wjcandee wrote:

AV8AJET wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

Yochai: Nice photo in the database of the ex-S7 Atlas aircraft N1439A!

Can you please post a link to the pic, I look forward to flying her!

Thanks!!!

wjcandee wrote:

Yochai: Nice photo in the database of the ex-S7 Atlas aircraft N1439A!

Thank you! and BTW, N374AA was finally delivered to SNN yesterday after several days of delays and cancellations.

N1439A is scheduled for delivery on Thursday morning ex TLV, GTI9321 to KPSM pending delays.

yochai wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

Yochai: Nice photo in the database of the ex-S7 Atlas aircraft N1439A!

Thank you! and BTW, N374AA was finally delivered to SNN yesterday after several days of delays and cancellations.

And immediately on it's way to ROW.

Still wondering about 376an's livery...

1439 is out on delivery ex TLV...GTI9321 to KPSM

wjcandee wrote:

Still wondering about 376an's livery...

Looks like it’s in ATI livery. It’ll be doing a MIA-GUA-SJO rotation six times a week starting in what I assume will be mid- to late-June.

Acey559 wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

Still wondering about 376an's livery...

Looks like it’s in ATI livery. It’ll be doing a MIA-GUA-SJO rotation six times a week starting in what I assume will be mid- to late-June.

Wow! Another ATI-painted 767-300. Very cool! And a nice piece of business that I'm sure that NAC or Amerijet would have been delighted to operate. This might indicate that, at least for the moment, ATSG would still rather lease AND fly the aircraft than just dry-lease it to a competitor.

yochai wrote:

1439 is out on delivery ex TLV...GTI9321 to KPSM

Indeed, arrived 5/31/18, and now it should be off to AMA for paint on 6/1. Leading Edge (IAC) will be turning this cool green look into either all-white or a Prime Air livery.

1487A, 1489A and 1499A have been in conversion long enough that we could see them on the way back to the US in the next month or so. (2 at TLV and 1 at TPE.)

I see that ELAL is retiring their 767-300's. Anyone think they could become cargo jets??

sunking737 wrote:

I see that ELAL is retiring their 767-300's. Anyone think they could become cargo jets??

All have PWs, so there's that.

Some are old enough to convert; some are young enough to probably have more passenger duty ahead of them somewhere else. All are leased, from a number of lessors, so they are unlikely to be sold as a package.

The Amazon demand will be filled by aircraft already-identified, but ATSG alone is projecting 6-8-10 conversions a year for the next few years. Kalitta will doubtless take some more, and DHL, perhaps Atlas, and plenty of onesie-twosie customers. ATSG has been mostly filling its needs from AA retirements recently, but it may need to reach outside of that supply. Kalitta and Atlas are casting a wider net.

So the short answer to your question is "Yes", maybe.

wjcandee wrote:

sunking737 wrote:

I see that ELAL is retiring their 767-300's. Anyone think they could become cargo jets??

All have PWs, so there's that.

So the short answer to your question is "Yes", maybe.

I mean, it's not a straight-up disqualifier like having Rolls Royce powerplants. Yes most conversions lately have been CF-6 but it might be a good idea to diversify with pratts a bit if only to have another spare parts pool for old engines you're not competing with everyone for.

Speaking of PW birds, does anyone have a photo of N1511A after paint?

jeffrey0032j wrote:

Speaking of PW birds, does anyone have a photo of N1511A after paint?

You know, I don't see one.

Spacepope wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

sunking737 wrote:

I see that ELAL is retiring their 767-300's. Anyone think they could become cargo jets??

All have PWs, so there's that.

So the short answer to your question is "Yes", maybe.

I mean, it's not a straight-up disqualifier like having Rolls Royce powerplants. Yes most conversions lately have been CF-6 but it might be a good idea to diversify with pratts a bit if only to have another spare parts pool for old engines you're not competing with everyone for.

Totally agree that it is in no way a disqualifier, although I'm not sure about wanting engine diversity. Most of these guys like commonality, and the GE is by far the more popular freighter. That said, they are both superb engines with long and reliable service histories. Unlike the attitude here on A.net, which seems to be "Why would anybody buy the PW4000?", the fact is that the PW has proven to be an excellent engine on the 767. The engines have significant design differences, and over time we have seen definable issues between the two, but nothing other than personal preference (and personal experience) would make a decisionmaker choose one over the other today besides initial cost and maintenance expense. A few observations: PWs tend to use less oil. PWs require significantly-more effort to do some maintenance tasks (although less on some other maintenance tasks), and the engine isn't designed to make life as easy for mechanics as the GE is. PW fuel efficiency tends to stabilize with age; the GE tends to reduce in a steady line until the next overhaul. PW handles hot environments better. PW survives FOD and compressor stalls that would require an engine change on the GE. PW doesn't get out of balance unless something is seriously about to go wrong; you end up balancing the GE more. PW maintenance expense is more stable; GE will be lower then have a pop.

(And, of course, the thing that "disqualifies" the RR engines is that there is currently no STC for a conversion of an RR-equipped 767, which is simply because there are so few of them out there it isn't worth it.)

wjcandee wrote:

Spacepope wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

All have PWs, so there's that.

So the short answer to your question is "Yes", maybe.

I mean, it's not a straight-up disqualifier like having Rolls Royce powerplants. Yes most conversions lately have been CF-6 but it might be a good idea to diversify with pratts a bit if only to have another spare parts pool for old engines you're not competing with everyone for.

Totally agree that it is in no way a disqualifier, although I'm not sure about wanting engine diversity. Most of these guys like commonality, and the GE is by far the more popular freighter. That said, they are both superb engines with long and reliable service histories. Unlike the attitude here on A.net, which seems to be "Why would anybody buy the PW4000?", the fact is that the PW has proven to be an excellent engine on the 767. The engines have significant design differences, and over time we have seen definable issues between the two, but nothing other than personal preference (and personal experience) would make a decisionmaker choose one over the other today besides initial cost and maintenance expense. A few observations: PWs tend to use less oil. PWs require significantly-more effort to do some maintenance tasks (although less on some other maintenance tasks), and the engine isn't designed to make life as easy for mechanics as the GE is. PW fuel efficiency tends to stabilize with age; the GE tends to reduce in a steady line until the next overhaul. PW handles hot environments better. PW survives FOD and compressor stalls that would require an engine change on the GE. PW doesn't get out of balance unless something is seriously about to go wrong; you end up balancing the GE more. PW maintenance expense is more stable; GE will be lower then have a pop.

(And, of course, the thing that "disqualifies" the RR engines is that there is currently no STC for a conversion of an RR-equipped 767, which is simply because there are so few of them out there it isn't worth it.)

I think those are all excellent points. I was merely speaking about engine diversity from an availability standpoint. ATSG and Atlas are not going to buy new replacement engines for their fleets, and with the huge amount of freighter work they are doing that was pretty much not planned for 5 years back, you're looking at up to a quarter million engine hours getting piled on annually (assuming heavy 3000 hour annual utilization, 40 aircraft, 2 engines each). This becomes a problem from 2 directions: your useage is high and your competitors are keeping their aircraft in service longer, meaning more competition for spare parts as well as any used engines that come on the market will be more worn as well. Pratt operators have a slight advantage now with the retirement of the UA and DL 744 fleet leading to available engines, but I'm seeing engines rather than airframes becoming the limiting factor soon. I wouldn't be surprised that after the 5 year lease for the 762s is up they get swapped for 763s as the 763 puts the same wear and tear on those precious powerplants and moves a bit more stuff.

Spacepope: Given what has happened with operators of the 747-200 and engine availability, and similar issues with other older airframes, yours are excellent points!

jeffrey0032j wrote:

Speaking of PW birds, does anyone have a photo of N1511A after paint?

I caught a photo of it the other day, not a great one but it is all white. Not sure how to upload a photo here.

Also announced today Amazon PVD operations will be terminated and moved to BDL.
http://www.wpri.com/business-news/logis ... 1212898420

N930WE scheduled into TLV on Wednesday morning

Although this thread has drifted away from "Amazon Fleet Growth", N1399A was leased to Amazon last Tuesday.

Yep. Thanks, MO11! It seems like certain conversions which ultimately are destined for lease to Amazon have been used by Atlas for other things until the commencement of the Amazon lease for that aircraft. 1399A and 1709A were put into service by Atlas for its own stuff and/or as a maintenance spare for Amazon, but ultimately will be among the dry-leased ones (and indeed 1399A is now just that). 1399A has been operational since January, but presumably Amazon wasn't yet ready for it.

yochai wrote:

N930WE scheduled into TLV on Wednesday morning

Thanks, Yochai! It seemed like it was time for it to move. Next question will be whether we see 830WE and 730WE move to ILN.

wjcandee wrote:

yochai wrote:

N930WE scheduled into TLV on Wednesday morning

Thanks, Yochai! It seemed like it was time for it to move. Next question will be whether we see 830WE and 730WE move to ILN.

Im pretty sure 30 West would be more than happy to sell the remaining 767's to CAM for some decent profit.

BOEING777EK wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

yochai wrote:

N930WE scheduled into TLV on Wednesday morning

Thanks, Yochai! It seemed like it was time for it to move. Next question will be whether we see 830WE and 730WE move to ILN.

Im pretty sure 30 West would be more than happy to sell the remaining 767's to CAM for some decent profit.

All three are single-owner (ANZ), superbly-maintained GE-powered, wingletted aircraft of the right age for conversion, so they're pretty-cherry. I just don't know how reasonable 30West's expectations are, or what they were hoping to get for them going into the purchase from ANZ. That the parties were able to deal for one, when all 3 were unsold/unleased, doesn't necessarily mean that they can deal for the others. But it's a good start, I think, if ATSG needs quality metal to bridge the gap until another AA 767-300 is retired. (And, as I mentioned earlier, now that AMES has had a chance to go over the frame before sending it to TLV, ATSG will have a first-hand detailed view of what kind of condition these frames are in.)

wjcandee wrote:

BOEING777EK wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

Thanks, Yochai! It seemed like it was time for it to move. Next question will be whether we see 830WE and 730WE move to ILN.

Im pretty sure 30 West would be more than happy to sell the remaining 767's to CAM for some decent profit.

All three are single-owner (ANZ), superbly-maintained GE-powered, wingletted aircraft of the right age for conversion, so they're pretty-cherry. I just don't know how reasonable 30West's expectations are, or what they were hoping to get for them going into the purchase from ANZ. That the parties were able to deal for one, when all 3 were unsold/unleased, doesn't necessarily mean that they can deal for the others. But it's a good start, I think, if ATSG needs quality metal to bridge the gap until another AA 767-300 is retired. (And, as I mentioned earlier, now that AMES has had a chance to go over the frame before sending it to TLV, ATSG will have a first-hand detailed view of what kind of condition these frames are in.)

Yeah I'd imagine the frames being in solid condition since ANZ maintained them if we look back at the other 767's we can see most of them going through second lives with another carrier. But I may be wrong.

BOEING777EK wrote:

Yeah I'd imagine the frames being in solid condition since ANZ maintained them if we look back at the other 767's we can see most of them going through second lives with another carrier. But I may be wrong.

I agree.

With respect to the Prime Air aircraft, every 767-300 at Atlas is a onesie-twosie-threesie from the last carrier to fly them, having generally been through numerous carriers before coming to Atlas. It's a diverse collection, and it will be interesting to see what standardization Atlas does on avionics, etc. (This is actually true for the entire 767-300 fleet at Atlas (totalling 29 at this point). The only exception is the two 767-300Fs that were bought new by DHL Air, and are now operated "for Polar" by Atlas.)

