Cui Bono? fuel ordering and KPI?
Nunc est bibendum
5:30 for a 20 minute chat and catch up with a bloke or girl I've known for years? Bring it on!
I don't expect that fuel will be a significant part of that discussion. The CARs will be everyone's default answer.
Nunc est bibendum
Is it? I suggest with respect that you ought get out more, dislike the message but at least do some research before dismissing out of hand what is occurring outside the Australian exceptionalism to which some people still subscribe. Control of pilot work forces is an objective that runs deep in HR circles.
When they give me an instruction, in writing, to carry min op fuel I'll be happy to do so. Just as I'm sure they'll be happy to go pick the aircraft up from wherever it ends up. And any interview would be recorded. Even the mention of fuel would be intimidation, and subject to a report directly to CASA.
Reminds me of the time they got snarky about the 767 pilots who were offloading cargo on some of the Brisbane to Singapore flights, so that they could ensure they'd have 60 minutes of holding on arrival.
Management came out and said that they didn't want cargo offloaded, and that they were prepared to accept the risk. Now, such a statement would assume that they knew exactly what they were risking, and what the odds were. The following week, over 50% of the flights diverted, and a couple of them terminated. So, obviously the actual odds were high, but what they hadn't actually thought through was what they were actually risking. The flights were being performed under what was called the 'op spec', which basically allowed a 2 man crew operation to be planned to 8:30 flight time, but which simultaneously took away the pilots' ability to extend to 9 hours. The flight that didn't terminate breached the rules. So, if a diversion took place, the pilots would not have any option but to terminate the flight.
The next week, all operations using -300s were planned with 60 minutes, and with -200s an SO was added to the crew.
Reminds me of the time they got snarky about the 767 pilots who were offloading cargo on some of the Brisbane to Singapore flights, so that they could ensure they'd have 60 minutes of holding on arrival.
Management came out and said that they didn't want cargo offloaded, and that they were prepared to accept the risk. Now, such a statement would assume that they knew exactly what they were risking, and what the odds were. The following week, over 50% of the flights diverted, and a couple of them terminated. So, obviously the actual odds were high, but what they hadn't actually thought through was what they were actually risking. The flights were being performed under what was called the 'op spec', which basically allowed a 2 man crew operation to be planned to 8:30 flight time, but which simultaneously took away the pilots' ability to extend to 9 hours. The flight that didn't terminate breached the rules. So, if a diversion took place, the pilots would not have any option but to terminate the flight.
The next week, all operations using -300s were planned with 60 minutes, and with -200s an SO was added to the crew.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appeared you were making allegations that management were using it to feather their own beds. That's not your actual concern? You're raising a future, potential issue with it rather than what you think is a current, actual issue?
1. Ask your DFO or his Deputy whether they make any personal financial gain from fuel savings achieved? If you have indeed asked them, then yes or no do they secure pecuniary benefit from your colleagues saving them fuel?
2. Will the app be utilised for performance management of pilots?
Suggest you read the following article, read what Cathay Pilots, Ryanair pilots among others say on the matter before you dismiss any probability of the app being a performance management tool.
3. Do you consider yourself a 'management pilot'?
Nunc est bibendum
1. I know the answer to that question. It makes absolutely no difference to me and what I do. I can't see what relevance me shutting and engine down on taxi in, using idle reverse for landings where appropriate, or using a Config 3 (Airbus) approach where appropriate, have to do with discretionary fuel uplift. These initiatives are entirely separate.
For the avoidance of doubt, my main concern is stopping the aircraft safely. If I can do so using those other measures then my company is more profitable. I'm happy with that as an outcome. I'm not sure why someone would have an issue with this or providing info back to crew as to how it's occurring. From what I've seen my numbers are pretty close to everyone else's in this regard.
2. Will it? Dunno. It's not currently. I'd be surprised if they get very far trying to use it that way in QF in the future. What other airlines do is up to them.
3. No. I'm not sure what the relevance of that is to your original post either.
For the avoidance of doubt, my main concern is stopping the aircraft safely. If I can do so using those other measures then my company is more profitable. I'm happy with that as an outcome. I'm not sure why someone would have an issue with this or providing info back to crew as to how it's occurring. From what I've seen my numbers are pretty close to everyone else's in this regard.
2. Will it? Dunno. It's not currently. I'd be surprised if they get very far trying to use it that way in QF in the future. What other airlines do is up to them.
3. No. I'm not sure what the relevance of that is to your original post either.
there was a captain nicknamed 'Vapours'.
Remember him well, wasn't at his retirement presentation (out burning a bit of A1) but I am told the then DFO presented him with a large flagon of said Jet A1.
As long as there are airlines, there will be airline managements, as long as there are airline managements there will be drives to reduce costs, some will be sensible, some will be "widely discussed" and some best not discussed in polite company at all.
Most will die a well deserved death, because, at the day to day operations level, and over the top fuel orders are one, there are not too many variable costs. Hence "surplus fuel" coming up on a regular cycle over the years. The current "app" is just part of the regular cycle, it will not influence the thoughtful and conscientious pilot in command, and that is the great majority.
When it comes to fuel, the powers of the pilot in command are, in most western jurisdictions, robust in law, and I hope they are never eroded (but please look closely at the soon to emerge CASA AU CASR Part 91 NPRM, very iffy and fluffy in this area, and also seeks to expand the power of ATC to "issue orders" on pains of strict liability criminal offenses by pilots) because by far the majority of pilot's fuel orders are prudent results based on the circumstances of the day.
Will "the law", unions and regulatory authorities severally or jointly stand up to coercive airline management in the future, to maintain the authority of the pilot in command ??
I certainly hope so, but looking at some of the actions and in-actions of CASA AU, I am far from 100% confident. For those many countries where there is no real "rule of law", fingers crossed.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 19th Nov 2017 at 12:46. Reason: spelling
The term 'risk management', when it comes from airline blunts, is always amusing. What it means is that they'll manage it, you take the risk!
Anyway, app or no app, they are easily ignored.
......Pax will be asked to judge your PA's and anything that they perceive that the pilots can do better to make their flight more enjoyable. You will be asked to justify why you made this PA and why didn't you make that PA 5 months ago. Pax complained it was a bumpy flight, care to explain why?
If they don't like my PAs, I'm happy not to do any.
And if you ask me anything beyond 60 minutes after the flight, I'll have totally forgotten it.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Be careful how quickly you dismiss this.
The new QF International boss has a track record of introducing KPI's in their area of influence.
The new QF International boss has a track record of introducing KPI's in their area of influence.
I generally try not to kill my passengers, and I consider it a successful flight if that is the outcome.
As I said HR have long targeted control of pilot work force.
Are they taking over and administering the regulatory role from CASA?
Are they taking over and administering the regulatory role from CASA?
I am certain they would if they could, and this pesky nonsense of the "authority of the pilot in command" would have to be the first thing to go.
Anybody in/from Qantas remember a few years ago when "they" started writing letters addressed to J. Smith, captain, and articles appeared in Qantas news referring to aircraft captain J.Smith --- presumably to distinguish J.Smith cricket captain or a hotel bell captain --- but there was no doubt it was intended to downgrade the status of Captain J. Smith in the company --- by some people with very small minds.
On that occasion, very senior management put a stop to it, quick smart.
Tootle pip!!
