FTLs UAE

[Engineer]

Looking for info on the flight time limitations currently used in the UAE? Is it similiar to either JAR or FAR etc.

Thanks :ok:

[Dissapointed]

I work here and if you find out, can you please tell me?

[Shake]

EKs FTLs are supposed to be JAR compliant.

However: In Europe FTLs are tempered by unions or at least some representation or agreement that limit the limits. In EK these limits are predominantly used as targets with no consultation or agreement needed from those who actually do the flights. So you can find yourself flying east bound on one trip followed by a west bound the next with minimum rest in between.

A classic trip is the DXB-SIN-MEL. This is flown on consecutive days with 24-16-22 hours 'rest' respectively in between the flights. MEL is a bruiser: arr 0200, wake up call at 1600, so some of the 'rest' is actually spent on the bus. Keep in mind also that these are all 2 crew ops and that several of these can appear in the same months roster with a few east bounds to pad it out thanks to our new & very popular roster system AdOpt.

If this doesn't fit in with EK plans then a waiver will be sought (and got if you sponsor the local yacht or horse racing industry) to do anything you want for as long as you want. DXB-SIN-BNE-AKL is a prime example of such a waiver and has been renewed several times and been in force for over two years.

Added recently was the DXB-BKK-SYD. Couldn't get away with a waiver on this one (not for the want of trying) for the flight deck. The cabin crew are not so fortunate and operate on consecutive days.

EK does however ask crews to fill out a fatigue diary to keep a record of exactly how knackered they really are but these are regarded as a cynical attempt by someone who shold know better to acknowledge the fatigue issue without actually having to do anything about it.

Ask AS if any of this would have been allowed in BA...

Hope this helps, must sleep now.

[Engineer]

Thanks for info the area that is of interest is the use of extending FDP and reducing rest?

Can one assume that EK FTLs are indicative of the UAE authority rules and regs? :ok:

[uplock]

Actually this is an interesting topic however the reality of it all is that whilst there are rules and regulations pertaining to Extended Flight Time periods along with extensive complicated variations which very few understand the company will continue to operate as they wish.

Even if this goes against what the FDP or Extension or variation, for this is reality in EK. Unfortunately you risk bringing unnecessary grief to your life here with EK if you go head to head with the powers that be to high light this.

At the end of the day EK will keep flying, I don’t see the point in raising my furry little head above the trenches to have it shot off.

From a practical point as a crew operating on an extended duty or long pairings I believe that common sense dictates that you plan your rest and sleep periods accordingly especially the controlled rest whilst operating as crew.

The GCAA really do not show that much interest in our FDP or FTL’s as even a very basic audit would highlight the deficiencies that exist on our extensive network.

It would be naive to believe that they are not aware of this.

[Backwater]

Engineer,
Log on to the UK CAA website and look up the CAP371 and the Air Navigation Order. Much of emirates FTL rules are word for word the same as the UK, including rest reduction and FDP extension. There are two variations which are applied to certain flights which allow them to plan schedules outside the normal limits, but these also penalise the company by requiring extra rest post flight etc. An example is ICN-DXB which is a 2 crew looong night flt.
EKs worst crime so far has been the factoring of augmented ops flight hours when applied to 28day and annual limits. It was in force from Aug04-Mar05 b4 the GCAA apparently put a stop to it (there were a large number of fatigue related ASRs which highlighted the folly of it all). The company won in the short term as they could run an ultra long haul/ specific long range operation with less pilots and therefore save money. After factoring was gone we had a couple of months in limbo where pilots had no idea whether they could still factor or not. Many (meaning more than 100, but probably more like 200) guys had more than 900 non-factored hours and were uncomfortable coming to work due to legal exposure. The company didn't give a monkeys.
Finally in Jun05 they produced a 'policy' saying that although factoring was no longer in force, they would factor 'historically', in other words factor the hours from Aug04 - Apr05 when calculating annual hours (they gifted themselves the extra month). Miraculously this meant that no pilots were over the 900 annual limit, although many were over 1000 actual hours. The only problem is that the letter they produced outlining their new policy was a 'notice' not an 'instruction', which doesn't seem a big deal at first glance but the difference is that a 'notice' is not a powerful enough document to modify the Ops Manual. So many (>200 guys) are now flying outside the Ops Manual FDP limits AT THEIR OWN RISK. Everyone I talk to is burnt out.
Why do they need to resort to these devious stunts? If they didn't then a/c would be parked against the fence and mngmt heads would roll. Which is why I think the GCAA are quietly looking the other way on this one. Where does it leave the pilots? Exposed. Exposed to potentially ruinous litigation in the event of the smallest of incidents.
Uplock is right. Stand up for yourself here and you get punished. The best course is to update the cv and leave them to their fate.

[Engineer]

Backwater
That is all the info I needed thanks a lots and also the the rest who replied :ok:

[ruserious]

Backwater you are absolutely spot on with your summary of the problem, a FCN is not a policy document, it is merely a way of informing the pilot body. It has no legal status and a copy does not need to be sent to the GCAA. Which of course makes it easy for them to deny it!

I had a look last week and we still have numerous pilots over the 900 threshold, with one lucky chap being on 995.

[Shake]

The same could be said for the fuel policy: promalgated by FCI, not in the the FOM.

[ruserious]

While the fuel policy was lacking in a proper introduction, i.e education and training it is however OK as an FCI, as an FCI is a policy change mechanism.
In the case of the FTL's a FCN is NOT a policy statement, just a notice (or should be).

[Shake]

See what you mean...

[Backwater]

Here it is, to save me writing it out again.

[donpizmeov]

Also of note is that the request to desend at ECON was a email, and has no status requiring it to be followed either. Think this also applies to the delayed APU start as well. I think these were things that monkey boy was pondering one lunch hour and sent out to relieve some boredom.
Don

[Alphaprot]

monkey boy
I like it :ok: