Time to Passenger Command - 17 Yrs

[Millstream]

Most folk aspire to a Passenger Command.

(For those unaware, CX will offer you a Freighter Command, but the pay and conditions are so poor that as a new joiner you can achieve this with less than 2 yrs experience, if you can get through the course).

How long to a passenger command then?
CX have never acheved more than about 100 commands a year. Of these, about 20 are on the freighter, leaving 80 Pax Commands Per Year.

There are just shy of 1400 pilots that are not captains, so as a new joiner, this is the number of commands that need to take place before you get your shot at a pax command. 1400@80 per year comes in at:

17 years to a CX Passenger Command :sad:

This is conservative, for sure - perhaps CX will manage to increase the rate of command training. Bear in mind also that an increase in Retirement Age is around the corner which will increase time to command.

Milly

[Aussie]

On recent posts, guys from CX have commented that the current time to command is around the 10yr mark... :ok:


Aussie

[Millstream]

True, but is that useful information for a new joiner?

In fact if you want a Freighter Command, 18 months will do it.

As for passenger commands, granted, 10 years is accurate, for those achieving it today having joined 10 years ago.

The numbers would suggest significantly longer for someone joining today.

If you are thinking of joining today, I would assume closer to 17 years to a pax command.

Milly

[BusyB]

Strange mixture of misleading interpretations. Historically CX may have only given 100 commands a year but that was all that was required. Now they require more and are attempting to ramp it up (with varying success) so I reall feel that there is very little truth in your prediction using current info.:rolleyes:

[Millstream]

Hi Busy B

Fair point: They will train the Captains they need.
What might that mean?

Back in 1995, there were perhaps 500(?) ahead of a new joiner - today there are 1400.

If the airline grows from 100 to 250 A/C in 10 years, then that would require 1000 more Captains. (Currently 750 Captains) - add 400 retirements to give the 1400 required to sustain 10 years to command.

What are the chances of 150 new aircraft and averaging 140 commands a year for the next 10 years? :eek: Fairly slim I would suggest.

Easy to double in size starting from 40 A/C. Not so, starting from 100 A/C.

Milly

[sizematters]

actually the current business plan is to double the size of the airline in the next 5 years.....................


you do the math

[jtr]

So that would be 20 a/c a year for the next 5 years.

When should we expect the order announcement sizematters? :confused:

[Numero Crunchero]

millstream,
I think you are misusing numbers....and I should know;-)

There are just over 1300 FOs and SOs. With asian contagion followed by SARS etc the recent expansion rate has been slower than what is planned in future. With no expansion we still need almost 60CNs a year just for retirements. We are getting ULR aircraft and we all know that the crewing requirements are far higher than for 330s and regional 777s. So it isn't as simple as just looking at how many aircraft.

Over the next 10years it would be close to 600 retirements(just a guesstimate). So a new joiner would need expansion of 700 commands. Initially, it wouldn't affect the new joiner whether guys take commands on freighters or Pax fleet UNTIL guys junior to him start taking them. Also, and I can't prove this with numbers, anecdotally, freigther pilots are generally older on joining than pax fleet guys so command rate might increase in a few years with additional freighter pilot retirements.

As the airline gets bigger the retirment rate will also increase, albeit with a huge time lag. I know that it is almost 60 a year for the next 6-7 years but I haven't looked beyond.

RA60 would most definitely cost 2-4years on CN time...but then again, I keep reading CX propaganda that tells me that RA60 will speed up commands....not sure who is right on this one;-)

I think CX has planned in excess of 120commands this year. If we are say double the size in a decade, and still exanding at around the same %, we would need double the number of CNs...maybe 240 a year.

My point Millstream is that neither you or I know what Command time will be for a new joiner. I think your outlook is misrepresentative, but thats just my opinion. I think 10years is a good number to use as it is far enough away that it probably wont make a hell of a lot of difference to a new joiner than say 8 years of 12 years. I was told 6-7....but then they didn't know they were going to introduce ASL when I joined...that action cost me 2-3years.

