Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

atlas air new ceo announced

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
I agree belchfire. But I think there is a big difference between allowing Atlas to aquire those route authorities versus UAL. Atlas has a pretty bad reputation (as far as on time performance, and reliability). The governments of Japan and the US might make an exception for a larger company like UAL.

All just speculation of course.
 
Why not Astar? A holding just like AAWH and they can keep the PO name with half the fleet and play the same games with 3 airlines .... I guess we'll all find out soon enough :)

Good luck PO guys & girls
 
furloughfodder said:
Atlas has a pretty bad reputation (as far as on time performance, and reliability). The governments of Japan and the US might make an exception for a larger company like UAL.

More Polar propaganda...........
Last 12 months:
Polar Total departures....6635, delays...165, 97.51% ontime
Atlas Total departures..18424, delays...525, 97.15% ontime
 
Classicdriver said:
Polar...........97.51% ontime
Atlas...........97.15% ontime


Propaganda??!!.........Why it is plain to anyone with a pair of eyes!!!.......Atlas was .36% less on time than Polar was.........just awful...awful I say!!!:D
 
KeroseneSnorter said:
Propaganda??!!.........Why it is plain to anyone with a pair of eyes!!!.......Atlas was .36% less on time than Polar was.........just awful...awful I say!!!:D

Yep, we should be flogged and sent to bed without any supper. Overall not bad (for both fleets) with over half being classics.
 
Classicdriver said:
Yep, we should be flogged and sent to bed without any supper. Overall not bad (for both fleets) with over half being classics.

It is the epaulets on the jacket that slow you down that extra .36%...not as streamlined as the Polar jackets!! Plus the Polar wings do not fit on the Atlas WW Holdings provided jacket, the holes do not match....that gives us an extra .025 pound weight advantage too!

In short...its mgmts. fault that you boys can't keep up!! They planned this all along to make you look bad and lower your self esteem!!:D
 
belchfire said:
My understanding is that if there was a way around the Polar certificates/route issue the current owner would have done
it...

You are right Mr. Fire. There is no way around it. The route authority was specifically awarded to Polar Air Cargo. Any changing of the company or name will result in a rebid of the route authority amongst Fedex, UPS and all the other frieght carriers. Thats why the UPS rumor of buying Polar was BS from the start. UPS wanted to absorb Polar but no dice if they wanted just the route authority.

United is no different, any exception to the rule will cause all the other frieght carriers to file law suits. No one wants that $hit storm, especially the government. Polar will have to be operated separately as a subsidiary of United Cargo. By the way ALL of Polar's upgrade/transition training to the 747-400 is being done at the United training center in Denver and not Miami.....Hmmmm.
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom