QF shock horror A330 outrage [Archive]

bonvol

24th Feb 2005, 20:50

It’s hard to get the attention of senior QF pilots on many issues but one has galvanised them into some serious navel gazing. A330 seniority.

If all goes to plan these affected LH Q list pilots will soon find themselves well and truly done over by the 89 opportunists from shorthaul. Blokes from LH with donkeys years in the company may suddenly just find themselves relatively junior to these undesirables. You may even find that the foreign SH blow ins add insult to injury by being senior to some QF LH pilots.

This is altogether a most unsatisfactory possibility and could even be classified as a shock horror outrage.

But what to do ?

Squealing on qrewroom wont do too much. Sadly, the time to sort these blokes out was back many years ago and that opportunity was lost. They are seasoned street fighters now, unconcerned with how they are perceived and will go to any lengths to advance themselves at the expense of others. Just like the good old days!

I suppose you can’t blame them. After all, they are just doing what comes naturally !

blue belly

24th Feb 2005, 21:15

well a sca_ is a sca_ and always will be! watch your backs!

justanoldboy

24th Feb 2005, 21:31

For those of us not on the inside could someone please post some details.

I thought that when Qantas took over (saved) Australian the SH crew effectively went to the bottom of the LH list.

I suppose that QF management would like to see the end of seniority as applied to aircraft endorsements. Would save a lot of money!

Pete Conrad

24th Feb 2005, 21:43

Wait for it bonvol, the Impulse hero's will be the first on the A380!

bonvol

24th Feb 2005, 22:10

justanoldboy,

The problem has arisen because the A330 wasn't around in 1992. It is a new type and originally started doing some SH flying.

Now it is primarily LH the SH blokes want to maintain their bidding status and use the vagaries of the agreement to shoehorn their way to the front of the queue....or as close to it as they can spiv it.

It gets really interesting if the 744 starts to go to the scrapheap. 744 blokes, now sitting fat dumb and happy that they have finally "made it" may find themselves assigned to the A330. Changing to a bus at this stage of career may not be a real attractive proposition to some. Being junior to an opportunist would make it very unpalatable indeed! Salt to the wound so to speak.

If the SH proposal to nuke the LH blokes gets up then it could get very frosty in the crewroom. Not that it would worry them.

Romeo Tango Alpha

24th Feb 2005, 23:03

History ALWAYS repeats. ALWAYS. As Blue Belly so eloquently said, but mate, add the B. No point calling them sca. Scat maybe, but not sca :p

I once heard someone quip that scab actually was an anogram: Self-Concerned Abdicating Bastard. Kinda rings true.

The time to stop the rot was indeed "back then", but unfortunately the "support" from Qantas at the time (89 and immediately there after) was NOT there, except for a distinct few.

I cannot give any advice with what to do with undesireable pond scum like these - they don't care, and never will, so long as they can have their cake, and eat it as well. They believe they are OWED it because of their loyalty to their airline, especially during the "hard times" of 89 and beyond. Anyone got a tissue? Or a real small violin?

I think it is time that Qantas MAINLINE had the gumption to dig the heals in, and force the frog crap back to the bottom of the cesspool.

Qantas mainline, you have run out of toilet paper, and now you WILL have **** on your hands. Just make sure to wipe it all off, and flush. I am afraid you are S.O.O.L!

Flying Ninja

25th Feb 2005, 00:00

Gee, there was another airline involved in 89 ???

From what I have read on this site, surely only Ansett pilots were involved. Hasn't been any mention of Australian Airlines for years, .......until now. Why ?
Aaahhh!!! It now effects those precious gods of aviation QF.
The "creme de la creme" of aviation ,those who were "hollier than thou" in 89 and supposedly stayed out of it. For the good, or because they saw it as more beneficial to them? The chickens have come home to roost!
What ever is happening in your company stems from the character of just about every pilot , both sides of 89 and QF. They all care about #1 first.
You precious dears are only concerned about missing out on something, not what is right( and I don't care who is right). Welcome to the real word.
There is no divine right just because you have sat on your fat ar-e for years with the minimum input and trying to milk the maximum salary. Most were handed a career , developed an attitude of arrogance and a belief that they are above all others. Here is where you find out the truth.
If you don't like what is happening, vote with your feet!
Sorry, didn't mean to make your choke on your tea " commander". Upset the applecart, what?
Shock Horror, what?
Grow up and stop blaming others for what you and your union has created.

king oath

25th Feb 2005, 00:19

Oh boy. The Q pilots are squealing like stuck pigs.

For those not in on the situation, back when Qf "bought" Australian for a bargain price off the Gummint of the day they had to strike a deal to work out seniority for the 2 groups.

One rocket scientist manager by the initials WK and a mate worked out a deal over a dinner table one night. Create 2 groups. A pilots got domestic Q pilots got international to simplify it. Any future type not yet in service would be shared as necessary between the 2 groups fairly. As usual the Q blokes want the lot and management are no doubt are happy with that. Very cosy.

Unfortunately for them an independant arbitrator is looking at the original agreement to work out who gets what. The original agreement is coming under real scrutiny for the first time.

The Q people are getting nasty as shown above indicating that they are sh*tting themselves.

Watch this space ladies and gentlemen.

Wizofoz

25th Feb 2005, 00:27

QF Longhaul pilots did VERY well out of the merger and the subsequent intergration deal. The 767 stayed a 100% LH aircraft, even though many were added to the fleet PURELY to cover the domestic network, and replace the shorthaul A300.

Suprise Suprise, a new type might actually allow the short haul guys (Many of whom took no part in the '89 dispute) to regain some lost ground, and out come the sky-gods bleating that there cosy existences are threatend, and of course bandying the "S" word.

Dear god, a QF Long Haul (Tug forelock) pilot junior to a shouthaul (PHTOI!!) guy! What is the world coming to!!

surfside6

25th Feb 2005, 00:32

So the QF Gods don't only hate Cabin Crew but other pilots as well.How benevolent of them to spread it around.Looks as though they are about to get their comeuppance .Ho Ho Chuckle chuckle.

Kaptin M

25th Feb 2005, 00:43

ss6, I am not a QANTAS pilot, but I find some of your posts - such as the one above - bitchy.
You've got a BIG chip on your shoulders......your slip is showing, and your rouge is smudged :eek:
But that aside, ALL of you QF'ers are in the same boat, and I would have thought that with Dixon drilling as many holes into it, from the outside, as he can, he wouldn't need any assistance from the likes of [U]you[/b] on the inside!!

The_Cutest_of_Borg

25th Feb 2005, 00:47

I have asked this question many times on PPrune and NEVER received a reply to it. Well let it never be said that I am not persistent.

Q. Given that the '89 dispute involved a completely separate union to AIPA, and that AIPA was not in dispute with Qantas at the time, what precise level of support did AFAP members expect and not get?

This is a serious question and I would like a serious reply.

schnauzer

25th Feb 2005, 01:27

Well, I must be a "chickensh1t little darling" (a qrewroom joke - thanks Bill - you really are hilarious!) because I joined after '92.

The thing that worries me most about this little dispute - and I call it little because it doesn't involve a huge number of people - is that AIPA's focus is completely lost on the most important thing right now.

Extinction.

QF Pilots out there? For farks sake, STOP squabbling over some scraps and do something to ensure that we as a group survive. Because the company is laughing their collective @rses off at us at the moment, whilst screwing us some more. What good is winning this battle if we lose the big one?

My union dues are going towards fighting a battle which will deliver a phyrric victory, whichever way it goes. It disgusts me. Grow up all of you. Bonvol, I hoped for more from you my friend.

Bill? Go away and retire. You are a mean, nasty, ill spirited, tyrannical, lonely old fool who needs to spend the rest of your days in a bowls club.

Sunfish

25th Feb 2005, 01:54

Schnauzer has it right in my opinion, you are just getting divided and ruled again....

ur2

25th Feb 2005, 02:41

Just heard, Jetstar pilots will be able to bid onto A330,s retaining current status. ie Capt. ??????? :confused:

schnauzer

25th Feb 2005, 04:22

There's always one, isn't there.:ouch: :ooh: :hmm:

Capt Stabbin

25th Feb 2005, 04:24

ur2, urdreamin'.

Ex FSO GRIFFO

25th Feb 2005, 11:25

G'day Ladies and Laddies,..

IT IS a VERY OLD AXIOM...United you stand, divided you are / will be "LIKE THE CHRISTMAS TURKEY"!!!!!

Please take a leaf from an 'old book', sit down for a minute or two, and really THINK about where you go from here....for the combined good of ALL of you.

In no way do I wish to sound 'patronising in any way', but I do have some experience in industrial matters v management.

My first suggestion would be for someone there to do a 'quiet' survey of aircrew of all affected 'groups' (LH/SH etc) to ascertain just who / how many might be willing to come to some 'formal' arrangement, for the combined good of all of you.

In the era of which I speak, the motto was 'as much as possible for as many as possible', and, it worked.

Meet 'privately' at the Coogee Bay or where-ever, to formulate a strategy of aircrew unity if this at all possible...

Try to formulate an 'agreement' between yourselves, to present an arrangement based on CONSULTATION between Aircrew (combined groups in UNITY) and CONSULTATION with the management group.

THEY most certainly, WILL be organised, by direction from the 'TOP', with each successive rung of the ladder 'down' looking UP, after his/her own interests for their his/her own self preservation.
('Yes men' is the term I believe...)

If you can get this far you are half way home......

Then, when you have the complete and undivided attention of the management group, you will have Consultation / Negotiation..

(Reminds me of the old joke about 'What do you have, if you have a moth ball in the left hand and another in the right hand....?')

Too difficult?

Sorry to sound out the obvious, but the -alternates- look 'crapped in'.

ps Definition of 'CONSULTATION' as described by COMMISSIONER G. SMITH....

"In relation to the concept of consultation I wish to make it clear that this involves more than a mere exchange of information.
For consultation to be effective the participants must be contributing to the decision-making process not only in appearance, but in fact."
Commissioner G. Smith Melbourne, 12 March 1991.
The reference can be supplied on request.

May you be able to utilise this legal definition to its fullest extent.
Cheers and good luck.

:ok: :ok: :ok:

Kamelf Hucker

25th Feb 2005, 11:31

Thanks sunfish for that essential, intelligent and timely gem of advice.

I think it's time for a pilots-only forum so things like this A330 topic and other similar can be discussed by those concerned ONLY without constant butting-in by the wannabes or morons.

matca

25th Feb 2005, 12:22

Then nobody would know you are a qantas pilot.

How do you know if there's a qantas pilot at a party? Don't worry he'll tell you.

Flying Ninja

25th Feb 2005, 15:55

Ain't that the truth!!!!

numbskull

28th Feb 2005, 20:55

All the a330 outrage may just be a waste of time. Rumour has it that QF will announce an order for 777's sometime in May to replace 747-300, A330's and 6 x 744.

Capt Stabbin

28th Feb 2005, 22:32

If a 777 order is announced it more than likely won't be for at least another six months.

Captain Can't

28th Feb 2005, 23:22

Well, hey.
Sure, a 777 (that everyone has been predicting for years now) order would be great, and say it meant the end of the 330 fleet, what would happen to the relative order of pilots scuffle going on now? surely it wouldn't be transferred to the 777 - although I'm sure there's some a listers who think it's just another domestic a/c :hmm: so, where would they go? Just put em back on the maggot?? hmmm :suspect:

swh

1st Mar 2005, 00:32

If QF does go for the 777, it will be the 767/743/744 fleets that will reduce, a 777-300ER is longer than a 744, carries about 30 seats less for 40% less cost.

Dont think the 330 will go anywhere, espically with a rumoured embargo by the manufacturer of having pilots flying the 380 without airbus experience. Wonder how that will go down with capts at the top of the list on the 744 being bypassed for the higher paid 380 slots as they have no airbus experience.

:ok:

Captain Can't

1st Mar 2005, 00:50

swh said;
embargo by the manufacturer
surely this would involve some hefty anti-trust litigation! after all, it's just another a/c!

:yuk:

.... and before someone points it out for me, I\'m no lawyer, so yes, i\'m probably not spot on with my legal diagnosis there. out.

swh

1st Mar 2005, 09:24

Capt,

Well sorry to dampen ya anti-trust argument its really up to the manufacturer, insurance companies, regulatorty authorities, and the owners to set minimum pilot requirements, not the courts.

Anti-trust would imply that there is some technology in the aircraft that forces you to buy airbus. Airbus are not saying that, they are saying they dont want their new baby to crash due to inexperienced crew, they want people who are Airbus experienced, i.e. already experienced with airbus flight modes, check lists (or lack of them), ecam, autopilot and autothrust modes, to an pilot who is already airbus experienced it would be "just another airbus" to them.

The mobs that the 787 are being sold to, I hope they have a good autopilot on that baby.

Anyways, they tell me any decision on a 777 is a while away, got all the commercial/marketing/engineering people trying to exploit the A380, nothing novel about a 777 for the punters, every man and his dog has them, it looks like a 767 to most people at the gate.

The 744 is not going anywhere for a while, so I guess many will retire on the queen of the skies, not the king.

:ok:

OBNO

1st Mar 2005, 10:25

B744 - it's a dying fleet!!

MarkD

1st Mar 2005, 13:39

Restricting A380 to Airbus crew only would mean no sales to a certain Big Airline, wouldn't it?

If BA start leasing a couple of 330s we'll know why :D Otherwise - roll on 747-500!

Presume Boeing didn't make any such stipulation for 747 when it came out?

Taildragger67

1st Mar 2005, 13:51

MarkD,

BA have a large fleet of A320 family.

If they got really interested, they might aso be able to swing a combo 330/340 deal with the 380s a la a certain southern carrier, to replace their increasingly long-in-the-tooth 763s.

MarkD

1st Mar 2005, 16:46

TD67 - if any airbus will do (or at least sidestick buses) then BA should be right as you say.

numbskull

1st Mar 2005, 18:48

The word in engineering is that the A330's aren't tough eneough. They can't handle domestic sectors in particular and basically just break down more often.

As for Airbus requiring a 330 rating before being allowed to drive a 380, I can't imagine that would stop them selling one to Qantas if they offloaded the 330's. They can't be that hard to fly!! You guys are pretty clever, I'm sure you'd work it out!!

alidad

2nd Mar 2005, 12:12

Yep- they will be ofloaded to J* by end of 2007.

swh

3rd Mar 2005, 11:11

Mark ...

"Restricting A380 to Airbus crew only would mean no sales to a certain Big Airline, wouldn't it?"

From the little I know of Big Airways, thought they had about 30 airbuses and 100 on order.

:ok:

trousersnake

3rd Mar 2005, 23:22

:mad:

Woomera

scramjet77

4th Mar 2005, 00:16

This will be interesting to watch!

Having received so much "advice" from the "big end" of town, I wonder if they will take a dose of their own medecine.

We watch and wait with interest.

MarkD

4th Mar 2005, 00:27

swh

As earlier noted - I thought it meant "Big Airbus" :D :D

18-Wheeler

4th Mar 2005, 02:00

The word in engineering is that the A330's aren't tough eneough. They can't handle domestic sectors in particular and basically just break down more often.

Imagine my surprise ...

rockarpee

4th Mar 2005, 09:37

cutest of borg, obviously a VERY difficult question to answer, page 3 now and no response, its just easier to crap on about QF wackers!!!!!!Hang on, I am one ......DOH!!!!!!!!!

OhForSure

5th Mar 2005, 10:38

With Airbus being as desperate as they are to pedal A380s - I highly doubt they'd have any problems selling to A/Ls not operating FBW Airbuses. Just look at the 380 sale to SQ... given they do have a pretty puny 345 pilot pool, and rumur has it they are on the way out too - they are a Boeing company for sure. Regardless, the A345/346 is still on the cards for QF. So where will QF turn? To CCQ, and fly chiefly Buses LH? Or run higher quality, stronger a/c that may cost more to train crews on?

Wait... what was the original question again?

swh

5th Mar 2005, 10:54

OhForSure,

SQ have a extensive number of pilots with previous Airbus FBW experience, at the moment as you suggested they do operate the A345, you seem to forget the A319/320 pilot pool also.

Lots of pilots have started with SQ in Silkair on the A319/320 and progressed to 744/777. Some are going back from 777 to A319/320, there is very little pay differance in SQ between a captain on any fleet.

Dont know if the A345 will get removed, they have said no to Boeing for the 777-200ER, they want to dump all their 777-200's and replace them with 300's

:ok:

OhForSure

6th Mar 2005, 01:22

swh: My appollogies, you are correct... I had forgotten about the SilkAir situation. Although I can say that I've read and heard in a few places that SQ management have already told 345 pilots to expect a switch to 772LRs... don't remember where I read that now, but maybe somebody from SQ can verify???

swh

6th Mar 2005, 08:30

OhForSure,

My sources are telling me all 777-200's will go, and they dont want the 777-200ER as its another aircraft they would need to gear up for.

The mainline pax fleet is going 773, A345, A380 thats it. The 744 due to moved to cargo by 2008.

Forgot to mention before the piot pool they had inhouse for the old A340s, think they had 12 of them at one stage.

:ok:

BlueEagle

6th Mar 2005, 10:04

I'm told that the first twelve A380 captains at SQ will come from the A345 fleet.

Trashed Aviator

7th Mar 2005, 04:48

A380 latest rumour is Direct entry crews and a new company called Qantas ULH (ultra long Haul) created .
Ample supply from SQ and EK as time goes , Dixon cannot compete with the competition , the unions have him nailed.
Its the only way to bust them legally .
Also some 744 going for freight conversion .....:sad:

king oath

7th Mar 2005, 06:50

Having to fly another Airbus before being trusted with an A380 sounds like a wank extraordinaire.

What happened when the Concorde came along? Did you need time in an SR71 or similar? Maybe a bit of space shuttle time would impress the bejeezus out of them.

They all fly the same. It ain't rocket science boys and girls.

The_Cutest_of_Borg

7th Mar 2005, 06:52

...They don't actually....

Taildragger67

7th Mar 2005, 09:07

Aaaaactually...

Aren't there a couple of A380 customers who don't have any other Airbus types currently in their fleets and none on order?

In particular, I'm thinking of FedEx and UPS... sure, both have only ordered freighter A380s but surely they (Airbus) would still want to make sure that none were mis-handled...

And also, can Airbus be sure that the leasing company-ordered aircraft won't go to non-Airbus operators?

Zapatas Blood

7th Mar 2005, 11:51

"The word in engineering is that the A330's aren't tough eneough. They can't handle domestic sectors in particular and basically just break down more often."

What BS.

swh

7th Mar 2005, 12:42

Taildragger67,

Fedex currently operates 103 airbus aircraft, with 10 A380 orders.

UPS has ordered 90 Airbus aircraft, 42 of them are in service. No A380 orders from UPS are on the books.

ILFC have ordered 10 A380 aircraft. ILFC have ordered 586 airbus aircraft, of which 349 have been delivered.

Other A380 orders :
Air France 10xA380, 168 airbus aircraft in service
Emirates 43xA380 , 112 total airbuses orders, 43 in service
Etihad Airways, 4xA380, 24 total airbuses orders, 6 in service
Korean Air Lines, 5xA380, 56 total airbuses orders, 29 in service
Lufthansa, 15xA380, 203 total airbus orders, 138 in service
Penerbangan Malaysia Berhad (MAS), 6xA380, 14 total airbus orders, 16 in service
QANTAS Airways, 12xA380, 26 total airbus orders, 21 in service
Qatar Airways (inc. Amiri Flight), 2xA380, 50 total airbus orders, 45 in service
Singapore Airlines, 10xA380, 79 total airbus orders, 19 in service
Thai Airways International, 6xA380, 63 total airbus orders, 33 in service
Virgin Atlantic Airways, 6xA380, 33 total airbus orders, 18 in service

:ok:

king oath :

I agree an aeroplane is an aeroplane, however with the vast non standard way 744 crews operate in QF, its no wonder they are delayed a lot. It was only after the introduction of the Airbus aircraft into the system that QF actually had a perscribed engine failure after takeoff procedure. With Airbus, everything you need to know, flows, checklists, SOP, is all in the FCOM. Crew from one Airbus can go to another and expect the same standard stuff. Boring as hell, but very predictable.

End result, crew training and turn arounds on airbus aircraft tend to be quicker as the PF/PNF roles are very defined. No need to mind read what this captain would like to see today.

The_Cutest_of_Borg

7th Mar 2005, 21:03

agree an aeroplane is an aeroplane, however with the vast non standard way 744 crews operate in QF, its no wonder they are delayed a lot. It was only after the introduction of the Airbus aircraft into the system that QF actually had a perscribed engine failure after takeoff procedure.

Well there we have it folks.. the new contender for the greatest load of codswallop ever posted on Pprune...!!!! All hail SWH... :yuk: :yuk: :yuk:

swh

8th Mar 2005, 01:40

Borg,

My apologies for hitting a raw nerve...so tell me how exactly will two different 744 skippers want an FMC programmed for departure? and what will that skipper want to see ?

As for the engine failure procedure, flight ops put it to the vote of the pilot body three options of what should be included in the FAM in terms of the engine failure after takeoff drill, and gave a lead in period for the drill, you know the one where the PF and PNF will confirm things these days.

What bit of this is codswallop ?

:*