Ask The Pilot

[CaviAck]

Re: Ask the pilot

QF93 07/12

Bugger miss you by 3 days and the wrong destination

But speaking of QF93/94 and crew bases. I know you have a preference to ports other than LAX, does that change now if you have the opportunity to never have to fly a sector through SYD again but it means having to fly to LAX more?

 

[jb747]

Re: Ask the pilot

Bugger miss you by 3 days and the wrong destination

But speaking of QF93/94 and crew bases. I know you have a preference to ports other than LAX, does that change now if you have the opportunity to never have to fly a sector through SYD again but it means having to fly to LAX more?

Sydney is just a consequence of moving to the Melbourne base. They don't build trips for Mel crew that go through Sydney. I'm just as likely to divert there on a 94. HKG (which I understand will still happen every now and then), and Dallas, also disappear.

The MEL-LAX trips are stand alone. Building them for Melbourne based crew simply means removing the paxing from the start and finish of the trips as they existed for Sydney crew. This results in maximum savings for the company (shorter trip, potentially less credits (i.e. pay), no hotels or allowances), but also can be done without affecting the build of the Sydney trips. There are no London trips that start and finish in Melbourne, so they have to be built, and they have the effect of creating different trips for the Sydney base as well. The upshot, is that the Melbourne base currently will mostly go to LA, at least initially.

Right now, there's the bare minimum number of Captains necessary to start the base, but it's nowhere near a full complement. Most will be ex 747 people and are yet to be trained. And many will actually be commuters, as they have only taken the base as it was the only way to get the 380 slot. As more people qualify, the proportion of trips will change.

 

[Quickstatus]

Re: Ask the pilot

JB,

In the US there seem to be aircrew who are based in a city sometimes thousands of km away from home, and they live in "crashpads" between work shifts. I understand it is to minimise outgoings.

Do these exist in Australia?

 

[jb747]

Re: Ask the pilot

In the US there seem to be aircrew who are based in a city sometimes thousands of km away from home, and they live in "crashpads" between work shifts. I understand it is to minimise outgoings.

Do these exist in Australia?

There are many commuter flats. Most are quite decent setups. I was part of one in Sydney for many years. As often as not, when you used it, you were the only one there. There's also a very enterprising lady in Sydney who has a whole bunch of houses near the airport that she runs as mini hotels for crew.

 

[Quickstatus]

Re: Ask the pilot

as they have only taken the base as it was the only way to get the 380 slot.

Who gave the 380 slot?

also JB when you transitioned from 747 to 380 was it a tap on shoulder or an application?

 

[jb747]

Re: Ask the pilot

Who gave the 380 slot?

also JB when you transitioned from 747 to 380 was it a tap on shoulder or an application?

Generally, when the company wants to crew new aircraft/base, they have two options. They can offer a posting. That has a time limit of two years, and is only open to people who are already qualified on type/rank. The can also offer a basing (or slot). That will be open for anyone to bid on. It will be allocated based upon seniority (assuming the allocation is acceptable to training/management). They take up the basing after completing the appropriate training. The company will choose based upon whether it actually wants to do more training, or it's just moving people around.

Once a base is established, another option becomes available, the base transfer. This is also only for people already qualified on type, but has no end date.

Only training/management are ever 'tapped on the shoulder', and even their slot is potentially only available to them whilst in that training/management position. Everyone else bids, with the allocation being decided by seniority. As we've discussed before though, seniority only gets you onto the course...you have to pass.

Having seen new aircraft introduced in the past, I was aware that there was likely to be a window of time during which slots might go more junior than you'd otherwise expect. That was exactly what happened, and I was allocated my slot before the first aircraft even appeared. Then QF30 happened, and the company elected to delay (whilst keeping it as mine) my slot for a few months (which was good thinking on the part of the Deputy Chief Pilot..he figured I might not be in the right frame of mind). Subsequently, I would have been able to get a slot on most allocations, but many others were wise to have taken the opportunity. It's quite possible for (instance) an SO to be senior enough to get an FO slot on one year's allocation, but to not be within hundreds of numbers the next year...so it's always dangerous to let a chance go by.

 

[hummel]

JB,

A very good friend of mine is a captain for Rex out of sydney and he maintains that the bigger the aircraft get the easier are they to fly, thoughts?

A very open question considering the biggest he flies is the saabs but I think he is coming from the view that more systems in bigger aircraft = less pressure?

 

[jb747]

A very good friend of mine is a captain for Rex out of sydney and he maintains that the bigger the aircraft get the easier are they to fly, thoughts?