The CAM fleet of 767-300s, in contrast, is largely made up of aircraft purchased directly from the original owner (or its agent).

Of the 8 Amazon 767-300s at ATI, 2 have had multiple owners and the rest are either direct from Qantas or direct from AA. There is also 395, the ATI-owned maintenance spare.

To be specific, 331 and 347 had multiple owners (originally ANZ, then here and there and then to Omni),
337, 395, 353 and 359 are direct from AA, the original owner,
and 307, 311 and 313 are direct from Qantas, the original owner.

In fact, CAM bought and converted 11 of the retired non-RR-engined Qantas 763s; besides the three described above, six of them are at ABX Air (362CM, 317CM, 364CM, 363CM, 372CM, 371CM), and the other two are dry-leased to Amerijet (319CM, 373CM). [The other three 767-300s at ABX Air are multiple-owner aircraft, originally at SAS, and with PW engines.]

On top of that, all of the conversions that ATSG has done in the past several months for placement at other carriers have also been of AA aircraft. Specifically, 7 ex-AA aircraft have been converted and placed (if you include 344CM), and 5 more ex-AA aircraft are in conversion (including 374AA, which is in paint at ROW). That exhausts the supply of viable retired AA aircraft for conversion, except for 380AN, which I assume will be coming to CAM for conversion unless there's something really wrong with it. The next aircraft to go to TLV will be 930WE, and then we'll see if 380AN gets converted or not.

So at the end of the day, 16 or 17 direct-from-AA aircraft will have been converted by CAM. Then we'll see whether the next round of AA retirements will be as well.

I wouldn't be surprised if N380AN will go to CAM. But yes, it will be interesting to see what happens once all the AA birds are bought. 730 and 830 sure seem like good options for CAM.

N930WE is on its way from ILN to TLV for conversion as of 3:15pm on June 15, 2018.

And 311AZ came in for a check, while 307AZ went back into service following about a month at ILN.

I had heard that ABX lost ATL on the DHL network. Looks like Connie will now be serving it, at least for the moment with N762CK, one of its recent 767-300 conversions.

NEW SERVICE TO AT LEAST ONE NEW STATION TONIGHT. GTI3500 will be leaving shortly from BWI-MSP.

wjcandee wrote:

NEW SERVICE TO AT LEAST ONE NEW STATION TONIGHT. GTI3500 will be leaving shortly from BWI-MSP.

After MSP, the aircraft goes to CVG.

So is MSP-CVG a new route? https://flightaware.com/live/flight/GTI3000

Hot Damn Prime Air in MSP ???...Now we are in the big leagues....

N1399A is headed to DEN from CVG. So I guess MSP/DEN are the new stations?

Nice to see this finally happen. I’ve been saying since I got hired at ATI that there have been rumors of MSP/DEN but it never panned out. Now it looks like a pilot rumor actually came true. Mark your calendars.

cvgComair wrote:

N1399A is headed to DEN from CVG. So I guess MSP/DEN are the new stations?

Yes indeed! MSP and DEN are it!

New route is CVG-DEN-ONT.

Acey559 wrote:

Nice to see this finally happen. I’ve been saying since I got hired at ATI that there have been rumors of MSP/DEN but it never panned out. Now it looks like a pilot rumor actually came true. Mark your calendars.

But it looks like an Atlas Prime not ATI route doesn’t it?

AV8AJET wrote:

Acey559 wrote:

Nice to see this finally happen. I’ve been saying since I got hired at ATI that there have been rumors of MSP/DEN but it never panned out. Now it looks like a pilot rumor actually came true. Mark your calendars.

But it looks like an Atlas Prime not ATI route doesn’t it?

It is very definitely an Atlas route, because Atlas simply has more available planes. Acey was just saying that the rumours about additional stations, regardless of who would serve them, included MSP and DEN.

