QFI-man,
To re-iterate, in the case you were describing the crew that flew the ac from the UK to the first stop would have had a minimum crew rest period whilst the deployed crew took the jet to/from a place further east. The second crew's task takes less than the min 13.5 hour ground time of the first crew. The 13.5 hours is made up of 0.5 hours post-flight duties, 11.5 hours rest (including any travelling) and 1.5 hours pre-flight duties. The pax inbound to the UK unfortunatley have to wait whilst the first crew finish their mandatory min rest before the ac can depart. These are the legalities and the fact is that if you cut the 5 hour ground time down to the standard 1.5 hour stop then the crew would only have an 8-hour rest period . This equates to about 6 hours sleep after an out-of-hours report, a 10 hour working day and a 3 hour time zone change before another 10 hour day.
Whilst I agree that this does not sound too onerous for deployed ops in support of war, would it be an acceptable way to run a continous airbridge through busy European airspace? I again make the point that whoever contemplates authorising a reduced rest period needs to think about a tired crew descending through the London FIR and the duty-of-care owed to the other users of that airspace. Would you authorise this schedule and potentially have to stand in a court and explain why the published limits (based on medical advice and industry practice) were disregarded - contributing to a civil aircraft accident? Think about the Railtrack directors. The pain that that this type of scheduling causes to passengers can only be reduced by using more crews - which costs money.
You really are believing in jaundiced sterotypes if you think that Crew Duty/Rest limits are only written and implemented on the basis of the crews having a good time downroute. Yes there are occasions when one elemnet of a slip pattern have a good deal relative to other tasks, or even other crews within the same slip - but that is simply the luck of the draw. It seems that it is only those have no expereince of working any type of long-haul schedule that view such regulations with suspicion. Incidentally, I think this route is done a different way now anyway - going direct to KBL and then crew changing on the way home.
I don't know what you mean about TriStar crews in Bahrain but I'm guessing that because Bahrain is more comfortable than Ali-Al S/PSAB etc then you believe that the missions they flew over Irag during GW2 were somehow less worthy than those flown by folks from crappier places.
PP - As for extending the runway at KBL - terrain aside, the cost would be enormous compared to tech-stopping ac on the way home. Resurfacing Brize cost circa £20m! The last new runway in the UK (Manchester) cost £250m.