2 Whites 2 Reds

Since when DHL Express or Deutsche Post become a freighter operator? Don't mix one of their units actually operates a fleet to serve the group's traffic with making money from that.

DHL is a mail, freight forwarder and express parcel company, it can get a rid of airline tomorrow, substitute all capacity with subchapter and they still will be a fine and profitable business. Now, how many days EAT, DHL Air and Co will survive if they become an open market freight carrier?

Same goes for FedEx, UPS, TNT etc.

Cargo One....

As you rightly say, Deutsche Post could indeed dispose of all of it's in-house flying ie DHL Air and EAT and still make money. But having recently spent $1bn on 6 new 767's straight off the production line, it's not likely. There are already a number of external carrier's operating for us but the group make vast amounts of profit from the ability to get things from one country to another in a timely fashion. Whilst we would all like a copy of 'The Big Picture', I can only assume that there is a worthy benefit to operating our own aircraft or the company woud simply use the external carrier's.

To cut a long story short, DP makes HUGE profits and largely thanks to it's airline business which, as you correctly say, is in itself a tool to facilitate the overall operation.

Dalsey, Hillblom and Lynn. Better known as Dewy, Hewy and Lewy fell hind tit to FedEx in the US market and the brand was bought by DP later bullied out of the US market giving it a still profitable but restricted global market. They know their limits and will operate within them.

2 Whites 2 Reds

Just my personal opinion, all big express parcel companies can get more profit by outsourcing airlift, at least in Europe.

However the initial point was that there are few to none freighter operators who making profits at the moment and for sure DHL & Co are doing their profits not from freighter operations as such. To give you an example, BP and Shell have business jets and making a multi-billion profits while NetJets is struggling. Why would be that?

WTF The largest global companies (freighter operators) as you call them are all well in the black, hardly phased by the recent recession. In what logic do you compare oil companies (deep pockets) who could probably fly NetJet's fleet at a complete loss and not have it make a dent in their profit margin's to net jet's? Sir your logic, I do not follow,

[QUOTE]Not sure an airplane would actually get certified if its engines "shut themselves down if they don't like it"!!! I presume you're talking about shutting down during an autostart rather than inflight! Autostart is nothing new on Boeings or Airbus though is it??/QUOTE]

Just in case I didn't make myself clear, I was of course, alluding to the ground autostart feature!

If the engines were capable of shutting down in flight with no prior warning the aircraft would certainly not be certified. Any pilot voluntarily operating an aircraft so equipped probably would be certified and quite possibly sectioned as well. :ok:

If someone can tell me an easy way to post pics on here without opening my own website ;) then I can post some flight deck pics of the new displays and systems :ok:

Zeddb and Siberfuchs,

Those revues are pretty much what I think about it too.

Very accurate descriptions and I can only agree on the lag on rotation issue.

VNAV has calculated some outrages paths for the descent, but as you said, a lot of it is down to ATC clearances and FMC modifications to the STAR or when on vectors. The suggested Flap configuration points are great, but they are definitely on the "sporty" side if you are light, and if you get any shortcuts to final, you may end up in a pickle :-)

Most noticeable is the lack of engine noise, especially in landing configuration.
The leading edges seem to cover any engine noise with their own.
Overall thou it seems quieter than the -400. Except for the damn galley chiller that is, which also has a mind of its own :)

My experience of IAN (albeit in a 737 NG) has 99% of the time been good. However it can kill you as I am sure you are aware. It is only as good as the database provided. If it is wrong then all bets are off. I would never rely on it as a stand alone system. Every time the database is changed there is the potential for errors.

The auto function on the wx radar may be great on this new aircraft. On our old 73 NG's I find it to be very good in clb and crz but hopeless in descent - in descent the ground returns obscure potential wx hazards so I have to switch to manual tilt.


Regards
Exeng

I guess, with the ground autostart - quote "now the autostart on the -8 is completely independent. i.e, it monitors everything with no exeptions and does everything."..........I'm thinking this new space-age system has now been developed to the stage where it is almost as good as the 742 autostart system, but certainly not as reliable....and I have much experience in this area!

EW73

Brilliant ! only defects with that system was the coffee bag consumption......

I thoroughly enjoyed my training flight up to PVG on it. I totally agree with the points on reduced engine noise, complications with the Vnav and especially the attitude in the flare!!! It seemed flatter and de rotated so quickly I nearly didn't catch it. My only concern was its comfort in turbulence. We went though some bumps both cloud and clear air and I thought it was rough as old guts.....not that the boxes mind. Oh quickly forgot not fiddling with the tilt on the radar is a habit I must refrain from!!!

The Cav

Great plane, although taking a bit of getting used to not being able to hear the engines on final approach mainly due to the odd hurricane that rushes through the cockpit. I do believe the air con is being looked at though so that will hopefully be solved. As mentioned, the upper deck is a real let down. Wish they had consulted a few pilots. Just a few small changes could make a great plane a totally awesome one.

Given that the GenX hasn't yet delivered on it's original promises, that is impressive...

I never flew the "classic" but the autostart system on the-8 works fine. As did the one on the -400. Did exactly what it said on the tin.

To be honest, in 10 years flying the Jumbo and far too long flying other Boeing and Airbus products, I never had any problems with the motors. But then I have always had GE's hanging off the wings. The only donk I ever saw problems with was made by RR/BMW. And that wasn't a very serious one.

Just my own personal experience. The BA777/Quantas A380 crews may feel somewhat different.

The fuel burn with the Gnex is pretty good although that may have something to do with the new wing as well.

Thanks to the guys in the know for takng time to give us some answer and an insight. Much apprciated!

Which figure is that based on, the EIS figure, or the original figures given some time ago?

Ahh yes; good old days. Hardest part of 744 sim could be "start faults"-(18, as I recalled). No autostart on our machines in those days, even though it came as standard on the later model-400. Management had them removed from the new deliveries (apparently to maintain fleet standardisation).

This, coupled with the official policy of no overlapping starts, (i.e have to wait till each engine was stable before starting the next) used to drive ATC (and other operators) crazy during pushback. Eventually, we resorted to the obvious--unofficial overlapping starts (not quite 2 at a time, a la Airbus, but almost) which speeded things up quite a bit.

Then the "powers that be" saw the light and incorporated it into the SOP's, and eveyone was happy.