Ask me again in 2017 and I will tell you who was right;-)

[SNS3Guppy]

Doubtless I'll get flamed by one of the cxregret personalities, but freighter captain sounds pretty good to me.

[act700]

10 years, so what.

Even 17 years; millstream, do you have any idea how long it takes at a major in the US?

If it's quick command you want, go to the LCCs.

I know guys who are F/Os after 7-8 years +, at a REGIONAL!!!

[Numero Crunchero]

And another thing....
Back in 2000/2001 I had to work out for the AOA the financial effects of freighter deferment pay. If you are eligible to transfer back onto pax fleet but cx chooses to leave you on the base due manning requirements, then CX would top up your salary to HKG rates. Sort of similar to bypass pay.

Anyway, in the course of these calculations I worked out something very interesting. If you take Freighter FO, then transfer across after (3 or 4?) X years to pax FO and then move across to freighter command about 3 or 4 years before you would have got pax command, you will be financially better off than a colleague that stayed hkg based through SO/FO/CN. You do take a short term pay cut, but the fact that you are always 3 or 4 increments ahead of your pax colleagues is where you end up better financially. Obviously this ignores your basing/lifestyle requirements;-)

Guppy...the quicker you get your command, the less ERAS reports they will have on you;-)

[hog tied]

That works well in a perfect world, but how many Americans have passed the upgrade on the freighter? I can tell you the number is infintesimally small compared to the number of Americans who have joined under the DEFO North American scheme!

[iLuvPX]

There is only ONE American pilot that joined as a DEFO and passed the upgrade to freighter captain, but he went passenger FO for a while before trying (greater than 3 years with CX).

Many have tried, but none have yet been successful. There has definitely been no American that upgraded from freighter DEFO to captain.

Pxing

[hog tied]

.... about what I thought..... hey Elroy or any other C&T'r, or even management types out there.... I challenge you: How many Americans have gone from DEFO to freighter captain? EVER? There is a big problem here.... What is it?!!

There seems to be this idea out there to prospective new joiners that they have some wonderful opportunity out there to quick widebody command, but guess again: the odds of an early selection to ATTEMPT a command course are very low (I bet 1 in 20 DEFO's would be conservative). Now how many of those have passed?..... crickets chirping......

[iLuvPX]

The same checkers will also tell you...with a straight face..that there is no prejudice against Americans either....

The facts speak for themselves...

[cpdude]

There is only ONE American pilot that joined as a DEFO and passed the upgrade to freighter captain, but he went passenger FO for a while before trying (greater than 3 years with CX).
Many have tried, but none have yet been successful. There has definitely been no American that upgraded from freighter DEFO to captain.

There have been a few Canadians...are they better?:oh: :E :ok:

[The Messiah]

17 years is not right, because 10-15% fail the course and with the expansion comes extra training capacity, an extra sim etc. It is 10 yrs right now in fact just under and has been 10 yrs for the last 5 yrs so??????

[iLuvPX]

There have been a few Canadians...are they better?


Yeah must be, i heard our(Canadian) air force produces some of the best conscientious objector commanders in the world...second to france :}

[rjmore]

I wonder where that attitude comes from, considering that the company was founded by an American.....how soon some forget history.

[propdog]

10 years, so what.
Even 17 years; millstream, do you have any idea how long it takes at a major in the US?
If it's quick command you want, go to the LCCs.
I know guys who are F/Os after 7-8 years +, at a REGIONAL!!!
Even though US airline industry has a lot of issues, the general upgrade time is not that long. Continental upgrade is currently running 6-7 years for EWR base. FedEx and UPS MD-11 upgrade is right at 5 years for the ANC base. Most regionals are upgrading at the 2 year mark except very few (including American Eagle).
In American, Delta, North West etc the upgrade time is really long. With the projected hiring, upgrade time in all majors in the US is estimated to come down.
However, if there is another major terrorist attack :mad: in the US, this is all obsolete...we will be doing good to stay out of the furlough list

[druglord]

There is only ONE American pilot that joined as a DEFO and passed the upgrade to freighter captain, but he went passenger FO for a while before trying (greater than 3 years with CX).

