A Pilot’s Blog
A blog about aviation, aviation news, and space.

Following yesterday’s announcement that FedEx Corp. will be canceling their A380F order, the possibility remains that UPS, which also ordered several A380F airframes, will also cancel their order. Airbus is apparently scrambling to prevent this and salvage the freighter variant of their struggling A380 program.

EADS Chief Financial Officer Hans-Peter Ring said Airbus’ 15 remaining freighter orders _ 10 from UPS and five from International Lease Finance Corp. _ still need to be “reconfirmed.”

All the freighter orders are now “in the cancellation zone,” he said. A spokesman for Louisville-based UPS Airlines said Tuesday the company was still reviewing its options.

In a statement released to the press today, FedEx Corp announced that they have entered into a contract with Boeing to purchase fifteen new 777F freighter aircraft from Boeing with an option to order fifteen more. In the same announcement, FedEx released that they have canceled their order for 10 A380 freighter aircraft from Airbus. The delays are finally catching up with them.

"Global demand for air cargo and express services continues to grow rapidly and FedEx has made significant investments in our network to meet customers’ needs and fulfill our business objectives. Therefore, it was necessary and prudent for us to acquire the Boeing 777 Freighter." said Frederick W. Smith, chairman, president and chief executive officer, FedEx Corp. "The availability and delivery timing of this aircraft, coupled with its attractive payload range and economics, make this choice the best decision for FedEx, its customers, shareowners and employees."

I was reading a story in the Denver Post today about air traffic controllers in the Denver International Airport tower and what they currently are and are not allowed to do for lunch.

If air traffic controllers at Denver International Airport want to leave the tower for a lunch or dinner break, they have to go on vacation.

Or they can use accumulated personal time.

Otherwise, they have to stay in the 327-foot tower above Concourse C, where their menu choices are a bit limited. Just like airline passengers, controllers can’t bring liquids or semi solid food items through security checkpoints.

There are two issues displayed here, that of being able to leave the tower for lunch and that of bringing food and/or liquids through security to their workplace.

The latter one, bringing food through security, is just silly. These folks have security badges that allow them to bypass security and enter heavily restricted areas, and yet they aren’t allowed to bring liquids in because of the TSA rules. Could an intruder cause major havoc by doing something to the control tower? Yes. But certainly not to the level of doing so on an aircraft, which the rules are to protect. So they should be able to bring liquids/semi-solid foods into the tower for breaks and snacks. These guys are under enough stress already.

Now to the former – not being able to leave the tower for lunch unless they take personal time. At first, I was going to talk about how utterly stupid this was as well, until I read the article more carefully. Specifically this:

Coulter said the FAA is punishing controllers because the government was unsuccessful in extending employees’ workday to 8.5 hours, with an unpaid meal break, during recent labor talks.

So here’s the issue: The controllers are paid to work for eight hours, the same as most full-time employees. They refused, through their union, to be scheduled for more than eight hours, so that they would have at minimum a thirty-minute period of time during which they could take their lunch break. So now they want to be able to leave during their eight hour shift, apparently the maximum amount of time they want to be on the job site, so they can eat. I don’t feel sorry for them at all.

Yes, being an air traffic controller is a very stressful job that I would never want to do, but come on…they can at least realize that they need to keep up with the same schedule types that most everybody else works by. It’s just common sense.

Well, well…it seems as if Airbus is considering yet another change to their proposed A350 design to attempt to compete with Boeing’s new 787.

It would mark the sixth time that Airbus has changed plans as it scrambles for the right airplane to not only challenge The Boeing Co.’s 787 Dreamliner but possibly leapfrog the 777. The two Boeing planes are dominating sales for jets that seat from about 250 to 350 passengers.

Airbus may present its latest A350 design to the board of its parent company, EADS, next week, according to a published report.

And what is this change? Copying Boeing’s all-composite fuselage design. Way to come up with your own ideas there fellas! However, given the wonderful way that they’ve handled their A380 program, I’m not too worried about the competition from them for the near future. Maybe they’ll just start buying 787 frames from Boeing and painting “A350″ on the side. It would probably work better for them. >:-)

PS: As you can probably tell from this and other posts, I’m an unapologetic Boeing enthusiast. I will admit that freely. It probably has something to do with my Uncle working for them for a few decades. :-)

Last year, at Boston’s Logan International Airport, Continental Airlines was offering free wi-fi Internet access to the patrons in their frequent flyers club. The service, provided by T-Mobile, was abruptly halted when the Massachusetts Port Authority demanded the airline (and others) cease the service and said that they had to use the fee-based service provided by the airport. Their reasons? Continental’s service would “interfere with their signal”, cause “safety issues”, and “violated lease agreements”. Thankfully, the FCC saw through that malarkey and granted Continental, and any other airline that wishes to do the same, the rights to provide free wi-fi Internet access to their customers.

“Today’s decision ensures that the Wi-Fi bands remain free and open to travelers, who can make productive use of their time while waiting to catch their next flight in an airport,” FCC Commissioner Michael Copps said in a statement.

It looks like another Airbus customer has turned to the other side. TAM Airlines of Brazil has placed an order for four 777-300ERs worth nearly $1 billion. This is significant because up until now, TAM has had an Airbus-only fleet. The 777s will likely be used to expand TAM’s international service. Way to go, Boeing!

Emirates Airline, which operates out of Dubai, has canceled their order for 20 Airbus A340 airframes and may be looking at purchasing several new Boeing 777s instead, according to an unnamed company spokeswoman.

“Emirates confirms it will not be taking delivery of its order and option for 20 Airbus A340-600 aircraft,” an Emirates spokeswoman said.

Emirates will instead order 777 models from Boeing Co., Emirates Executive Vice Chairman Maurice Flanagan said, the Wall Street Journal reported.

777 airframes cost between $178 million and $264.5 million each, depending upon the model and options, according to Boeing’s price guide. An order of twenty or more of them would mean a huge boost for Boeing’s sales figures this year. Emirates also ordered ten 747 airframes from Boeing earlier this year, according to Boeing’s order sheet.

I believe this has everything to do with Airbus’ horrible management of the A380 program. If they aren’t careful, Emirates may be canceling that order too:

[Emirates President Tim Clark] also said Emirates will send engineers to check on A380 production plants in France and Germany. The engineers will examine how Airbus managers are resolving industrial problems that have pushed production of the world’s largest passenger plane two years behind schedule and more than one-third over its original $12 billion budget, the paper said.

Hat tip to the Airliners.net message boards for this story.

Currently, if you are a pilot for any commercial airline service you must retire upon reaching your 60th birthday. There have been ongoing debates for years as to whether or not this should be raised, or even done away with altogether. By next month the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), the international body that helps to guide the aviation industry, is expected to approve new guidelines that urge all countries to raise mandatory retirement ages from the current 60 to 65, provided that:

…the second pilot in the crew is below 60 and all pilots over 60 undergo a medical assessment every six months.

I think this is a wonderful idea. All United States certified airline pilots must already undergo a “First Class” medical evaluation every six months no matter what their age. I firmly believe that if you are able to meet all the physical requirements, and you still have the passion for flying, that you should be allowed to work and fly for as long as you want. In the aviation profession age brings with it experience. I, for one, would have no qualms about boarding an aircraft with a 65+ year old pilot, because I would know just how much experience he had under that gold-brimmed cap. So come on Congress, tell the FAA to raise the retirement age!