New Flight Time Limitations GF

[downNOgreens]

Does anyone have any comments regarding the 'malleable' FTLs by GF?

[Panama Jack]

Much better and humanistic for us, insofar as a step toward recognizing human physiology and not having exhausted pilots at the switch. Not easier to understand or memorize though, but I'll learn to live with that.

As far as some of the malleable issues, well, one wonders how these came to be especially if you go to the original regulatory source. :rolleyes:

In any case, the Company has historically seemed to consider "limitations" as guidelines or best-practices. A GCC destination turn-around after coming from Europe doesn't seem like a good idea for the Cabin Crew. Nor do Indian-destination turns. And explanations like "Emirates does it too!" doesn't provide a great explanation-- they shouldn't be a baseline either for practices. :ugh:

[Che Guevara]

Interesting to find out on what scientific evidence they have based their maximum FDP on. To be specific, according to the new rules we can now do 12:00 if we do two sectors starting between 22:00-0559, but only 11:00 if you only do one sector.....not only is this ridiculous but it is a full 1:45 longer than the limitation set out in CAP 371, on which they have based most of their new FTLs.

I wonder how this would be viewed by foreign authorities if they had cause to look at them....suspect there may be a red face or two.

Even to the casual observer, there simply is no logic to this let alone scientific evidence, unless we base this on Dr. Dinar's research I suppose. Real third world stuff this, not sure about the 'humanistic' element there PJ. ;)

Chao

[tmax]

That is beeing corrected to read 12 instead of 11!!!!!! latest NTC in case u do not kwow! Finnaly we will rest together as per latest crew notice !!!!!!!!!!Next roster!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mister Head of crew planning and his managers should go,leave,retired, as soon as posssible! they are useless as far crew planning cause of Favorism!
AIMS is capable to create blocks and rosters equal to everyboby and therefore biddng is possible! the system is already bought but can not be used cause of favorism and sortage of crew!!! as they claim!!
that is not true!! they just do not this to happen cause they have to justify their present as heads or managers

[Propellor]

Comrade Che',

Lest the one-sector pilots get any benefits, the 12 hour rule has now been extended to them as well, for the night departures.

Am given to understand that this prescription to impaired performance leading to fatigue (and reduced flight safety) has apparently been made by the custodians of the regulations, themselves, i.e. the Bahrain CAA. They certainly know more than those that made the CAP 371!!!!!

With an absence of a Safety board like the NTSB, an intelligent crew union, and self-conscience, the airline and the regulator have colluded to make ridiculous legislations.

The airline now tends to exploit these draconian rules to the hilt; they must, to prove their efficiency. The checks and balances have all been eroded - an impotent safety/quality department, and ignorant fleet managers, who were conspicuously absent when the new rules were launched.

I hope it is not Goof(ed) Air again.

[downNOgreens]

It seems silly that the AIMS full functionality is not utilised. How could it be restrictive for them if GF's limitations and crew numbers are fed into it? Seems to me they that they have bought a car and using it as a wheelbarrow.

[Albergineman]

Let's not forget the "minimum rest festival" in places like BKK and KTM...
Two CP's flying while there is a F/O DHD...
Two crew's rostered for the same block...

etc...

:ugh:

[Che Guevara]

Comrades,

Interesting comments indeed and as Propellor said, it appears that certain entities know more than the authority that administer CAP 371, this is worrying. My problem is that if you are going to 'cut and paste' because you don't have the knowlege of experience, then at least 'cut' the entire document and not 'cherry pick' the bits you like based on what?

CAP 371 which is titled "The Avoidance of Fatigue in Arcrews" is recognised and used by many countries as a workable and safe solution to managing crew fatigue, indeed the very spirit of the document is 'cut and pasted' for you below in full.


The prime objective of a flight time limitations scheme is to ensure that crew members are adequately rested at the beginning of each flying duty period, and whilst flying be sufficiently free from fatigue so that they can operate to a satisfactory level of efficiency and safety in all normal and abnormal situations. Aircraft operators are expected to appreciate the relationship between the frequency and pattern of scheduled flying duty periods and rest periods and time off, and give due consideration to the cumulative effects of working long hours interspersed with minimum rest


Therefore by adding an hour here and subtracting an hour there to suit, you are not fullfilling the primary objective of the document which as stated is to operate at to a satisfactory level of efficiency and safety in all normal and abnormal situations. Can the entity that decided to change these tried and tested FTLs gurantee that they have improved the airline's safety and efficiency by doing so. Well, this remains to be seen, only time will tell, perhaps, perhaps not...

Chao

[Trader]

That is because they don't do any 'scientific' research on the subject!!!! They took the JAA concept - because all the writing was done for them already - and then razed the areas that did not work for them. GF and the Bahrain CAA are in cahoots and have been since day 1 and simply modiefied the work done by others to fit into a workable mold for GF.

[Panama Jack]

Real third world stuff this, not sure about the 'humanistic' element there PJ.


Well, yeah, you are right and I know what you mean. Still, better than the Oman DGCAM stuff that we were under (as far as I can read).

As I understand it, the CAP 371 standard that was used in writing the Bahrain ANTR's is a previous edition-- not the current one (nor even the last one). And from this, Gulf Air has received several other regulatory exemptions. :suspect:

Many of the region's airlines benefit from extremely cooperative regulators, or in the case of the UAE, regulators that are headed by the same individual who heads the airline, maintenance organization, airport services company, etc. No surprise then when they raised the maximum number of hours per year that UAE air carrier pilots can fly. It really creates a great business environment for UAE airlines (one that almost any airline manager would envy)-- relatively cheap, easily-available labor (look at cabin crew, etc), cheap fuel, leanient regulations, cooperative (to an incestuous extreme) regulators. Because they are our direct competitors, the heat is on for us also in Bahrain.

Unfortunately, this is a problem in many other parts of the world also-- no, I am not saying Western Europe or English-speaking North America, but many others. It is evident when you walk into the local regulator and see the national airline's mousepad by the inspector's computer, and he is drinking his coffee out of a mug that has the local airline's logo on it.

I agree in principle with a reasonable, workable regulator who takes the realities of business in mind. Unfortunately, this becomes a very gray and murky area.

[downNOgreens]

I wonder if Bahrain Air will get the same treatment as Gulf Air from BCAA.
What will the overseas regulators' attitude be toward GF who 'knead' the rules of their own regulator and flying to their countries. Is there a point where they will say something (as was the case with PIA in several developed countries)?

[Sal-e]

GF hasn't done anything other carriers haven't done with their regulators.

[downNOgreens]

One must wonder what these rules are for.
I believe there is provisions for amending some of the flight duty periods as long as the company ensures that a system is in place for safety/rest/CRM etc etc. Does GF have such a system?

[Che Guevara]

Negative :=

[Che Guevara]

Bit like keeping the plastic on the seats of a car.......:D
Out of context I know, but I could not stop myself with that one....sorry.