Jed,
Sorry I should have been more specific. I meant to say FRA/PEK/HKG. I am simply trying to show that their interpretation is flawed, because it would allow 2 crew to fly as far West or East as possible without any time zone limitation. They keep reminding me that according to the definition of ULR, it has to meet condition A (
requiring three or more pilots)
AND condition B (
involving a time difference of 6 hours or more) to be deemed as a ULR flight. Not A or B. Fine! I am not arguing the English language here! My point is that ULR wasn't defined a decade ago with the intent to make an odd ball ORD/AMS sector legal. It was defined this way purely to differentiate between 3 crew Normal Ops to that of 3 crew ULR Ops period. I still say 6 time zone changes alone has always defined ULR ops.
If you believe in the flawed interpretation then you must also accept that so long as the crew compliment is kept to the minimum of 2, then the "
involving a time difference of 6 hours or more" is not a factor, in which case it would be quite legal to roster 2 crew to fly FRA/PEK/HKG or HKG/CTS/ANC, this is but only two examples. I've forgotten what the scheduled sector length for our old Istanbul flight was, but if it was under nine hours it could have been crewed by only 2 pilots, but it never was!
Do the maths for FRA/HKG via PEK for 2 acclimatised flight crew or HKG/ANC via CTS. You will find that it is quite doable, albeit marginally, and this is what makes it a farce if you believe in the flawed interpretation.
If you start interacting section 15 and section 16 together to determine if a flight is ULR or not, then you are not using the AFTL the way it was constructed.
By current AFTL definition, and correct interpretation of its intent, the ORD/AMS is being crewed illegally, unles they have received some sort of dispensation that we are not aware of.
Rookie,
Do not worry there will be no chance of doing 2 crew HKG/CTS/ANC based on the current AFTL, because the correct interpretation does not allow it.
