Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/330125/

Topic: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: Shamrock137
Posted 2013-02-20 20:37:04 and read 3704 times.

I was curious as to how much time would be saved on a quick turn using containers vs bulk loading. I understand aircraft such as the A320 can be ordered with both. In the US all operators have opted for bulk loading, while most operators in Europe and elsewhere use containers. Quick research of schedules shows that EI A320's are blocked for 40 min turns, the same time B6 uses with the EI aircraft holding 174 as opposed to 150. Would this be mostly down to container vs bulk loading? What are the advantages of both?

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: FlyDeltaJets
Posted 2013-02-20 21:10:23 and read 3689 times.

1 contaner can hols upwards of 50-70 bags, you can take a container off the plane in seconds. You cant take 70 bags off in seconds.

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-02-20 21:52:18 and read 3671 times.

High European labor cost also drives decision to utilize ULDs versus bulk loading on the A320 family.

One airline I do work with figured a 3-man crew can turn the A320 using containers at its hub, while bulk loading required a team of 5.

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: Starlionblue
Posted 2013-02-20 22:28:43 and read 3657 times.

The disadvantages of containers are:
- Weight.
- Cost.

Advantages:
- Speed of loading/unloading.


I leave the question of whether finding an errant bag for offloading is easier with containers or bulk to an expert.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 2):
One airline I do work with figured a 3-man crew can turn the A320 using containers at its hub, while bulk loading required a team of 5.

Does this include the labor to fill and empty the containers?

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: FlyDeltaJets
Posted 2013-02-21 01:36:25 and read 3620 times.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 3):
Does this include the labor to fill and empty the containers?

The labor to fill a cart or container is relatively the same, that is done in the bagage makeup area.

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: CARST
Posted 2013-02-21 03:39:14 and read 3582 times.

In AMS they have a new system, robot arms fill the containers directly from the baggage belt system. No manual loading of bags.

Just a small team of 2 or 3 persons to load and unload the containers into/from the aircraft.

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: Yukon880
Posted 2013-02-21 04:05:13 and read 3571 times.

The one aspect I have yet to see mentioned here is the comparative cost of the equipment necessary for that "3 man" crew to off/upload the containers, though Starlionblue was probably headed that way. In the U.S., given the nature of the wages paid to ramprats, the case for a "5 man" crew is clear. Though I for one have seen many, many situations where having a quintet on the ramp at your gate was but a dream!

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: clydenairways
Posted 2013-02-21 07:44:44 and read 3500 times.

I would wager that the time saved would be minimal. The boarding of passengers/ cleaning / security checks / catering probably take longer overall.
Easyjet is bulk loaded and they do fast turns.

I think the overall manpower reduction is probably the best suggestion i have heard. More relevant for airlines with Big hubs and fleet such as BA,AF,IB,LH,EI,LX etc.
Maybe also the 3rd party handling companies in Europe charge less to turn a containerised 320 than a bulk loaded one?

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: FlyDeltaJets
Posted 2013-02-26 07:05:34 and read 3081 times.

Quoting clydenairways (Reply 7):
would wager that the time saved would be minimal. The boarding of passengers/ cleaning / security checks / catering probably take longer overall.
Easyjet is bulk loaded and they do fast turns.

I think the overall manpower reduction is probably the best suggestion i have heard. More relevant for airlines with Big hubs and fleet such as BA,AF,IB,LH,EI,LX etc.
Maybe also the 3rd party handling companies in Europe charge less to turn a containerised 320 than a bulk loaded one?

Regardless of how you do it you are correct the ramp loading and unloading generally is the quickest portion of the flight turn. That is not to say that there is a great savings in time in offloading a containerized aircraft in comparison to a bulkloaded one. I full 777 can be offloaded in about the same time as a full A320, with likely double even triple the freight and baggage.

That is not to say that the labor savings is great as well, but lets not discount the savings in time as well.

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: musapapaya
Posted 2013-02-26 09:32:02 and read 3050 times.

I still tend to think modern technology means less human being doing hardwork, the case in AMS is a prime example where robots can do these repetitive work and potentially save on labour cost and also potential injuries,

Quoting CARST (Reply 5):
In AMS they have a new system, robot arms fill the containers directly from the baggage belt system. No manual loading of bags.

I remember reading somewhere that some airlines here in Europe went for A320 rather than B737 series was due to the fact that they have the flexibility for container loading. I cant quote anything but this is in my memories....

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: FlyASAGuy2005
Posted 2013-02-27 07:12:29 and read 2939 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 2):
One airline I do work with figured a 3-man crew can turn the A320 using containers at its hub, while bulk loading required a team of 5.

In the United States! That sounds like a dream come true! I've never seen more than 3, including the lead with most airlines including my own when I worked the ramp some years back. The mantra was "3 to a T". You had 40 minutes to turn a fully loaded 738. Don't let it's size fool you. The longer aft bin can hold up to 180 bags by itself. That's not counting anything up front which bulked out can be up to 120 or 130.

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: Tristarsteve
Posted 2013-02-28 00:26:44 and read 2827 times.

