KALB
Topic Author
Posts: 564
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2000 12:33 pm

UPS Airbus A300

Wed May 10, 2000 11:14 am

HEAVYJET, a UPS pilot, mentioned in another post that he is transitioning from the 757/767 to Airbus 300. When did UPS acquire Airbus A300s? Where did they come from and are they being converted to freighters? HEAVYJET, could you share with us what your training will be like to transition to the A300?
 
Guest

RE: UPS Airbus A300

Wed May 10, 2000 11:01 pm

UPS will take delivery of our first A300 freighter in mid July of this year. UPS has ordered 30 airplanes with an option to buy an additional 30 for a total of 60 A300-600's through the year 2008. While these will be new aircraft off the assembly line, we are the last customers before production of the A300-600 stops. They'll be powered by PW 4058 (58,000lb thrust) engines.

Training will begin next week for company sim and IOE instructors in Miami and initially taught by FlightSafety. Our new simulator is still being built and should arrive the beginning of August, at which point all training will be in house.
 
Boeing727
Posts: 816
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 1:32 am

RE: UPS Airbus A300

Thu May 11, 2000 12:40 am

Do the new A300 still have the yoke infront of the pilot, or has the A300/310 line move to side joysticks as well. Why the move to Airbus HeavyJet? New Challange? Just curious.

Thanks, Boeing727
 
FDXmech
Posts: 3219
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 9:48 pm

RE: UPS Airbus A300

Thu May 11, 2000 1:35 am

The A300-600 has a conventional yoke with primary flight controls using cable runs
not fly by wire
You're only as good as your last departure.
 
Guest

RE: UPS Airbus A300

Thu May 11, 2000 3:15 am

FDXmech pretty much covered the yoke thing.

Why the move, you ask? Good question! I been asking myself the same thing. In a moment of weakness I accidently submitted a bid when the new aircraft was announced. New challenge, something different........yea, that sounded good 6 months ago until I got the system manual that's as big as a New York telephone book!!

Actually, I instructed on the B757/767 for many years and volunteered to sim instruct on the Airbus. Ideally, the company wanted B757 qualified crewmembers (management & line pilots) to help with the A300 program as the operating philosophy and procedures (two man cockpit, FMC's, automated, etc..) are basically the same.

I don't believe I'll stay on the 'Bus very long...maybe a year or two. I'm a "Boeing" guy at heart and probably always will be.

Bill (Future Bus driver)
 
WorldTraveller
Posts: 594
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 1999 3:47 am

HeavyJet

Thu May 11, 2000 3:36 am

Hi HeavyJet!

How about flying the A3XX cargo in a few years?

That really is a heavy jet and would be a real treat for you!  

How's UPS philosophy on the new big BUS?

Happy BUS-driving,

the WorldTraveller
 
KALB
Topic Author
Posts: 564
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2000 12:33 pm

RE: HeavyJet

Thu May 11, 2000 6:40 am

HEAVYJET, What was UPS' philosophy in ordering the Airbus A300-600? Is not the 767-300F an aircraft of similar capability, why not order more 767s unless the price was too good to pass up? I appreciate you and other ATPs who take time to share info with us "wannabees" and other pretenders.
 
Guest

RE: UPS Airbus A300

Thu May 11, 2000 7:59 am

I think it was more political than anything, IMHO. They were wanting to expand into Europe, so...buy a European product...bata bing, bata boom..your in!

I think the A300's are in the 50 million dollar range vs 80-100 mil for the B767-300ER's. It's hard to justify (economically)flying a 76-300ER domestically...like we do. That's not what it was designed for. The A300 will economically be better suited for a heavy lift domestic aircraft. I'd personally rather see more 767's (-200's) but I don't think it'll happen.


For "WorldTraveller": Don't believe will see the A3XX. Word around the campus is that we'll probably be ordering B747-400's soon for our new heavy lift and converting are existing fleet to a two-man aircraft.
 
