AvTalk Episode 274: International trash balloons

AVT 274 Transcript
EPISODE 274
[EPISODE]
[0:00:07] IP: Hello, and welcome to Episode 274 of AvTalk. I am Ian Petchenik here, as always
with –
[0:00:17] JR: Jason Rabinowitz. Hello, Ian. How's it going? I'm here on time, on the correct day
and everything.
[0:00:23] IP: Hello, Jason. Welcome to the schedule. We're so glad you could join us. Yes, we
apologize last week for the delay.
[0:00:31] JR: Ian apologizes. I apologize for nothing. I was out enjoying my day off.
[0:00:37] IP: We're not sure how he got a day off. But we'll talk about that later.
[0:00:41] JR: I was only three hours late. Apparently, that makes a full-day difference when it
comes to the podcast.
[0:00:45] IP: It does. Yes. So, we'll be out on time. Hopefully everyone who will be listening to
this Friday morning on the US East Coast, and then whatever time that corresponds to where
you are. Welcome folks to Episode 274. It's officially summer here in Chicago. Jason, I suppose
they are in New York, though. I haven't checked recently.
[0:01:07] JR: It's hot. It’s really, really hot. It’s summer.
[0:01:10] IP: We're getting ready for all of our summer activities. I am booked to Oshkosh for
AirVenture. This year, I will be back, well, about a month from now, on the 27th of July, which is
the final Saturday of the show. I'll be there all day. So, if you're at Oshkosh on the 27th, please,
please, please come find me. We'll be doing a live stream at 10am with Infinite Flight, talking
about all the things that we've worked on together so far, which includes the new 3D models
and deliveries. So, we're going to chat about that. Some upcoming projects for Flightradar24
© 2024 AvTalk 1
AVT 274 Transcript
and some upcoming projects for Infinite Flight. Of course, we're going to be talking about all
things AirVenture, and flying, and geeking out over all that stuff.
So, if you're going to be in Oshkosh on the 27th, absolutely, let me know, and we'll try and meet
up somewhere at the airport there. So, looking forward to that. Then, while we're talking about
summer travel, or I guess, technically still summer, a reminder that Dorkfest and SpotLAX are
coming up on the 14th of September. So, if you're planning on attending that, I hear hotels are
going fast, and airfares are unfortunately high. Maybe they'll come down a bit. So, I will be
there. Jason might be there. We don't know yet.
[0:02:32] JR: Yes. Game day decision. We’ll see.
[0:02:34] IP: Game day decision. Boy, are my arms tired. That's a bit of housekeeping. Now, on
to the news. We begin with Boeing Airbus and Spirit AeroSystems, “At the goal line,” according
to our good friend Jon Ostrower over at The Air Current, “on an agreement to bring Spirit
AeroSystems back into the Boeing fold. Airbus would likely take over or somehow spin off the
work that Spirit AeroSystems does for them.” Then, all of those 737 Max fuselages and 787
components and other parts that go into Boeing aircraft would again just be Boeing Wichita. I
don't know. That's something I don't know if we've talked about, like, I suppose that's kind of the
least of their concerns. But I feel like –
[0:03:24] JR: What’s the name of the thing? Yes, I don't think anyone is thinking about that right
now.
[0:03:29] IP: Well, Reuters, and Mr. Ostrower over at The Air Current are reporting that the deal
is likely to be concluded this week. At the end of last week, they said, as early as Monday, but
seems like beyond that, since it's already Wednesday, and it will be Friday by the time the
podcast comes out. So, Jason, as is true AvTalk fashion, by bringing this up and discussing it,
we've almost guaranteed that a deal will be reached as soon as we hit stop on the recording.
[0:03:59] JR: It could be any second. Though, we did read earlier this week that there was a
last-minute wrinkle in any potential deal that apparently Boeing said, “You know what, maybe we
don't want to buy Spirit AeroSystems in cash. Maybe they’ll take Boeing fun bucks, which is
© 2024 AvTalk 2
AVT 274 Transcript
actually just stock in the company,” which apparently isn't a huge problem in this deal. It’s just
very late in the game to decide. “We're not good for the cash, but here's some stock
equivalency.”
[0:04:23] IP: “Will you take a check?”
[0:04:25] JR: “Will you write an IOU, basically?” doesn't seem to be as big a deal as I thought
that would be, but any day now it seems.
[0:04:33] IP: Any day now.
[0:04:34] JR: Of course, that will not automatically like flip a switch and make Spirit
AeroSystems all good and everything will be great. That is just the end of the current saga and
the beginning of a very much bigger daunting challenge of writing the ship that is Spirit
AeroSystems. Of course, work to improve quality has already been ongoing, but at this point, it
will become Boeing's in-house problem to fix.
[0:04:59] IP: Which is hopefully a good thing?
[0:05:01] JR: Probably not a bad thing at this point.
[0:05:03] IP: We'll see. So yes, we'll keep on that and perhaps have more to share next week.
[0:05:10] JR: Yes. Also, in Boeing news, though, also reported from Jon Ostrower is that
apparently Boeing won't be taking the 73 Max or 777X test aircraft to Farnborough, which is a
bit disappointing. Not that I had any intent to ever go. But yes, Boeing will again not be showing
off its latest wares at one of the world's biggest air shows.
[0:05:32] IP: Interesting.
[0:05:32] JR: Yes. Well, they quote, “Our commercial airplanes team has been focused on
implementing our comprehensive safety and quality plan, and working to meet the commitments
we've made to our customers with these priorities in mind. We decided that rather than prepare
© 2024 AvTalk 3
AVT 274 Transcript
and perform flight demonstration in December, we are redirecting the engineering and
manufacturing resources towards airplane production and certification.” That's a mouthful. It’s
basically saying, “We're too busy. Maybe next year.” Which is probably –
[0:05:57] IP: Sure. Yes. I think that sounds like a fine idea.
[0:06:00] JR: Yes. I don't think bringing those aircraft to Farnborough and making them dance
over the runway is really going to sway any public opinion, or more importantly, any airline CEO
to make a big purchase at this point. If the aircraft aren't certified, not really all that helpful.
[0:06:15] IP: Yes. There is that. There is that minor detail.
[0:06:19] JR: Focus on that.
[0:06:21] IP: Good stuff. Good decision. So last week, we talked about some incidents that
occurred as they relate to Southwest Airlines. We talked about a May 25th incident in which
Southwest pilots reported that the aircraft experienced Dutch roll, which we then talked about
what in fact, Dutch roll was, and I made a clunky explanation. We've said we would put a link in
the show notes to the Wikipedia entries. They were much better at explaining that. And a few of
you wrote in and said, “You should have just said go look at the Wikipedia thing instead of trying
to explain it.” So, I appreciate all of those that said, “Stop trying to explain it and just tell people
to go look at Wikipedia.”
[0:07:06] JR: Wait, didn't I do that?
[0:07:08] IP: What?
[0:07:08] JR: Didn't I tell you just to look at animation in Wikipedia?
[0:07:10] IP: Yes. But that was after I tried to explain it.
[0:07:15] JR: Yes. All right.
© 2024 AvTalk 4
AVT 274 Transcript
[0:07:15] IP: You see, I got called up for wasting some people's time, which I mean –
[0:07:19] JR: To me, despite now, Ian. We’ve done it 274 times.
[0:07:26] IP: Exactly. Exactly. But while the NTSB is investigating, Boeing's chief engineer,
Howard McKenzie, said that he believes the Dutch roll experienced by the Southwest aircraft
was due to factors specific to that aircraft, not the 737’s design or production. It didn't really go
into much more than that, other than saying it was a unique experience. So, it sounds like there
was an issue possibly with this particular aircraft, but the NTSB is investigating, so they'll have
much more to say on that.
We also talked about an 11 April incident in which a Southwest aircraft was conducting a go-
around and achieved euphemistically and excessive descent. Basically, pushed the nose down
and sank too far. Well, last week, on 19 June, a Southwest 737 was inbound from Las Vegas to
Oklahoma City. When they were issued a landing clearance for runway 1-3. The aircraft lined up
with the runway. Then, while nine miles from the end of the runway, descended to approximately
525 feet above the ground.
[0:08:45] JR: Oh, that's no good.
[0:08:45] IP: They flew over a residential area and a high school just hundreds of feet above the
ground. The incident came to attention because the tower queried to the aircraft and said,
“Southwest 4069, low altitude alert. You good out there.” Unfortunately, the ATC audio from
liveatc.net did not capture the pilot’s response. But they responded by climbing and circling and
then, ended up landing on a different runway. Not great.
[0:09:17] JR: No. I feel like I did hear other ATC recordings, maybe not from LiveATC that did
capture it and it was a very nonchalant response from the Southwest, which sounded, I don't
know, maybe it was fatigue because it was a flight landing in Oklahoma City time after midnight.