In 1990 SAS opened their new Domestic Terminal 2 at ARN. The ramp systems were supplied by FMT and included many systems built into the ramp, including a baggage belt that went from check in to the aircraft hold. No containers or trollies.
The idea was to operate with very few ramp staff, but two years later SAS pulled out. The cost of keeping the equipment working was higher than the cost of more loaders. Most of the equipment is still there, and you can see the rising red boxes still being used for air conditioning and ground power.
Here is their website
http://www.fmt.se/en/airport/vfgss/
Watch the You tube video and you can see the baggage belts at 6.00.

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: Starlionblue
Posted 2013-02-28 06:32:47 and read 2757 times.

Quoting musapapaya (Reply 9):
I still tend to think modern technology means less human being doing hardwork, the case in AMS is a prime example where robots can do these repetitive work and potentially save on labour cost and also potential injuries,

In Europe there is much incentive for automation as labor costs are so high. In the US they are lower, and in East Asia much lower. Why invest in automation when you can just pay more labor?

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: musapapaya
Posted 2013-02-28 09:50:41 and read 2727 times.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 12):
In Europe there is much incentive for automation as labor costs are so high. In the US they are lower, and in East Asia much lower. Why invest in automation when you can just pay more labor?

The reason being i work in the health and safety field, and the hierarchy of control of risk means that we try to eliminate a task, if equipment can do it rather than human. Equipment will not get a bad back when handling bags but human will. Of coz I dont work in aviation but the health and safety game is quite similar across the board - having said that, we only do things 'as far as reasonably practicable' so it is not practicable to automate everything, and human needs to do it.

next time i am back to my hometown (HKG) I will have a look at how much containers they use in, for example, dragonairs A320, or you can tell me  

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: Starlionblue
Posted 2013-02-28 16:25:40 and read 2681 times.

Quoting musapapaya (Reply 13):
The reason being i work in the health and safety field, and the hierarchy of control of risk means that we try to eliminate a task, if equipment can do it rather than human. Equipment will not get a bad back when handling bags but human will.

Of course. And in an ideal world corporations would care about people's backs. But remember that in, say, The Philippines, salaries and insurance (if that is even needed) are very low compared to Western Europe. Corporations don't have consciences. Unless there is incentive to "care", they don't. They go for the efficient use of money and maximum wealth generation for their owners.

Quoting musapapaya (Reply 13):
next time i am back to my hometown (HKG) I will have a look at how much containers they use in, for example, dragonairs A320, or you can tell me  

HK is a bit of a special case. Salaries are comparatively low but many companies want to seem "cutting edge". Then again I am sure Dragonair follows the money. The Swire Group tends to be quite ruthless about such things.

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: FlyDeltaJets
Posted 2013-02-28 20:46:52 and read 2649 times.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 12):
In Europe there is much incentive for automation as labor costs are so high. In the US they are lower, and in East Asia much lower. Why invest in automation when you can just pay more labor?

It's true that labor costs are higher in Europe but they also have a tendancy to be more foward thinking in general as well. In the US our unions battles are to keep the status quo and fight technology at all costs because of the jobs that will be lost as a result, rather than accept technology and push to get the workers trained to do the higher skilled job that the technology will create.

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: Geezer
Posted 2013-03-01 17:13:32 and read 2562 times.

From reading all of these replies, it would appear that the "containerization" of freight / cargo has worked MUCH better in the shipping industry than it has in the airline industry.

Back in the 80s and 90s, I frequently had to go to major airports to deliver and pick up cars at the car rental companies, and I remember often seeing air freight lots with dozens, even hundreds of containers, just sitting around, apparently not being used; I remember thinking at the time, the things looked like they must be very expensive to build, needing to be very light, and having to "fit" certain a/c like pieces of a big puzzle.

I also remember quite well, back in the late 1950s when I first started having occasion to deliver and pick up stuff at sea ports, that everything that was transported by ships was loaded on the ship, piece by piece, and also that anytime you had to pick up cargo that had arrived by ship, I would always have to "deal" with "longshoremen"; for anyone not familiar with ocean shipping and sea ports, "longshoremen" are guys who belong to the I.L.U., ( International Longshoremen's Union )
It always seemed to me back then that the primary reason for the very existence of the I.L.U. was for the members to be able to give the rest of the world a HARD TIME; (what a bunch of A**H***S !) Now, where have all of the "longshoremen" jobs gone to ? Ha ! The "freight" now gets loaded into a container in East Podunk, then hauled 300 miles to Port Newark or Port Dundalk by some scab who can't speak English, and makes less than minimum wage, so now,about 95% of all of the "now laid off longshoremen" are sitting home twiddling their fingers, wondering why they no longer have a job.

Having been a Teamsters member for 41 years, I always feel very bad for anyone who is out of work, but I must tell you, it's damned hard to feel sorry for longshoremen ! ( I wonder if there are any on A.net ?)

Charley

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: Starlionblue
Posted 2013-03-01 19:34:02 and read 2545 times.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 16):
for anyone not familiar with ocean shipping and sea ports, "longshoremen" are guys who belong to the I.L.U., ( International Longshoremen's Union )

Well, technically a "longshoreman" is not necessarily a union member but just a person who loads and unloads ships. The term derives from "man along the shore" and if memory serves was used even way back in the time when they would row in boats out to the ships to be loaded/unloaded.

