southwest to convert up to 20 737 for ups

[brownie]

SWA is converting old 737 to carry up to 10 cans per A/C for ups , starting in may.

 

[SWA/FO]

source? I have heard we were doing this for our own freight, not UPS.

 

[flint4xx]

According to an LAX ops agent, we are using UPS to ship freight from LAX to other stations overnight to be put on originators to get them out. (LAX can't because of the loads), and it's only two airplanes to be converted.

...grain of salt.

 

[brownie]

nooooo, it's 4 bloody ups and our wonderful scope. That's why u guys are keep hiring, because of good customers like ups, but kidding a side those are for ups flight (ont and sdf).

 

[scoreboard]

Brownie, please explain "wonderful scope", "good customers" and "ont/sdf comments", oh, who told you this? thanks

 

[swaforme]

I was at the puzzle palace two days ago for recurrent. We were told that the SWA a/c that were to be converted to frieghters idea has alot of merit but is now on a back burner.

 

[brownie]

our union is looking in to this matter as we speak because our scope allows the company to use other carriers up to 5 cans per A/C but with this SWA deal they are converting them for 10 cans. Ups needs the extra lift for ont and sdf and this could be up to 30 airplanes. For how long , i don't know but this suppose to take place starting may 06.

 

[GuppyWN]

Aint gonna happen.

Gup

 

[DX Jake]

That is not true. All of these rumors started when aircraft 300 and 301 were scheduled to have a "skin" overhaul. It's because of how old they are. Boeing requires it.

 

[airlinepilot]

Infor from recurrent traing...according to MR "T"

and all the SWA guys know who "T" is.

We are going to comvert 4 to 6 300's to cargo
- Cost is approx 1 mil per aircraft to install cargo door
- return would be around 20 mil per aircraft per year
- our cargo operation has grown rapidly and we need the increase capability
- would lower cycles on the older 300's and extend their life
- did not mention any specific contract with UPS or Fed Ex

We carried were loaded to the gills with Fed Ex cargo yesterday from MDW to ISP.....go figure

 

[MLBWINGBORN]

Sorry guys..

Just got off the phone with a CP.

While bugging him about other things i asked about anything new..

The 300 freight operation is dead.Aint gonna happen.

This along with other news was said during an EPT class yesterday.

For those of you longing to fly freight for SWA...Sorry

Mike

 

[ecb]

Not!

BWI Chief read a letter written by our cargo study group to Gary Kelly stating, among other things, that converting any of our a/c to cargo is not cost effective at this time.
It's a dead horse.

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

Does anyone know how much cargo those EMB 195's can carry??

Anyway here is how much revenue we get now from Cargo--

Three months ended
December 31,

2005 OPERATING REVENUES
Passenger $1,906
Freight 35
Other 46
Total operating revenues 1,987

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

If cargo is so lucrative and easy, why didn't we start doing it years ago? The only reason I can think of is we always saw easier money expanding into passenger markets. Which leads me to believe that expanding into new pax markets is looking less attractive and the new, riskier, idea of cargo conversion looks more attractive. Cargo sounds good but I wish it didn't.

Frieght dogs, correct me if I'm wrong. Isn't the point to point freight maket somewhat competitive? Not the customer to customer stuff UPS, FedEx and DHL are doing. I can see SWA facing new competitive challenges in this market. My understanding is these guys and gals work for less pay and have less generous benefits. They also need real estate on other parts of the airport that we don't currently own. Training for employees. We won't be getting 70-90 block hours out of freight lines. Our cost advantage might disappear for a freight schedule.

Just ramblings, what do you think?

 

[Clyde]

If cargo is so lucrative and easy, why didn't we start doing it years ago? The only reason I can think of is we always saw easier money expanding into passenger markets. Which leads me to believe that expanding into new pax markets is looking less attractive and the new, riskier, idea of cargo conversion looks more attractive. Cargo sounds good but I wish it didn't.

Frieght dogs, correct me if I'm wrong. Isn't the point to point freight maket somewhat competitive? Not the customer to customer stuff UPS, FedEx and DHL are doing. I can see SWA facing new competitive challenges in this market. My understanding is these guys and gals work for less pay and have less generous benefits. They also need real estate on other parts of the airport that we don't currently own. Training for employees. We won't be getting 70-90 block hours out of freight lines. Our cost advantage might disappear for a freight schedule.

Just ramblings, what do you think?

FBJ,

It's been a while, but when I flew on-demand cargo, that market was fairly competitive. It could also be quite lucrative as well, because the on-demand freight that I typically flew was stuff that had to get to a specific point as quickly as possible, and the customer was willing to pay top dollar for it.

In that market, you would be competing against the likes of Ameristar, USAJet, Kalitta, and Grand Aire, just to name a few. I know with Ameristar and USAJet, the aircraft consist of Falcons on up to 737's and DC-9's.

With point-to-point ad-hoc freight, you typically bypass any type of sort facility and go right to the customer's airport. This could lead to new challenges, such as finding a fork-lift at 0300 to unload the goods.

As far as pay and benifits, it has been too long to give you accurate numbers.

 

[TZtoSWA]

our union is looking in to this matter as we speak because our scope allows the company to use other carriers up to 5 cans per A/C but with this SWA deal they are converting them for 10 cans. Ups needs the extra lift for ont and sdf and this could be up to 30 airplanes. For how long , i don't know but this suppose to take place starting may 06.

BTW I was wondering is there some loophole in your scope for X-mas rush? I see alot of non-brown A/C on the SDF ramp that time of year. Is your scope strong enough to prevent mgmnt from going back to all subbed out flying ie. the Orion days?

 

[Big Beer Belly]

BTW I was wondering is there some loophole in your scope for X-mas rush? I see alot of non-brown A/C on the SDF ramp that time of year. Is your scope strong enough to prevent mgmnt from going back to all subbed out flying ie. the Orion days?

It's not a "loophole" in our scope. "Peak" volume (generally Thanksgiving thru Christmas) increases dramatically (some days/weeks see 50% increases). UPS needs the extra lift for this month and our scope clause acknowledges this by agreeing to subcontracting during peak to meet lift requirements.

YES ... our scope prevents year-round subcontracting (some exceptions for less than 5 "cans" of volume).

FWIW ... UPS has historically not been a player in the freight market until very recently with the purchase of Menlo Worldwide (air freight) and Overnite (LTL ground freight).

Our management still sucks! :smash:

BBB

 

[SWA GUY]

According to Mike Van de Ven (he took Wimberley's place as VP Aircraft Ops), we don't have enough jets to open an additional city for 06, let alone "spares" for cargo use.

If we find more jets, maybe it'll happen, but were not close to this happening.