Atlas/Southern/Kalitta > Fedex?

[SMcC]

With all due respect, I don't need any career advice. I'm just curious about the crew utilization. In the earlier posts there was reference to 600 hours over a 5 year period, and another to 70ish in a year. These were examples from FedEx guys I think, and not ACMI. Another guy asked about staying current.

So what would a rough average be per month, or per year? The examples referenced above have got to be way out of the norm.

 

[HA25]

300 to 400 a year for me.

 

[Whistlin' Dan]

I'm not at FedEx or any of the ACMI's, so as an outsider I have to ask about the extremely low crew utilization being talked about here. I assume some exageration is involved, and that the numbers were not meant to reflect an average cross section. But still.... How long can that last?

I've been asking myself that for quite a while now. Over the last 30-or-so years in this business, I've heard the same thing from at least 3 people flying for different carriers. ALL were on the street (or nearly so) within 36 months of having made the statement. None of them had any inkling of the disaster that was about to befall them, nor was there any reason at the time they were made to believe there might be.

I'm not wishing ill on anybody. If ACMI wages are going to be somewhere between the highest and lowest-paying operators out there, it behooves us all to support higher pay for those at the top of our profession. But if I'm a shareholder in a company whose actual, a$$-in-the-seat costs are 3X what my competitors are paying, at the very minimum I'm going to want to know why.

 

[LongBeachTrijet]

I've been asking myself that for quite a while now. Over the last 30-or-so years in this business, I've heard the same thing from at least 3 people flying for different carriers. ALL were on the street (or nearly so) within 36 months of having made the statement. None of them had any inkling of the disaster that was about to befall them, nor was there any reason at the time they were made to believe there might be.

I'm not wishing ill on anybody. If ACMI wages are going to be somewhere between the highest and lowest-paying operators out there, it behooves us all to support higher pay for those at the top of our profession. But if I'm a shareholder in a company whose actual, a$$-in-the-seat costs are 3X what my competitors are paying, at the very minimum I'm going to want to know why.

I would hope that a shareholder would know that the lower utilization is the nature of the business. It is much easier for companies with mostly known flying to schedule crews more efficiently. In ACMI, things change with the wind and crews have to commercial all over the world, get their rest, fly, rest, maybe fly again, rest, then commercial again.

 

[HA25]

I would hope that a shareholder would know that the lower utilization is the nature of the business. It is much easier for companies with mostly known flying to schedule crews more efficiently. In ACMI, things change with the wind and crews have to commercial all over the world, get their rest, fly, rest, maybe fly again, rest, then commercial again.

and it's only going to get worse (for the companies) when the Aug 1 rules come out.... they'll have to give us rest as if we're a scheduled airline which frankly makes more sense.. unscheduled is even more tiresome work.

 

[SMcC]

Wasn't it the non-ACMI guys talking about really low numbers?

...FedEx, for example. I'm expect UPS would be similar, maybe others.

 

[Uncle Bunkle]

Looking back at the four years prior to the reduced BLGs, it looks like I averaged right at 315 blocked per year. Mainly domestic flying with a little reserve sprinkled in.

Z

That'll lead to some rust building up, huh?