Nowadays the guys who drive the container cranes are longshoremen. These people are not paid peanuts as it is a highly skilled job.

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: zeke
Posted 2013-03-03 02:42:00 and read 2426 times.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 3):

Advantages:
- Speed of loading/unloading.

Protection from rain, snow etc
Reduction in theft
Reduction in damage
Reduction in lost luggage
Reduced number of people used to turn an aircraft around, and those people can be used more efficiently.
Can provide better fire and explosives protection (GLARE ones).

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: sunrisevalley
Posted 2013-03-03 06:15:34 and read 2396 times.

Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 1):
1 contaner can hols upwards of 50-70 bags,

The "statistical" standard for a LD3 is 37-bags

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 3):
- Weight

Standard weight for a LD3 is 82kg.

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: FlyASAGuy2005
Posted 2013-03-03 09:33:34 and read 2371 times.

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 19):
The "statistical" standard for a LD3 is 37-bags

Yeah our average is usually 30-40 if they're regular sized bags not sure abou 70...unless we're talking about LD8s.

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: dlramp4life
Posted 2013-03-03 11:13:06 and read 2353 times.

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 19):
Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 1):
1 contaner can hols upwards of 50-70 bags,

The "statistical" standard for a LD3 is 37-bags

which LD3 are you talking about?

This is a standard LD3 (AKE): (used on widebodies):


Or this LD3 (AKH): (used on the A320 family):

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: bikerthai
Posted 2013-03-04 12:08:33 and read 2238 times.

We are talking about containers for baggage right?

For other cargo on the 737, how do they load those?

Example: We get fish from Alaska every year (Copper River Salmon). They fly 'em in on Alaska Airline 737. So how are those fish shipped? In boxes that are handled like regular luggage? Or can a 737 handle non-standard container for on pallets?

Quoting Geezer (Reply 16):
it would appear that the "containerization" of freight / cargo has worked MUCH better in the shipping industry than it has in the airline industry.

Technically true. However if you want to compare apples and apples, then you would have to say FED-EX, UPS and DHL are using one form of "container" or another. Although a "container" could be just a pallet with all the packages shrink wrapped.

But you may also be right that a cruise ship will use containers to get the passenger luggage on board . . .  

bt

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: intsim
Posted 2013-03-04 12:19:44 and read 2237 times.

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 22):
Example: We get fish from Alaska every year (Copper River Salmon). They fly 'em in on Alaska Airline 737. So how are those fish shipped? In boxes that are handled like regular luggage? Or can a 737 handle non-standard container for on pallets?

The boxes of fish are just bulk loaded. The fish are shipped in plastic wrap with dry ice. The boxes can weigh a lot.

The perk of bulk loading boxes of fish is the slime that gets on the bin floor from minor leaks.

Jeff

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: dlramp4life
Posted 2013-03-04 13:32:59 and read 2224 times.

Quoting intsim (Reply 23):

Aww yes nothing beats offloading the heavy boxes of fresh fish or meat... I am not a fan of the wonderful stench that is left behind in the cargo bay after all the fish boxes are offloaded

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: bikerthai
Posted 2013-03-05 05:59:30 and read 2175 times.

Quoting intsim (Reply 23):
Quoting dlramp4life (Reply 24):

Ah, but thanks y'all for the wonderfully fresh fish!!!   

And one good reason to go with a container as opposed to bulk.  crazy 

bt

[Edited 2013-03-05 06:05:01]

Topic: RE: Container Vs Bulk Time Savings
Username: Geezer
Posted 2013-03-05 21:51:31 and read 2107 times.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 17):
Well, technically a "longshoreman" is not necessarily a union member but just a person who loads and unloads ships. The term derives from "man along the shore" and if memory serves was used even way back in the time when they would row in boats out to the ships to be loaded/unloaded.

You're absolutely right about the origin of the term "longshoreman"; But I can tell you this; since I started in trucking in the late 1950's, there have been precious few, (if any) non-union dock workers loading or unloading ships at any or the major east coast seaports; I'm mainly familiar with Port Newark, Port Elizabeth, Dundalk Marine in Baltimore, and the port at Brunswick, Ga.

At all of those places, everyone touching anything, including the people who drive the cars off of the car carrier ships, all belong tom the L.S.I. I don't like to say this too loud, but if you take a close look at many of the union bosses at these places, you'll notice that many of them have a another "line of endeavor" ( which you can read a lot of books about ),
if you catch my drift. Seaports are a very good place to "look straight ahead", don't ask many questions, and above all, don't get into any " physical altercations" with "anyone" ! Overall, it may not be quite as bad any more as it used to be; in the late 50's, all through the 1960's, all the sea ports were a lot like going to a "Good Fellow's" movie.


Nowadays the guys who drive the container cranes are longshoremen. These people are not paid peanuts as it is a highly skilled job.

Ha! You got that right! But just try to get one of those crane operator jobs ! It aint easy, and the dues aren't cheap, either.


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/