Is this really true? What's the reason? Are there any americans on here that can give some feedback? Does someone in the training dept have a chip on their shoulder against yanks? I know of a guy that's turned down the job, they called him back and he turned them down again for this very reason. I thought it was vicious rumour since CX seems to be an HR department dream of racial diversity, but now it's got me thinking.

[iLuvPX]

If any of you have an interview lined up, ask CX how many US pilots have attempted the command course, then ask how many have made it to captain...zero.

If anyone knows of a yank that has upgraded from freighter DEFO straight to captain please correct me.

[Cpt. Underpants]

I know of at least two on the B744. I was on course (Annual Cabin Safety) with one last year (he's now a trainer on the B74F) and personally know one who retired a year or two back - actually, he left early.

Bzzzt. Try again.

CX are NOT anti-American. Some of our colonial just brethen have difficulty "adjusting" IMHO. No-one said it would be easy.

[Millstream]

Hi NC

I agree - a lot of crystal ball stuff. A couple of thoughts though - and I am not saying they illuminate the situation.

For a while in the 80s/90s, three years to command looked like the norm............
120 Commands this year includes a fair chunk of feighter commands. Pax Commands are what matters.
I agree that we are going to have to push 240 commands per year from time to time. Seems a heluva lot!
Yes, airframe numbers are not the end - you need lots of bodies for ULR - but you do need some airframes and I do not see the orders. Check out page 10: http://downloads.cathaypacific.com/cx/investor/2006_Annual_Results_EN.pdf
and don't forget to take into account returned aircraft.
As jtr says - where are the orders :confused:Milly

[Numero Crunchero]

How many yanks did we have 10 years ago? I know we have been recruiting on the freighter side for a while but on the pax fleet it has been minimal. I only know one american and he passed his 777 command last year.

My point is that we really haven't had that many amercians for long enough to state with any surity the alleged anti us bias. I accept that some have failed on the freighter command course but isn't that true of all nationalitys? I know of a few aussie guys that failed their freigther command.

I will say though that the US aviation culture is quite discordant with the traditional CX culture. Maybe that has caused the anti american perception.

Many years ago I think CX pilots were predominantly english. Now there seems to be a more eclectic range but predominately aussie/kiwi. Ten years from now it might be just as many yanks as aussies as I believe CX plan to recruit ever increasing numbers from the states. My point is the airline culture will change with the predominance of other nationality densities.

To the americans out there...unless someone has empirical proof of this alleged bias, I would take it simply as a PPRUNE whinge!

[hog tied]

Underpants,

Nice try, but while the fellow you refer to might have a US passport, his accent and birth are decidedly not yank.... unless Brit accents develop in Alabama. He also was not a DEFO in the way CX is hiring now, had spent many years there and had a fair amount of time on the pax fleet to boot.

As for the "guy" who left early a few years back... don't know who that might be (or why!) but I can think of a few captains who were "helped" to leave early.

My point still stands... the chance for the elusive freighter command early from the ranks of the DEFO's is about as slim as it gets, almost not worth mentioning.

Numero cruncher, the empirical evidence is pretty clear: look at how many yanks are sitting in the right seat (plenty). How many have successfully clawed their way to the left? I'm still waiting for the numbers! Purely discrimination? Probably not, they eat their own young here too.

BZZT...try again!

