Ron & Edna Johns
9th Sep 2005, 00:29
Hmmmmmm, this (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16536524%255E23349,00.html) from The Australian today:
Regulator's redefinition makes Jetstar jumpy
Steve Creedy
September 09, 2005
JETSTAR is worried that proposals by the aviation regulator to change the way a pilot's work is defined may force it to employ more flight crew and undermine moves to slash costs.
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority is working on a new definition of what constitutes flight deck duty times after it was asked to clarify the issue by the International Federation of Air Line Pilots. CASA initially told the federation that it considered flight deck duty to start when a pilot first entered the cockpit.
However, a spokesman said the authority subsequently discovered that another definition, which only counted airborne time, had been introduced in 1994. It also found at least one airline was using block time, the time between leaving a departure gate and reaching the arrivals gate at the other end of a trip. How the work is defined is important, because CASA imposes limits on the number of hours of flight duty pilots can work each day.
The CASA spokesman said the authority was now reviewing the issue and would get a legal ruling on it. "We'll then talk to the airlines about the definition we intend to adopt and, when everyone's happy, we'll put that into the books and that will void any other definitions," he said.
But the changes could require Jetstar to use two crews on routes where it currently uses just one. Jetstar spokesman Simon Westaway said a change in the definition would clearly affect the way the airline worked.
"We do fly the aircraft for periods of time longer than our parent company, and the way our schedule is driven and the way we have our crew bases, we seek to position crew bases in a minimum number of ports." He said Jetstar had referred the issue to its parent company.
Qantas executives are understood to have visited Canberra this week to lobby against any change. "We'll continue to liaise with CASA," said Qantas chief pilot Chris Manning.
A Virgin Blue spokeswoman said the airline had an approved flight duty time scheme which already included sign-on and all associated pre-flight duties.
Anyone on top of what this is all about? The use of the the term "flight duty" is confusing - as if it's the same thing. But we know it's not. I take it what's being considered here is the definition of "flight time" (as opposed to "duty time"). Does "flight time" commence from pushback or from entry to the flight-deck? Or is the "flight time" limit a misnomer - that it was intended a limit called "flight deck duty" exist, commencing from entry to the flight deck?
If that's what's being reviewed here then there are wider implications for QF than just ol' Jet*. Think about all the two-pilot ops to/from Asia that push the 8hr flight-time limit. And have concessions to go beyond.....
Regulator's redefinition makes Jetstar jumpy
Steve Creedy
September 09, 2005
JETSTAR is worried that proposals by the aviation regulator to change the way a pilot's work is defined may force it to employ more flight crew and undermine moves to slash costs.
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority is working on a new definition of what constitutes flight deck duty times after it was asked to clarify the issue by the International Federation of Air Line Pilots. CASA initially told the federation that it considered flight deck duty to start when a pilot first entered the cockpit.
However, a spokesman said the authority subsequently discovered that another definition, which only counted airborne time, had been introduced in 1994. It also found at least one airline was using block time, the time between leaving a departure gate and reaching the arrivals gate at the other end of a trip. How the work is defined is important, because CASA imposes limits on the number of hours of flight duty pilots can work each day.
The CASA spokesman said the authority was now reviewing the issue and would get a legal ruling on it. "We'll then talk to the airlines about the definition we intend to adopt and, when everyone's happy, we'll put that into the books and that will void any other definitions," he said.
But the changes could require Jetstar to use two crews on routes where it currently uses just one. Jetstar spokesman Simon Westaway said a change in the definition would clearly affect the way the airline worked.
"We do fly the aircraft for periods of time longer than our parent company, and the way our schedule is driven and the way we have our crew bases, we seek to position crew bases in a minimum number of ports." He said Jetstar had referred the issue to its parent company.
Qantas executives are understood to have visited Canberra this week to lobby against any change. "We'll continue to liaise with CASA," said Qantas chief pilot Chris Manning.
A Virgin Blue spokeswoman said the airline had an approved flight duty time scheme which already included sign-on and all associated pre-flight duties.
Anyone on top of what this is all about? The use of the the term "flight duty" is confusing - as if it's the same thing. But we know it's not. I take it what's being considered here is the definition of "flight time" (as opposed to "duty time"). Does "flight time" commence from pushback or from entry to the flight-deck? Or is the "flight time" limit a misnomer - that it was intended a limit called "flight deck duty" exist, commencing from entry to the flight deck?
If that's what's being reviewed here then there are wider implications for QF than just ol' Jet*. Think about all the two-pilot ops to/from Asia that push the 8hr flight-time limit. And have concessions to go beyond.....