Two aircraft that had been delivered but not yet leased to Amazon were just leased to Amazon, and there are four more coming, including one that's in paint. There will be 21 or 22 aircraft that Atlas has available for Amazon (including one or two Atlas 767-300s that are available as maintenance spares but not leased to Amazon). So any additions to the network will be largely on Atlas until all 40 aircraft are running. (All 20 at ATSG are running.) Not to say that ATI might not initiate a new route or new station, if Amazon decides to shift one of ATI's existing routes to Atlas. However, I think that those kinds of changes will be relatively-limited as we get closer to Peak, allowing for each airline's station staffing to remain constant. (In other words, if you take all ATI flights from Station A and move them to Station B and replace them with Atlas, you have to shift the maintenance/support/management function (but not the package handling function) at that carrier as well, which means newbies at that station every time you do it. Better to let the ATI folks at Station A continue to gain experience at that station and the GTI folks at Station B continue to gain experience at that station, presumably leading to a smoother operation there, all things being equal.

AV8AJET wrote:

Acey559 wrote:

Nice to see this finally happen. I’ve been saying since I got hired at ATI that there have been rumors of MSP/DEN but it never panned out. Now it looks like a pilot rumor actually came true. Mark your calendars.

But it looks like an Atlas Prime not ATI route doesn’t it?

Yep. As wjcandee noted, I wasn’t speaking as to which carrier would operate the routes, only that I’ve heard those particular cities rumored for quite a while.

Does anyone know when N377AN is coming back? I need to get a photo of 377 in the chrome livery

Speaking of MSP, currently our packages that come from Shakopee to the Phoenix area go on the direct flight from RFD. I wonder if they will continue to use the nonstop RFD flight or will they use MSP-CVG-PHX.

cmairplaneman wrote:

Does anyone know when N377AN is coming back? I need to get a photo of 377 in the chrome livery

Most likely early July, give or take a few weeks. TLV has been averaging about 6 months per aircraft, although that has varied a bit because they had a number of aircraft sitting and waiting to go through the process, and, of course, each aircraft needs a different amount of heavy maintenance work at the same time. (In contrast, down at MEX where they are doing basically one aircraft at a time, it's about 4.25 months, even on some aircraft that needed a boatload of sheet metal work. That's about where TLV would be if they weren't so busy.)

Yochai will probably have better info than this, however.

Looks like TPA gained a ONT-TPA-IAH route on Atlas, on the 6th.

So TPA has:

SMF-TPA-DFW
BWI-TPA-BWI
ONT-TPA-IAH
CVG-TPA-CVG

Seems like there's some unrest in the pilot ranks:

https://airlinegeeks.com/2018/06/08/the ... standards/

Low pay relative to bigger cargo and pax airlines, rest standard "cut out" for cargo crews being utilized by AMZN carriers, pilot losses due to retirements and better jobs means more pressure on remaining pilots.

Seems like some pilots are trying to use the current president's known animosity towards the AMZN CEO and owner of the Washington Post to gain some leverage.

Will be interesting to see the impact of pilot issues on "Amazon Fleet Growth - 2018"...

Revelation wrote:

Seems like there's some unrest in the pilot ranks:

https://airlinegeeks.com/2018/06/08/the ... standards/

Low pay relative to bigger cargo and pax airlines, rest standard "cut out" for cargo crews being utilized by AMZN carriers, pilot losses due to retirements and better jobs means more pressure on remaining pilots.

Seems like some pilots are trying to use the current president's known animosity towards the AMZN CEO and owner of the Washington Post to gain some leverage.

Will be interesting to see the impact of pilot issues on "Amazon Fleet Growth - 2018"...

Looks like the PR gurus at Local 1224 have managed to place another article similar to the ones they usually roll out around Holiday time. Congratulations to them -- working hard for their members.