[Numero Crunchero]

hoggie
if we look at demographics I can paint a very distorted picture.
Looking at the left seat, the majority are poms, aussies, canucks, kiwis and yarpies. Looking at the right seat, I would say aussies, poms, kiwis, canucks, locals, yanks and euros. What does this prove? It proves that from 25-10years ago they recruited more poms, less aussies/kiwis/canucks/yarpies and no yanks or euros. So what!

You seem to imply that people that have done significantly less than 10 years that try to do a command end up failing because they are yanks?

The command failure rate for the freighter is much higher than for pax fleet I believe. Why? Reasons suggested to me by friends on that fleet are the lack of currency, lack of exposure to our so special 'culture' here are probably the main culprits. I think the american culture is perceived to be very laid back when it comes to aviation. It must be a culture shock to go from 2 or 3 years in the right seat of a very relaxed fleet, flying the same destinations mostly ULR(?) to suddenly be thrown into the british sourced command course. I suggest it isn't a racial issue so much as a cultural issue.

I know, I can hear you saying po tay toes, po tar toes etc. I think it just takes more than a couple of years for the guys to get used to the culture here. And like I said, I have known plenty of people to have come off pax fleet who have been here 4-7years fail their freighter command...and they are aussies, poms etc

I have heard that some guys are thinking of sueing for antidiscrimination. I hope they do...then maybe we can find out for sure. But I have to say that apart from the infamous swire bottler (with his penchant hatred of polite hockey players) I haven't ever heard any racial discrimination.

If any group is to feel aggrieved it is the local pilots. But again, cultural differences...they just take, outspoken yanks/aussies etc kick up a storm.

[thepotato232]

Based on what I've heard about CX, I can see how it would be a shock for a lot of Yanks. Things are pretty laid back at the training departments of most regional airlines, and the pilots in the majors know they'd have to screw up pretty badly to have it marked against them. I can't see a company as diverse as CX having a huge problem with colonials in general, but I don't have a hard time thinking of American pilots who would have a problem with CX trainers.

I consider my current company excellent training for CX: The new hire process is mind-boggling, the training department is absolutely draconian, management has a personal vendetta against the pilot community, and the command upgrade classes expect you to be able to assemble the aircraft from scratch. We've also got some of the most competent, close-knit crews to be found in the regional airlines and lots of interesting flying.

[jetset]

I think it is worth considering the fleet differences with regards to command upgrades.
The 744 is NOT an upgrade (on the pax) fleet. Most of the training is for candidates who are already Cx captains and senior F.O.s. This is the yardstick on which 744F pilots are trained at Cx. These same guys are flying longhaul routes to the USA and back, jump in to regional flights in a pax aircraft (last flown in their line training and are critcised for their ability to interpret Thai controllers!!!) Compare that to a typical pax fleet trainees converting from one of the regional fleets. Give them a break!

A number of freighter only trainers feel that it is there role in life to be more painful than the pax fleet trainers in order to prove that they too have high standards. Perhaps this is a carry over that they have had to live with after joining ASL and being unreasonably checked by disgruntled Pax fleet guys.
All in all their appears to be very little training, weakness are not addressed with training solutions.
That said I think the above only really applies to a small number (some put it as high as 25%) of the trainers, everyone knows who they are and if it is they with whom you are rostered.... its all over.
This is my conclusion, and there is no doubt that there is an anti NA bias. It is stated a number of times to a whole course 'You NA guys are going to struggle.....' From my experience these guys are of the same standard of anyone else in the company and a damn site better than me!
These are just my thoughts after sometime on the 744F.
:rolleyes::O

[druglord]

My point is that we really haven't had that many amercians for long enough to state with any surity the alleged anti us bias. I accept that some have failed on the freighter command course but isn't that true of all nationalitys? I know of a few aussie guys that failed their freigther command.
I will say though that the US aviation culture is quite discordant with the traditional CX culture. Maybe that has caused the anti american perception
I can believe that pure stats would cause most americans to fail out of upgrade, but a yank that's been with CX 10 years??? Surely 10 years of line flying would be ample time to adapt to the CX/British culture wouldn't you think?
Every country thinks they train superior pilots to every other, but if this sort of patriotic pettiness is stopping upgrades, I'm thinking of reconsidering.

[BusyB]

4engines4longhaul,

Good to hear from you. How is the taxi business these days?:)

[Millstream]

Sorry chaps - numbers in this post are incorrect := - see later post for correction.

Milly

How come all FH threads lead to questions on why Americans may find it difficult at CX? No smoke without fire, I suppose.

I have to say though that the Americans I have flown with have been good company and competent.

Getting back to topic..........:cool:

I did the numbers on the Annual Report of the CX web sire, takes into account returned aircraft:

YR Pax A/C
2006 97
2007 103
2008 111
2009 119
2010 119
2011 112
2012 108

There are a further 20 options on 77ERs, which I suspect will materialize at some point. So say 128 a/c in 2012. Just over 30% growth in 5 years.

Still think you will crack a pax command in 10 years :confused:

Milly

[Numero Crunchero]

Disraeli said “lies, damn lies, and statistics”.

What is an annual report? Is it a forecast of future growth plans or merely a snapshot of the current position that also recognizes future liabilities?

According to the 1998 annual report, we should have between 54 -79pax aircraft by now depending on how many of the 25 options were exercised. According to the 2001 annual report we should have between 63-67 pax aircraft now, again depending on how many of the 4 options were exercised. We actually had 84pax aircraft on 31/12/06.

Milly…not sure how you got 97pax a/c for last year – 102 total less 5 744BCF, less 6 744F, less 7 classic freighters gives me 84 pax aircraft – all from the AR. From this same AR I have us peaking in pax aircraft in 2009/10 at 109 then reducing from 2011 onwards. This assumes none of the 20 options are exercised and no new orders in that 5 year period.

If I look at 31/12/11, if CX exercise all 20options by then, it will have 119 pax aircraft. This is with no new orders. That is a 42% increase of almost 800 pilots for pax fleet using simple mathematics and ignoring the increase of freighter fleet from 18aircraft to 25aircraft. Big assumption that all 777s will be exercised in the next 5 years….then again, when we only had 54pax aircraft in 1998, CX increased that number to 74 in a similar 5 year period…or 32%. Amazing when you consider that in that five year period we were recovering from asian contagion and had 2 major pilot stoushes -1999 and 2001.

If no new orders are announced over the next five years, our pax fleet will be 42% bigger on 31/12/11 than it was on 31/12/06. So I think it is safe to say that anyone joining more than 3-5years ago will be looking at 10years or less to command. If I went by the 2001 AR, going from 66 pax aircraft to 63-67, I wouldn’t have been confident predicting 10 years to command back then!

So millsteam, I think it best if you and I stick to flying planes as we obviously can’t predict the future from annual reports!

[sisyphos]

The problem in CX is not usually the seniority, it is getting accepted for a command course in the first place AND passing it. If you do not meet the expectations of our valuable ' training ' department, the time to command will be ... INFINITE, you will be simply stuck, without any career perspectives.

I am sure everyone within CX is aware of that, however, if this thread is meant to be as an information for potential new joiners, this should be taken into account when making the decision. ( I, unfortunately, wasn't so clever):{

[BusyB]

sisyphos,
sorry to hear that but tell me, how many pilots have "infinite" command times in CX?:confused:

[Millstream]

:eek:Sorry about that, NC et al - missed out half the freighter fleet :sad:

Is this better?
YR Pax A/C
2006 84
2007 90
2008 98
2009 106


Best I leave the crunching to you, Numero!

Of course you are correct about annual reports and predicting the future and I have left out anything after '09 in acknowledgement of that.

However, they are going to have to get a serious move on to deliver 10 year commands for new joiners. Are there airframes available? (Maybe the sands will shift under one of the Middle East carriers?). Never mind CLK slots......

Milly