Guest

RE: UPS Airbus A300

Thu May 11, 2000 8:52 pm

Would you mind sharing the advantage of information with us -- Do you know where UPS would fly the A300?
 
Guest

RE: UPS Airbus A300

Fri May 12, 2000 1:27 am

>>Do you know where UPS would fly the A300?<<

Not sure right now where it'll be flying in and out of......sorry.
 
richie
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 1999 10:28 pm

RE: UPS Airbus A300

Fri May 12, 2000 3:19 am

Well, believe the change had also to do with the fact, that the A300 has a wider and therefore more versatile fuselage compared to the 767. Besides UPS and I believe Airborne Express, nobody in the express business has 767Fs. And in the heavy freight market there is only LAN Chile. Asiana has one, another ordered (the first of LAN, by now) and just sold this one to LAN. MAy make sense for the Chilean, but for all the others, its just not the right airframe
 
UPS Pilot
Posts: 831
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 1:17 pm

Just Came To Tech :) First Post

Fri May 19, 2000 10:09 pm

First off Heavy Jet has nailed it as far as the questions. I do know some guys that went to FDX a month or so ago to begin training on the 300 bus. I am not going to be a bus driver. KPIT said they will be getting one before peak of 2000 for sure to either replace the DC-8 that flys in there now or to replace the 72's that are flying there now. The 75 was taken out to fly out of MIA on the Challenge routes that we aquired.
I heard also about the 744f was going to be the next purchase, probably about the time of the China routes being awarded. We are in talks right now with both Boeing and Airbus for aircraft purchases. Could UPS be a launch customer again for a new freighter? (777) (A330) Continental has purchased some 767-200's recently so Boeing is still producing them. Heavy Jet do you think this would be a consideration?
I did hear that FDX is looking hard at the A3xx and also Atlas. I've asked this before though, with the double deck how in the world does Airbus plan on loading the upper deck? There will be no loading from the nose only side cargo doors. I'm sorry but ground equipment is expensive and this is going to limit the A3xx if new equipment needs to be purchased just for the A3xx.
The A300 was bought for political purposes but also to keep Boeing honest. I love Boeing products but I can see it from a business prospective to use in leverage for the next purchase.
 
FLY DC JETS
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 1:13 pm

RE: Just Came To Tech :) First Post

Sat May 20, 2000 5:17 am

"The A300 was bought for political purposes but also to keep Boeing
honest. I love Boeing products but I can see it from a business
prospective to use in leverage for the next purchase."

Could it just be that the Airbus aircraft better fit your company's needs? Why is it that every Airbus purchase is political or due to the planes being given away? It think it's time that people wake up and realize mother Boeing isn't the only company out their that makes quality aircraft.

Would you please state the politcal reasons?
 
william
Posts: 1662
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

RE: Just Came To Tech :) First Post

Sat May 20, 2000 9:10 am

FLY DC,the fact that FDX are flying 300s and 310s answer your question if they are good aircraft. I remember correcty and A300 can take 40 ton or 50 tons coast to coast.
 
UPS Pilot
Posts: 831
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 1:17 pm

Fly DC Jets

Sat May 20, 2000 10:56 pm

First off I'm not going to get into a "Boeing vs. Airbus" debate! The "Political Reasons" are UPS is expanding it's presence in Europe. What I feel they are trying to accomplish is also supporting the European economy. Have you noticed that alot of European aircraft that were bought from Boeing have RR engines on them? Have you noticed the increase in Airbus orders especially from very long European customers like BA? UPS ordered the Airbus because yes it is a good aircraft. Yes they did get a good price on them, and Yes they wanted to support the European economy so they could gain more support in the Eurpean community. Did I say anything negative of the A-300? No! The A-300 is a perfect fit in the UPS System I feel because it frees up the 767-34ERF to fly the routes it was intended for (Long Range International). Yes UPS could have opted for a 767-200 freighter but chose the Airbus to fly the high capacity regional routes that it is intended for. The A300 has a good reliability record and is a good aircraft it's just I personally like supporting Boeing.
 
Guest

RE: UPS Airbus A300

Tue May 23, 2000 8:40 am

I'm happy UPS has chosen Airbus for this one- even if the decisions are purely political in this case (which they certainly appear to be), and I would back Boeing over Airbus in practically any dispute, the A300 was designed for short, thick regional routes, and the 763 was not. It's logical, however if politics hadn't been involved, I believe UPS would've gone ahead with more 767Fs.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: UPS Airbus A300

Thu May 25, 2000 7:27 pm

Everybody keeps talking about the political choices that may behind the ordering of this aircraft.

Anybody think that Bucking Bar that UPS found in the tail of that 767 may have had something to do with it???
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
balloonatic
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 12:14 am

RE: Just Came To Tech :) First Post

Sat Jun 03, 2000 12:41 am

"With the double deck, how does Airbus plan on loading the upper deck?"

Most likely with self contained elevators, so existing high load cargo equipment need not be replaced.
 
fxra
Posts: 600
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 1999 1:03 am

A300's, A3XX, Boeings...

Sat Jun 03, 2000 1:11 am

Well, i can say you'll be hard pressed to maximize a payload on the A300 with the type of freight UPS flies, same as Us at FDX. I personally have only found one problem (more like an annoyance) to the A300s but you only run into it on when you start maximaizing payloads.

Also, way back when FDX bought the buses originally, it was also seen as a big "political" move, and probably was. We are just now starting to fly A310's around Europe replacing boeings. However, when UPS placed this last order, Airbus did come to FDX and ask if we wante dmore at a reduced price, to really make the building more economic for Airbus. FDX declined due to its heavy involvement in the MD10 conversions (the first of which should be online now)

I Do find it amusing that UPS was using FDX for initial training for pilots... i wonder if we are charging them alot?? And as for the A3XX, i've been hearing for years, since i first heard of that project, that FDX was "involved" in the designing. So FDX ordering the A3XX would not surprise me.

As for loading that beast.... i can only imagine. Appearently there are 2 options.. design new loaders for the ramp that can reach that high (which is expensive) or put some kind off cargo elevator in the plane (think how much weight this would take up, also lossing some economics). And then doing a weight and balanc on that thing (the fedex way ie over complicating it) ugh i shudder.

thats my $.02
Visualize Whirled Peas
 
Guest

RE: A300's, A3XX, Boeings...

Mon Jun 05, 2000 10:19 am

>>I Do find it amusing that UPS was using FDX for initial training for pilots... i wonder if we are charging them alot??<<

I, for one, wish we were still using FDX for training...at least until our sim arrives in Aug.

Our initial batch of 4 A300 instructors went to FDX and were very impressed with their training facility and the level of instruction they received.

Upper management at FDX finally decided they didn't want UPS on the property using their training facilities and pulled the plug on us. We've been using FlightSafety in Miami and American Airlines for training (just finished my oral this week). Can't say I'm overly impressed with Flight Safety's facilities or program and American doesn't have much sim time available to offer us.

Delivery dates for our A300's will be increased. 21 aircraft by the end of 2001 vs 11 that were originally scheduled. This has increased the urgency for training facilities and the pick'ens are slim.

How do I like the Airbus...you ask?? Well, "It's not your father's Oldsmobile..." 

I like the ECAM (brings up checklists and system displays)and the vertical tape airspeed on the primary flight display which displays V-speeds and a speed trend arrow...nice! On the down side, the systems, while automated, are not as user friendly as the B75/76...sniffle, sniffle.  The non-normal checklist can be long and somewhat confusing at times. The FMC is not as intuitive as the Boeings and I'm having to unlearn alot of things when dealing with it.

Still a Boeing man......

 
KALB
Topic Author
Posts: 564
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2000 12:33 pm

RE: A300's, A3XX, Boeings...

Thu Jun 08, 2000 11:16 am

Thanks for the update HEAVYJET. Please keep them coming. KALB

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: balair863, Horstroad, WIederling and 14 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos