Ladies & gents,
To start with - I'm not suggesting ANYTHING against the pilots here - more just asking if this is the logic.
Bonvol raises a 'standards' argument. I find this a tad disturbing, if I am following the correct logic. Is it that management are saying that a S/O has to go across to the 767 fleet as they are not of a high enough standard to be a F/O on 747s? This is a bit scary - they're not good enough to fly 747s, but they're good enough to haul around the poor punters who get lumbered with 767s? Again, I'm not saying ANYTHING against the pilots here - more just asking if this is the logic.
If that's the logic, then wouldn't safety be a bit more enhanced if they were promoted to F/O on an aircraft where they're often flying with relief crew - hence always at least a third set of eyes - rather than just relying on two sets, one of which is possibly (by this logic) not good enough to be on the big pwane??
Frankly one would have thought that whilst there are doubtless some differences in skill amongst individuals - the standards are there for a purpose & anyone unable to meet the minima should not be in the job full stop, whether on bugsmashers, fruitbats or Jumbos.
Or maybe I've got it all wrong? I look forward to being enlightened.
TD67