Amazon does not now, nor will it, have difficulty having sufficient crews to fly its 40 freighters. If it gets bigger, it depends on how big it gets. Right now, there is no shortage at the 3 carriers, despite repeated efforts of the Teamsters 1224 unions to manufacture one and to drive pilots away from the other carrier, ATI, which is represented by ALPA. ATI is growing by adding little bits of non-Amazon business and continuing its military and 4-aircraft DHL business. ABX continues to lose DHL business, and doesn't gain other business due to its expensive and inflexible work rules (and reputation for labor drama), despite its excellent pilot group. So staffing at ABX isn't an issue but if it was, by force majeure or the termination for convenience clause, Amazon could move its aircraft to any other carrier. Atlas continues to take on new business, and there is anecdotal evidence of some tightness, but management continues to report an ability to staff its aircraft, particularly after the US District Court enjoined the organized activity of the pilots' union to interfere with the operation.

The Colgan experience requirement was not in the end a safety matter, it was a cynical, union-backed provision to reduce the number of pilot candidates to put pressure on wages. (The crappiest decisions in the Colgan cockpit were made by the experienced CPT, not the tired young FO.) And all it really did is put into deep debt or into longer crap duty those who wanted a non-military path to an ATP right seat.

The young FO in Colgan would meet the new hours requirements. She wasn’t low time.

32andBelow wrote:

The young FO in Colgan would meet the new hours requirements. She wasn’t low time.

I forgot that. Good point. She was like 2200 hours, with 800 in the Q400. In the moment, she didn't demonstrate a great command of the principles of flight or of the systems of the aircraft, but we never know how we're gonna react in a real emergency until we actually experience one.

wjcandee wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Seems like there's some unrest in the pilot ranks:

https://airlinegeeks.com/2018/06/08/the ... standards/

Low pay relative to bigger cargo and pax airlines, rest standard "cut out" for cargo crews being utilized by AMZN carriers, pilot losses due to retirements and better jobs means more pressure on remaining pilots.

Seems like some pilots are trying to use the current president's known animosity towards the AMZN CEO and owner of the Washington Post to gain some leverage.

Will be interesting to see the impact of pilot issues on "Amazon Fleet Growth - 2018"...

Looks like the PR gurus at Local 1224 have managed to place another article similar to the ones they usually roll out around Holiday time. Congratulations to them -- working hard for their members.

Amazon does not now, nor will it, have difficulty having sufficient crews to fly its 40 freighters. If it gets bigger, it depends on how big it gets. Right now, there is no shortage at the 3 carriers, despite repeated efforts of the Teamsters 1224 unions to manufacture one and to drive pilots away from the other carrier, ATI, which is represented by ALPA. ATI is growing by adding little bits of non-Amazon business and continuing its military and 4-aircraft DHL business. ABX continues to lose DHL business, and doesn't gain other business due to its expensive and inflexible work rules (and reputation for labor drama), despite its excellent pilot group. So staffing at ABX isn't an issue but if it was, by force majeure or the termination for convenience clause, Amazon could move its aircraft to any other carrier. Atlas continues to take on new business, and there is anecdotal evidence of some tightness, but management continues to report an ability to staff its aircraft, particularly after the US District Court enjoined the organized activity of the pilots' union to interfere with the operation.

The Colgan experience requirement was not in the end a safety matter, it was a cynical, union-backed provision to reduce the number of pilot candidates to put pressure on wages. (The crappiest decisions in the Colgan cockpit were made by the experienced CPT, not the tired young FO.) And all it really did is put into deep debt or into longer crap duty those who wanted a non-military path to an ATP right seat.

Not to make this a Colgan crash rehash, but the FO killed them when she put the flaps up. The captain got them in a very bad situation, but she made an extremely fatal mistake.

As far as staffing at Atlas, it does appear to be sufficient on a day-to-day basis, but the scheduling department is felling extremely stretched thin with the current staffing. There are multiple meltdowns in scheduling each week. It has gotten to the point where they are now telling pilots that management knows there’s a problem but refuses to address it.

Moving back to the thread title, N1013A was leased last Tuesday and placed in service that day.