying,....and they're not even CATII!" stuff, just as I know yall resented our scope arbitration. Everybody's tired of all of it.

I feel like the Ledbetter boy in the Jerry Clower story where they were coon hunting and when Neugene climbed up the tree to get the coon down he found it was an angry bobcat instead. While getting his a$$ handed to him he yells down for some body to shoot the cat, but his dad, worried about shooting Neugene, says he can't. Neugene's classic line to his dad is "Well go ahead and shoot on up here amongst us both! One of us got have some relief!"

That about sums it up for me regarding the whole affair!

 

[LarryinTN]

Our contract limits day/night transitions. You can transition between day and night flying only once per block of flights, you must have at least 16 hours off between the day and night flights and the transition must be at either the first, or last, layover in the block.

These provisions were put in many years ago to prevent having a schedule which constantly swapped back and forth between day and night flying while allowing a block (week) of flying to either start or end with a day trip. This would typically be a Sunday afternoon start, 16+ hour layover, then night flying for the rest of the week or a week of night flying ending with a 16+ hr layover and Sunday morning flight into ILN.

The transcon consists of three duty periods. The first and third of which are day flight, the second is night flying. That's two day/night transitions which weren't allowed. The company initially broke the trip up with different crews, on different trips, doing segments of the transcon but not making the whole cycle.

The agreement was made to allow the double day/night/day transition for the transcon in exchange for a couple of concessions from the company. The minimum rest was INCREASED (not decreased as had been alleged) from 16 hours to 24 hours at both SFO and JFK. That 24 hour rest can not be reduced. Additionally, the requirement for catering on the SFO-LAX-JFK night was added. Those company concessions provided the same, if not better, protection to the crews than the original rule which was intended to address a completely different issue.

There was no membership vote on this issue.

 

[hvydriver]

Our contract limits day/night transitions. You can transition between day and night flying only once per block of flights, you must have at least 16 hours off between the day and night flights and the transition must be at either the first, or last, layover in the block.

These provisions were put in many years ago to prevent having a schedule which constantly swapped back and forth between day and night flying while allowing a block (week) of flying to either start or end with a day trip. This would typically be a Sunday afternoon start, 16+ hour layover, then night flying for the rest of the week or a week of night flying ending with a 16+ hr layover and Sunday morning flight into ILN.

The transcon consists of three duty periods. The first and third of which are day flight, the second is night flying. That's two day/night transitions which weren't allowed. The company initially broke the trip up with different crews, on different trips, doing segments of the transcon but not making the whole cycle.

The agreement was made to allow the double day/night/day transition for the transcon in exchange for a couple of concessions from the company. The minimum rest was INCREASED (not decreased as had been alleged) from 16 hours to 24 hours at both SFO and JFK. That 24 hour rest can not be reduced. Additionally, the requirement for catering on the SFO-LAX-JFK night was added. Those company concessions provided the same, if not better, protection to the crews than the original rule which was intended to address a completely different issue.

There was no membership vote on this issue.

That's interesting LJ. We ran the trip precisely the same way you describe above. Except we didn't give on the double/day/night transition. And we already had catering, of course.

 

[Jurassic Jet]

I have a question. Why did none of your Airbuses make it on Friday? I heard they were CAT2... We had at least one runway CAT2 most of the night.

Ooooh...I'll take this one. :nuts:

hvydriver may be pontificating a conspiracy theory:

"RVR dropped below 1200 anytime there was an Astar a/c in range."

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/B...cks_A/threadview?bn=25762&tid=12384&mid=12617

 

[AV8OR]

Ooooh...I'll take this one. :nuts:

hvydriver may be pontificating a conspiracy theory:

"RVR dropped below 1200 anytime there was an Astar a/c in range."

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/B...cks_A/threadview?bn=25762&tid=12384&mid=12617

That's not the same hvydriver is it? Just yankin yer chain hvy!

 

[hvydriver]

Ooooh...I'll take this one. :nuts:

hvydriver may be pontificating a conspiracy theory:

"RVR dropped below 1200 anytime there was an Astar a/c in range."

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/B...cks_A/threadview?bn=25762&tid=12384&mid=12617

Yep, that's me. And true. Otherwise, the fabulous french nightmare would have been on the ramp along with all those wunnerful DC9's. Presuming they got in the air.

I have personally experienced the ILN Tower declaring CATII ops., use 22R, and all the while 22L was severe clear. (I know it was ducks walking this past weekend for both runways. This was a fog bank last winter.) And have the tower refuse my request for a visual approach to 22L. And 22R was visible the whole way down the chute as well. But, it was "CATII". No flames, just what happened.

 

[nitefr8dog]

That's interesting LJ. We ran the trip precisely the same way you describe above. Except we didn't give on the double/day/night transition. And we already had catering, of course.

I think Abx ended up with the trip because the 767 used alot less gasoline, did not break down as much and was overall cheaper to operate ie:two man vs three,etc. no flame. But come to think of it that would mean DP actually wanted to save money!

 

[Fly Astar Jets]

Our contract limits day/night transitions. You can transition between day and night flying only once per block of flights, you must have at least 16 hours off between the day and night flights and the transition must be at either the first, or last, layover in the block.

These provisions were put in many years ago to prevent having a schedule which constantly swapped back and forth between day and night flying while allowing a block (week) of flying to either start or end with a day trip. This would typically be a Sunday afternoon start, 16+ hour layover, then night flying for the rest of the week or a week of night flying ending with a 16+ hr layover and Sunday morning flight into ILN.

The transcon consists of three duty periods. The first and third of which are day flight, the second is night flying. That's two day/night transitions which weren't allowed. The company initially broke the trip up with different crews, on different trips, doing segments of the transcon but not making the whole cycle.

The agreement was made to allow the double day/night/day transition for the transcon in exchange for a couple of concessions from the company. The minimum rest was INCREASED (not decreased as had been alleged) from 16 hours to 24 hours at both SFO and JFK. That 24 hour rest can not be reduced. Additionally, the requirement for catering on the SFO-LAX-JFK night was added. Those company concessions provided the same, if not better, protection to the crews than the original rule which was intended to address a completely different issue.

There was no membership vote on this issue.

Thanks LJ for straight dope.

FAJ