So, it was probably – it would be late in their duty day that they're not operating another flight.
Southwest doesn't operate overnight. The whole thing was just very odd after descending
almost 500 feet above ground level and being issued a low altitude alert that the pilot didn't
seem to really be all that alarmed.
© 2024 AvTalk 5
AVT 274 Transcript
Of course, they climbed and they actually approached from a different runway. They were
assigned a new runway. After that, they circled around a little bit and came in on a different
runway. But this is very different than the incident in Hawaii just a week earlier, as there were no
other circumstances involved that we know of here. There was no – not only was there not any
significant weather in the area. There was no weather in the area. It was perfect visibility. No
storms. No real clouds. No issues whatsoever on that front.
[0:10:21] IP: Like winds?
[0:10:22] JR: It was a perfect night for flying. We have this crew flying into Oklahoma City,
which is an airport. I'm sure most Southwest pilots have flown in too many times before. Unlike
Hawaiian Islands, which are not a station most Southwest pilots will get to, since there's all sorts
of bidding required to get out to those luxurious routes, so very concerning that the crew would
have descended to a field they would have been presumably familiar with, and be so low so far
out. We'll wait. Hopefully, the NTSB will investigate this and find out, “Oh, they were lined up
with a highway that looked like the approach lights.” We don't know. But hopefully, the NTSB will
investigate this. So, I'm sure we'll find out again that the voice recorders were overwritten and
are not available and we'll never really learn what happened here. But maybe we'll find out also
that the crew failed and ASAP report, just like the crew in the Hawaiian Islands did as well. So,
we'll wait and see.
[0:11:23] IP: Yes. Stay tuned for more on this one. I'm keen to learn why I'm such a beautiful
evening this incident occurred. Let's stick with Southwest but shift gears in a business direction.
Southwest issued updated guidance on its financial performance today, for the second quarter
of 2024. These projections, “Are based on current booking trends and the company's current
outlook, and actual results could differ materially and for Southwest sake, we hope they do.”
Southwest now says that unit revenue or RASM, will be down four to four and a half percent,
rather than previously estimated 1.5% to 3.5%.
So, that's revenue per available seat mile. ASMs, so available seat miles or how much capacity
the airline has up 8% to 9% year over year. So, the airline is growing, but the amount of money
they're taking on each available seat mile is going to be down further.
© 2024 AvTalk 6
AVT 274 Transcript
[0:12:29] JR: Not great. And right four point something percent may not sound like a big deal.
But when you tell Wall Street to expect one point something and it's four times higher than that,
that's a really big deal. Maybe Elliott was right. I don't know.
[0:12:46] IP: Well, I –
[0:12:45] JR: Let's not go too far. But they may be on to something.
[0:12:49] IP: I mean, I think that there's a kernel of truth and every criticism. In this case, I think
the criticism Southwest has moved too slow, has certainly bearing that out. Southwest says so
themselves. I'm quoting now, “The reduction in the company's RASM expectation was driven
primarily by complexities in adapting its revenue management to current booking patterns in this
dynamic environment.”
[0:13:17] JR: It kind of means, “We're not prepared for whatever people are throwing at us post-
COVID, because we don't quite understand it yet.” That's my take on it.
[0:13:25] IP: I think that's an accurate translation. From 8k speak to human –
[0:13:30] JR: I’m sure Southwest is not the only airline in that position. Remember, in the
immediate period after COVID, airline revenue management didn't know at all what to do with
fares because things were so unpredictable and changing so quickly. But it kind of seems like
Southwest is stuck in that mode where it can't keep up with the changing moods and vibes of
the general air-traveling public. It's not good. They can’t keep up.
[0:13:56] IP: Moods and vibes.
[0:13:58] JR: I mean, that's kind of what's going on here, right? Kind of. Especially, when they
have no real international network to speak of beyond close in Mexico and Caribbean. They
don't have that international travel to really sustain them. But who knows? Next week, maybe
that won't matter. Maybe everyone only wants to go to Florida.
© 2024 AvTalk 7
AVT 274 Transcript
[0:14:17] IP: “Despite lowered expectations, the company continues to expect an all-time
quarterly record for operating revenue in the second quarter.” So, it's not great news for
Southwest, but it's not all bad news.
[0:14:31] JR: Yes. But revenue doesn't mean anything if you're not making profit.
[0:14:35] IP: I'm trying to will them – Jason.
[0:14:38] JR: Yes, that's true. That's true. It's not going to work, but you're feeling it.
[0:14:43] IP: I can do whatever I want.
[0:14:44] JR: Just like you wanted your iced coffee earlier.
[0:14:47] IP: There you go. Pre-shuttle discussion bringing it back. The NTSB released a
preliminary report on United Airlines Flight 28 uncontained engine failure. This incident occurred
on May 14th after the aircraft had departed Singapore and turned back not long after departure,
Squawk 7700 and landed safely. What we learned later was on a single engine, because the
number one engine had failed.
We heard not long after the incident that it was an uncontained engine failure. Jason and I,
we've been waiting for this preliminary report to come out to really discuss anything, because
Jason and I have been privy to seeing photographic evidence of that uncontained engine failure,
which has not yet been made public. Unfortunately, we are unable to make public at this time.
[0:15:43] JR: But we can talk about it.
[0:15:43] IP: However, we can talk about it. Those photos –
[0:15:49] JR: We've been holding on to this one for months and we're shocked that this has not
been made public or leaked or something. We're not going to be the ones to leak it. But, wow.
© 2024 AvTalk 8
AVT 274 Transcript
[0:15:59] IP: The photos that we have seen. This is – we're talking about the number one
engine. So, the left engine. The left engine suffered an uncontained engine failure in which a
piece of the engine we're not exactly sure which yet because the NTSB has not said specifically
what happened. The preliminary report is short on details, saying, “Hey, we're going to look into
it and we'll let you know more later.” This is GEnx engine on a 787-9, and the engine failed,
puncturing the engine case, and taking off a large collection of the nacelle chevrons from about
– if you're looking at the engine from the back, from about 11 o'clock to 8 o'clock on a clock, that
part of the engine cowling is just gone. There is a large hole in the engine itself with some
visible fire damage. So, this was a rather serious incident. It's interesting to me that the NTSB
didn't really say anything until issuing a preliminary report today.
[0:17:15] JR: Yes. It's very surprising, luckily, the hole in the core of the engine and the missing
cowling section was not adjacent to the fuselage, because it looks like there was quite a bit of
kinetic energy here. It could have been a much different situation had whatever been ejected
from the engine, or the engine core, gone 180 degrees the other way. It could have been a very
different situation, because there is a significant chunk of this engine, not in the engine
anymore, not attached to the engine anymore. Apparently, even with that, there was enough
damage to this aircraft that it had to stay in Singapore for 16 days before being ferried back to –
[0:17:56] IP: They needed to put a new engine on.
[0:17:59] JR: They need a new engine, which is, I don't know, do they keep those around in
Singapore? It might take a while. So, we don't know if that was truly because there was damage
to the aircraft or because they just needed time to get a new engine, which I'm sure those don't
grow on trees these days. So, it might take a while to get it. But yes, there's more to this story
than we know. We always say it, but we will have to wait for the NTSB to release a report. But in
this case, we're going to be waiting a long time because we're going to have to wait for the final
report, unless these images get leaked by someone that isn't us.
[0:18:31] IP: It won't be us. I'm sorry to say that you're not going to see the images here first.
But take our word for it that this is a final report that you're going to want to see. Because it'll be
interesting to know what exactly – because we don't know what part of the engine broke. We'll
put a link to the report in the show notes. But, “According to the flight crew, after just reaching an
© 2024 AvTalk 9
AVT 274 Transcript
altitude of 31,000 feet, when they heard a pop and felt the aircraft shutter followed by a number
one engine fire warning indication, a visual inspection of the number one engine was performed
after landing in Singapore, and damage was observed to the number one engine nacelle. And
there was a hole in the engine case at approximately the 10 o'clock position.”
[0:19:11] JR: Yes, there's a hole, all right.
[0:19:12] IP: There's a hole there.
[0:19:13] JR: But in the interim time, we have not heard of any Critical Airworthiness Directives
or Emergency Airworthiness Directives or anything of the sort that would indicate we have
learned something that there is wrong with this particular model of engine. So, maybe this really
is at least for now, just something happened. Maybe somebody left a wrench inside? I don't
know. We'll know eventually, but it doesn't seem to be alarming the authorities in any particular
way.
[0:19:39] IP: Yes, they're doing their thing. Speaking of authorities, shall we go to Denmark?
[0:19:43] JR: Oh, nice this time of year.
[0:19:46] IP: Yes. Denmark's investigative body has released a final report into an incident
where a few things went wrong, but the crew did a very nice job of handling it even though
things – everything worked out safely. No one was injured or anything like that. But things were
not great. The final report lays out kind of all of the things that went wrong and how the crew
responded to each one. So, Jason, tell us more.