A very open question considering the biggest he flies is the saabs but I think he is coming from the view that more systems in bigger aircraft = less pressure?

Different aircraft and operations have their own challenges. Whilst I have more systems available to me than in a SAAB, I also have much more available to go wrong. The complexity certainly allows many avenues for error. I'd have considered the hardest part of the SAAB operation would be the exposure to low level weather (i.e. below about 20,000'), operations to uncontrolled airports, and the number of sectors. To a degree, any technology from the last 30 years is good enough....

If you want to see really fancy aircraft systems, then airliners aren't the place to look. Biz jets...

 

[Quickstatus]

Re: Ask the pilot

seniority only gets you onto the course...you have to pass.
.

JB interested to know what happens if a pilot is underperforming at the company ? Remedial?, "3 strikes and you're out"?, Demotion?

 

[jb747]

Re: Ask the pilot

JB interested to know what happens if a pilot is underperforming at the company ? Remedial?, "3 strikes and you're out"?, Demotion?

Any and all of the above.

A one off remedial isn't a particular issue, but don't have more than one. Demotion may not be to the next rank down either....

And poor performance in the current rank is a guaranteed way of not being allowed to take any promotional slots.

 

[Himeno]

Re: Ask the pilot

When you head into LHR, how long do you normally end up in a hold? Have you ever had a flight go right into land at LHR without having to orbit in one of the stacks?


(about to get QF10 to DXB then QF1 back to LHR tomorrow morning. Looks like I miss you again )

 

[jb747]

Re: Ask the pilot

When you head into LHR, how long do you normally end up in a hold? Have you ever had a flight go right into land at LHR without having to orbit in one of the stacks?

When the QF9 timing had it landing before 0600, it was common to come straight in. QF1 will always hold for a couple of turns, but if you juggle it right (arrive a bit early, and be low in the stack), then it will be minimal. It's common to be told to hold, and to not even complete the first pattern.

The current later arrival of QF9 (around midday), also works pretty well. It seems relatively quiet, and I've had about 50:50 of arrivals without any holding at all.

London ATC is easily the best I work with anywhere (actually the best I've ever seen), and they are masters at manipulating the flow with minimal holding.

(about to get QF10 to DXB then QF1 back to LHR tomorrow morning. Looks like I miss you again )

By about a day and a digit.

 

[Himeno]

Re: Ask the pilot

When the QF9 timing had it landing before 0600, it was common to come straight in. QF1 will always hold for a couple of turns, but if you juggle it right (arrive a bit early, and be low in the stack), then it will be minimal. It's common to be told to hold, and to not even complete the first pattern.

The current later arrival of QF9 (around midday), also works pretty well. It seems relatively quiet, and I've had about 50:50 of arrivals without any holding at all.

London ATC is easily the best I work with anywhere (actually the best I've ever seen), and they are masters at manipulating the flow with minimal holding.

I guess they do better with the long hauls then the short flights?
BA303 from CDG this morning held to the SE for 15 mins or "about 3 circles" as the pilot called it before arriving at the gate just a few mins late. (of course we ended up at a domestic T5 gate so they had to pull the stairs and get the buses)

 

[mjt57]

Re: Ask the pilot

Speaking, or rather, writing of holding patterns, on Thursday evening around 1800hrs we observed one aircraft in what we presumed was one. About 20 mins. flying time east of MEL.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8929335/IMG_2029.JPG

There must've been some hold up getting into MEL.

How do you found out this info?

The aircraft in question is "off camera" to the left of frame heading in a SW direction. I'm guessing that it was inbound from UnZud.

Is the pattern as shown in the photo normal? I'd have thought that they'd fly in a "racetrack" pattern of sorts, or a large single circle.

 

[jb747]

Re: Ask the pilot

Speaking, or rather, writing of holding patterns, on Thursday evening around 1800hrs we observed one aircraft in what we presumed was one. About 20 mins. flying time east of MEL.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8929335/IMG_2029.JPG

There must've been some hold up getting into MEL.

How do you found out this info?

The aircraft in question is "off camera" to the left of frame heading in a SW direction. I'm guessing that it was inbound from UnZud.

Is the pattern as shown in the photo normal? I'd have thought that they'd fly in a "racetrack" pattern of sorts, or a large single circle.

flightradar24.com

Three flights...Virgin and QF from NZ, and JQ from Tassie. If you start the replay from about 06:15Z you'll see them all.