[0:20:12] JR: First of all, I want to point out that this incident only happened December 21st of
last year and we already have the final report out of Denmark, which is a lot faster than I feel
like we're used to. But a Jettime Boeing 737-800, registration OYJZN was operating from Egypt
to Billund in Denmark, where they had a bit of an issue with their flaps. At 300 feet above
ground level, they initiated a go-around, and then there's the flap disagree message with the
flap lever set to 15. But the flaps are indicating 13 degrees. They ran a checklist and there was
some issue with the flap system that apparently locked it out. They were not able to move the
© 2024 AvTalk 10
AVT 274 Transcript
flaps from that position. The weather was not good. They declared a mayday due to low fuel and
continued on to Copenhagen. Even though the runway, the winds there were gusting as well.
But they went through a whole bunch of checklists and this and that, and they ended up landing
with below the minimum required amount of fuel.
But even so, the final report says that the flight crew opted not to go beyond the non-normal
checklist and in an attempt to retract the flaps in order to reduce the unexpectedly increased
amount of fuel consumption, this is an available option to any commander if deemed necessary
for flight safety reasons, considering the quantity of fuel shortage versus any possible
unexpected consequences of going beyond the checklist. The AIB considers this decision to be
rational.
I feel like calling the actions of a flight crew rational is like high praise. Like, “Hey, you did
everything you were supposed to do. Sometimes, circumstances work against you. Everything
ended up being fine. Thank you for being rational.” I don't know. Because we've seen what
happens if flight crews are irrational and we can look back to the Russian incident from a few
years ago. What airline was that?
[0:22:10] IP: The one that landed in the field? That was Ural.
[0:22:12] JR: Yes. Ural. Thank you. We've seen the exact opposite of what happens when flaps
are left deployed and fuel becomes critical to the point where they have to land in a field. That
was irrational. In this case, the investigators say, “Hey, you are rational.” And I'm just kind of
picturing and in Danish investigator giving them the thumbs up like, “Hey, good job.” Because
that's basically all the report says.
[0:22:35] IP: Yes. Shall we talk more business, Jason?
[0:22:38] JR: It's not all good news, even if your name is Airbus. Did you know that?
[0:22:44] IP: I do know that because I have it in the show notes. But if I didn't know that, I would
have learned it from this podcast.
© 2024 AvTalk 11
AVT 274 Transcript
[0:22:49] JR: You would know that Airbus had previously forecast in 2024 to deliver 800 aircraft.
But unfortunately, due to supply chain issues affecting the ability to produce and deliver aircraft,
that number will be reduced by 30 to 770 aircraft. We'll have to come back December 31st, or
shortly thereafter to see if they can actually meet that 770 figure, because maybe they don't. But
yes, lowering at this point in the year, the expected amount of aircraft to be delivered is not
great. But it's also not the only news as Airbus is also pushing back the ramp-up of A320neo
family production to 75 back a year from 2026 to 2027. So, apparently Airbus sees the writing
on the wall and knows supply chain issues are not going to be solved today, or tomorrow, or
even 2026.
[0:23:46] IP: Can we just talk about how it's still bonkers to me that they're going to build 75
A320neo family aircraft per month.
[0:23:56] JR: Eventually, probably.
[0:23:58] IP: I mean that they have plans to build 75 A320s.
[0:24:04] JR: It is a lot of airplanes, as long as, and I quote, “The specific supply chain
challenges in a degraded operating environment” are resolved. Which doesn't seem to be the
case so far, because we keep seeing these delivery projections lowered and ramp-up schedules
bumped out. But 75 airplanes across how many production lines? I guess, are we counting the
T engine line? I'm not sure.
[0:24:33] IP: Yes.
[0:24:32] JR: I think we do. That's not just interior fitting. That's final –
[0:24:36] IP: For the A320 family, that’s a full line.
[0:24:38] JR: Yes. There are a lot of lines and a lot of places pumping out these aircraft and 75
is just a crazy number.
[0:24:46] IP: Yes. Crazy good number?
© 2024 AvTalk 12
AVT 274 Transcript
[0:24:47] JR: But a number that will come a year later than previously expected.
[0:24:51] IP: Fine then. Well, if Boeing is having problems, and if Airbus is having problems
building all of these aircraft, maybe Embraer is not having problems building their aircraft. But
this week they said, “You know what? Right now, we're going to focus on us. It's me time at
Embraer.” They are not actively pursuing for the moment, they say, building a larger single-aisle
competitor to the A320 and 737 families.
[0:25:20] JR: Well, that's disappointing.
[0:25:22] IP: For the moment.
[0:25:24] JR: Not actively. Maybe they're –
[0:25:26] IP: We're not thinking about it.
[0:25:27] JR: Passively deciding to do this. Remember, this is no surprise. Any company that
hasn't formally publicly launched a product is never going to say, “Yes, we're doing this,”
because you’ll spoil the surprise and you want to build up to the surprise. Maybe they are in a
secret Embraer resilient skunkworks actually coming up with a true narrow-body competitor to
Airbus and Boeing, and they're playing coy. I hope that's the case, because I do feel like
Embraer has the best chance of any global entity to pull this off successfully. It can't just keep
pumping out E-Jets forever, especially if the E2 is never going to be an aircraft that the US
majors can operate. They can't just keep making the E1 forever. We've talked about this in the
past, but I hope they're just playing coy. They really are planning to do something here, because
if they don't, somebody else is going to.
[0:26:22] IP: Not that this relates to anything Jason just said. But the skunk native to Brazil is
the Molina's hog-nosed skunk.
[0:26:31] JR: What do you call a group of them?
© 2024 AvTalk 13
AVT 274 Transcript
[0:26:33] IP: That's a great question. I don't know. We'll have our researchers get back. Let's
leave Brazil and go all the way to Vietnam, because this is one of those stories where you go.
“All right, but why?” Jason, what's going on?
[0:26:49] JR: So, if you're familiar with the Vietnam Airline ecosystem, a lot of stuff has changed
since COVID. Bamboo has come kind of gone. You previously in 2019, had Jetstar Pacific,
which was just another version of Jetstar. A low-cost carrier. I flew in it in 2019, which then
became after COVID, or during COVID, Pacific Airlines, which was still an offshoot of Vietnam
Airlines, but still primarily a low-cost airline. Now, Vietnam, after pausing operations of the airline
entirely, has said, “You know what? We want them back and we want them to be a full-service
carrier,” which is all sorts of confusing because that's what Vietnam –
[0:27:28] IP: To compete with our other airlines full-service carrier.
[0:27:29] JR: Airline is already doing, so why they need an offshoot of its own airline to
compete with itself? It's very Lufthansa, I feel like. Let's spin off Eurowings’ Discover and make
those planes better than the ones at Lufthansa and call it a day. I don't know, maybe they see
what's going on in Europe and say, “Oh, we could do that too.” Truly confusing. I don't know. But
somebody there must know.
[0:27:58] IP: We'll have to find out. Speaking of truly confusing, Lufthansa City Airlines began
operations today on the Munich-Birmingham route. They will operate to multiple destinations
within Germany, Bremen, Cologne, Dusseldorf, and Hanover. Besides Birmingham, operating
between Frankfurt and Munich to start. This is Lufthansa’s I believe 964th subsidiary airline.
[0:28:23] JR: Today.
[0:28:24] IP: they've announced in the last week, and the airline began operations this week,
and will launch further over the next few weeks to further destinations. But again, one of those
we're doing this for reasons.
[0:28:41] JR: For reasons to save money. Don't forget, it's a Lufthansa Group Airlines, so it's
just another airline that you're going to have to pay the new eco surcharge, an environmental
© 2024 AvTalk 14
AVT 274 Transcript
surcharge on all tickets, which is not something we planned on talking about. But Lufthansa
Group announced that all tickets across all of its group airlines and all cabins and fare types will
now have a mandatory fee ranging anywhere from 1 euro to 72 euros to basically pay for the
things that the EU is making them do to be greener and more environmentally friendly.
I don't like it. I don't think it's the right decision since Lufthansa Group is one of those airlines
that markets heavily towards how eco-friendly and green they are with SAFs and, and all sorts
of other things. And they already have their green fare, which is unique to Lufthansa, which I
think incorporates carbon offsets, I believe, as a part of your fare. But now they're making it
everyone's problem and they're not including it in the base fare. It is a fee added on top of the
base fare that you'll find out at checkout, apparently. I don't know. I really feel like this should
just be rolled into the cost of the fare and is a part of doing business rather than calling out and
say, “Hey, the EU is making us do this stuff and you’re going to pay for it.” But also, advertising
on how green you are. I don't get it.
[0:30:07] IP: Yes. I mean, to me, it's a little bit mixed. Because if you're saying, okay, these are
the regulations, this is just the cost of doing business now as an airline. Because if as an airline
you're saying, “Oh, we need to be more green.” Then you're going in complaining about being
more green, which is –
[0:30:23] JR: It's a very conflicting message. In my opinion, this should just be rolled into the
fare, part of the fare. You're not going to barely going to notice 72 euros in a first-class booking,
or 1 to 5 euro on short or medium-haul. But to call it out explicitly as a surcharge, it really is
intentional to make sure passengers know, “Hey, this is a fee that we're passing on to you,
because somebody is making us do these things to be more eco-friendly.” It sends the wrong
message. Maybe well-intentioned, but it rubs me the wrong way.
[0:30:57] IP: Yes, I mean, I wouldn't mind it if they were saying, these are the things we're
doing. This is how much costs, and therefore it's part of your ticket. But to add it as an additional
surcharge beyond the price of the ticket, that seems disingenuous.
There's another way to become a greener airline, Jason.
© 2024 AvTalk 15
AVT 274 Transcript
[0:31:18] JR: What's that?
[0:31:20] IP: You can just retire two dozen planes all in one go.
[0:31:24] JR: And then you could call it a green initiative and everyone wins.
[0:31:27] IP: There you go.
[0:31:28] JR: That’s not what FedEx is doing.
[0:31:30] IP: That’s not what FedEx is doing. They're saying we don't have the business to
sustain 22 Boeing 757s. Demand is softening for the services that we offer. So, we have parked
permanently 22 757-200s. So, those are gone from the airline for good. This was part of
Southwest’s fourth fiscal quarter, which ended at the end of May, and they said, “We parked a
bunch of aircraft.” Also, year-on-year revenue is down 53%.
[0:32:05] JR: FedEx, by the way. I think you said Southwest. We already talked about them.
We’re talking about FedEx here.
[0:32:11] IP: Sorry, FedEx. Yes, FedEx. If Southwest parked at 22 757s, this would be a much
better story. Sorry, FedEx.
So, FedEx is saying that revenue down 53% year on year, definitely seeing that continued
softening in the air cargo market. But it's been a yo-yo ride for air cargo. So, one minute,
demand is softening. Everything is down. Next minute, someone's picking up 10 secondhand
777s to convert them. They're having that number and then they're actually converting three of
them. But oh, we got 767s over here. It's this post-COVID yo-yo land.
[0:32:54] JR: FedEx as a whole is kind of going through an identity crisis. They've got a lot
going on. But like you just said, on the other end of the yo-yo bounce, Sun Country is expanding
its cargo operation. It’s taking eight more 737-800 aircraft not for passenger operations, but to
extend its cargo operations. These are coming pretty quickly as Sun Country operates under the
© 2024 AvTalk 16
AVT 274 Transcript
Amazon Prime Air brand, I guess, not with the Atlas 767s, but with the little 738 cargo aircraft,
and they should be taking –
[0:33:27] IP: And they have their own livery, which is a nice shade of blue.
[0:33:30] JR: It's very nice. This will take it up from 12 to 20 freighters, which is not insignificant.
This is a pretty big operation for a fairly small airline.
[0:33:41] IP: Yes. On the passenger side of things, less of a demand issue and more of a we
don't have the aircraft needed to operate all the flights we wanted to. So, American Airlines
becomes the latest airline to kind of hold off on increasing capacity, and they're doing that by
holding off on adding new pilots through the November class. So, the September, October,
November classes of pilots that are coming through, they will be pushed back to 2025.
So, we've reduced the amount of flying we're going to do, so we don't necessarily need all of
these new pilots at this time. Chief of American Airlines, Robert Isom says, “We've got some
work to do on building back from the hole we've created for ourselves.” This quote coming after,
because Raja was unceremoniously removed from his position and kicked out.
[0:34:41] JR: Yes. Especially, since under his supervision, it basically seems like American only
wanted to grow as a regional airline, connecting small cities to hubs. That’s really helpful if
you're looking to fly a mainline aircraft and all you're doing is adding an unstoppable amount of
E175s because those aren't flown at the mainline level. But at least it seems like the pilots in
this training program are just being deferred until the following year with only a few months and
not dropped entirely.
[0:35:09] IP: Yes. That's good news for those pilots, certainly. I did not have trash balloons on
my AvTalk bingo card for this week.
[0:35:19] JR: International trash balloon.
[0:35:22] IP: International trash balloon.
© 2024 AvTalk 17
AVT 274 Transcript
[0:35:23] JR: These aren’t just any ordinary trash balloons.
[0:35:25] IP: Oh, man. There’s the title of the episode.
[0:35:25] JR: They are well-traveled. But it seems like Incheon Airport in South Korea just about
40 kilometers south of the North Korean border was shut down briefly for about three hours
earlier this week because North Korea got mad at something South Korea did and they watched
a couple of 100 balloons carrying trash over the border. Some of them found their way to the
airport. That's different.
[0:35:53] IP: What will they think of next?
[0:35:55] JR: I don't know. But trash balloons, it's a good one. Wait a minute, I have to read this
quote, because I haven't actually read this article until right now. That quote, “Among the items
carried by the North Korean balloons have been articles printed with Hello Kitty characters,
badly worn clothing, and soil containing traces of human feces and parasites.” South Korea
said. That is a very motley crew in the trash balloon.
[0:36:21] IP: Awesome. I mean, the exact opposite of awesome.
[0:36:23] JR: Not great, but anytime you combine the keywords of trash, balloon, feces,
parasites, Hello Kitty characters in the same sentence, you're talking about something good.
[0:36:36] IP: I guess that's a way to put it.
[0:36:40] JR: Sure. It's interesting, without a doubt.
[0:36:42] IP: This last bit of news was flagged by a podcast listener. Thank you so much for
writing in on this one. Picked up in local press initially, and then has made its way into the
international aviation press. A KM Malta Airlines, so this is the successor airline to Air Malta,
which began as a replacement airline at the end of March, a pilot there was using their
mandatory rest periods to fly to London and fly for Virgin Atlantic. That pilot has since been fired
from Virgin Atlantic.
© 2024 AvTalk 18
AVT 274 Transcript
[0:37:22] JR: On the spot. As soon as they caught wind of this, this pilot was fired on the spot
as they should be. But the story gets worse, doesn't it?
[0:37:32] IP: It's hard to see how it could get worse, but it does. Jason take us on.
[0:37:36] JR: KM Malta didn't fire this pilot. They put this person on leave, apparently, rather
than firing them and the rest of the pilots at KM Malta are not amused by this because this is
kind of damning for any airline to have this kind of controversy. Of course, Virgin Atlantic did the
right thing firing this person immediately, because this is a clear safety violation, a rule violation,
a law violation. You cannot do this. You cannot even – if you do moonlight for another airline, I
guess that would be somewhat acceptable if you were doing it on I don't know time off or leave
of absence, but not when you're supposed to be enjoying your mandatory rest period. But to not
come around and relieve this person of their duties at the airline is just a really, really bad sign
for any of the other safety issues that the airline is supposed to keeping track of. It’s just not
good.
[0:38:32] IP: The only thing I can think of is that the lawyers got involved and said, “We can't fire
them right away. We have to do some due diligence, or process, or something before we can
actually fire them.” That's the only reason I can think of to like cover their bases.
[0:38:50] JR: It's the only thing we want to think would be the possibility, but nothing like that
got in the way in Virgin.
[0:38:56] IP: I mean, I assume and having never worked in Malta, I assume the UK and Malta
have different regulations and who knows how stringent labor protections are in Malta. Again,
I'm no Maltese lawyer, but I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt until we hear more and
I certainly hope we hear more. Jason?
[0:39:15] JR: Yes?
[0:39:16] IP: A group of skunks is called a surfeit.
© 2024 AvTalk 19
AVT 274 Transcript
[0:39:20] JR: A surfing?
[0:39:21] IP: A surfeit.
[0:39:22] JR: Surfeit. Oh, all right. That's great that our team of crack researchers were able to
turn that up so quickly.
[0:39:29] IP: It means an excessive amount of something. I guess anytime you have skunks in
a group, it is certainly an excessive amount.
[0:39:34] JR: Too much. One is too much.
[0:39:36] IP: And with that, the end of Episode 274 of AvTalk. How about that?
[0:39:41] JR: That's great.
[0:39:42] IP: What an episode. We'll be back next week with Episode 275. Jason, we should
start thinking about what we're going to do for Episode 300, though I think I already timed this
out and Episode 300 is the week of Christmas. So, maybe we'll start thinking about what we do
for Episode 301.
[0:39:57] JR: Okay, that'll work.
[0:39:58] IP: But, this one's 274. I'm Ian Petchenik and I'm here as always with –
[0:40:04] JR: Jason Rabinowitz. Thanks for listening.
[END]
© 2024 AvTalk 20