 

[docjames]

MEL ATC tower was evacuated due to fire so there were numerous holds and the ones over gippsland were reported to radio - I think due to the contrails they were fairly "obvious".

 

[mjt57]

Re: Ask the pilot

flightradar24.com

Three flights...Virgin and QF from NZ, and JQ from Tassie. If you start the replay from about 06:15Z you'll see them all.

Thanks, JB.

Strange that none of the aircraft appear to have the same flight tracks as what I saw. And they appear further west and south, too. I wonder how accurate the map overlay is.

 

[Flyerqf]

Re: Ask the pilot

Sydney is just a consequence of moving to the Melbourne base. They don't build trips for Mel crew that go through Sydney. I'm just as likely to divert there on a 94. HKG (which I understand will still happen every now and then), and Dallas, also disappear.

The MEL-LAX trips are stand alone. Building them for Melbourne based crew simply means removing the paxing from the start and finish of the trips as they existed for Sydney crew. This results in maximum savings for the company (shorter trip, potentially less credits (i.e. pay), no hotels or allowances), but also can be done without affecting the build of the Sydney trips. There are no London trips that start and finish in Melbourne, so they have to be built, and they have the effect of creating different trips for the Sydney base as well. The upshot, is that the Melbourne base currently will mostly go to LA, at least initially.

Right now, there's the bare minimum number of Captains necessary to start the base, but it's nowhere near a full complement. Most will be ex 747 people and are yet to be trained. And many will actually be commuters, as they have only taken the base as it was the only way to get the 380 slot. As more people qualify, the proportion of trips will change.

Hi jb, I don't know much about how all these things work but read with interest and hope my question isn't too silly. I really enjoy your insights on this board.


I noticed that you said none of the London trips start and finish in Melbourne. What exactly does that mean? From a pax point of view, QF9/10 starts and finishes in MEL, why does it not work that way for crew?

 

[jb747]

Re: Ask the pilot

I noticed that you said none of the London trips start and finish in Melbourne. What exactly does that mean? From a pax point of view, QF9/10 starts and finishes in MEL, why does it not work that way for crew?

Until now, all of the 380 Captains have been Sydney based. That means that they start and finish all trips in Sydney. So, if they are actually scheduled to operate the 9, they start in Sydney, pax to Melbourne, and then operate the 9 the next day. (The overnight slip is required as part of the flight time limitations, it didn't happen when the 9 operated via Singapore.) On the return journey, they'll switch to the 2 at some point, and end up in Sydney. Going the other way, it's fly the 1, and switch to the 10 to come back via Melbourne, and pax back to Sydney from there.

None of the trips were designed to fly the 9 and 10 through Melbourne, nor were there any that operated the 1 and 2. The reason was that it was cheaper. Building the Melbourne both ways cost more, and was not offset by savings from the Sydney flights. Now that there will be some based crews, the cost is reduced, and they need to be brought back to Melbourne anyway.

The Dubai sector from Australia is very long. Much longer than the previous BKK, SIN, or HKG sectors. That throws up flight time limits, rest, and crewing issues that never existed when the long sector was the second part of the trip.

 

[Flyerqf]

Re: Ask the pilot

Until now, all of the 380 Captains have been Sydney based. That means that they start and finish all trips in Sydney. So, if they are actually scheduled to operate the 9, they start in Sydney, pax to Melbourne, and then operate the 9 the next day. (The overnight slip is required as part of the flight time limitations, it didn't happen when the 9 operated via Singapore.) On the return journey, they'll switch to the 2 at some point, and end up in Sydney. Going the other way, it's fly the 1, and switch to the 10 to come back via Melbourne, and pax back to Sydney from there.

None of the trips were designed to fly the 9 and 10 through Melbourne, nor were there any that operated the 1 and 2. The reason was that it was cheaper. Building the Melbourne both ways cost more, and was not offset by savings from the Sydney flights. Now that there will be some based crews, the cost is reduced, and they need to be brought back to Melbourne anyway.

The Dubai sector from Australia is very long. Much longer than the previous BKK, SIN, or HKG sectors. That throws up flight time limits, rest, and crewing issues that never existed when the long sector was the second part of the trip.

thanks JB.

Based on that, wouldn't it make sense to have the MEL based crew operating 9/10 now that there is a base, rather than just to LAX on 93/94.

Also, if you lived in Melbourne but part of the Sydney base, did you have to travel up to Sydney to report for duty, even if you were going to be on the 9 or 93 the next day (and then position back down to MEL on work time)?