CI400

[ClearnceClarence]

Why has this NOTAM caused such uproar?

Correct me if wrong, is it not merely giving us the option to CI400 without to explain. Hence simply being a step up from the previous CI250-300 which was commonly planned to make up delays, protect connections etc?

Has anyone been dispatched with CI400 since the NOTAM?

[Emma Royds]

Not quite uproar but rather a degree of amusement I would say.

Having the vast majority of EK flights now planned at CI400 makes a complete farce of the expectation to only use idle reverse and single engine taxy etc.

All EK flights (except ULR and Freighter), will now be dispatched with CI400.

[B-HKD]

CI400? As is, most flights are arriving long before schedule. Whats is the logic begind .845 Mach flights arriving that early when they are short of gates? What happened to "protect the gate"

[SOPS]

First it was RTA, then it was dont depart early and slow down enroute, now it's CI 400. And you get to fly really fast to spend more time in the Desdi hold.

A certain person who used to fix planes, and hates pilots has been promoted so far out of his depth, that the "ideas' are now just silly.

Does anyone in the bouncy castle actually have any idea what is going on?

[B-HKD]

Considering CI400 is way over LRC on the john deer (B777 CI180=LRC=~.84) they are giving up 1.5-2% in fuel burn per sector. Is fuel really that cheap? Closest to that is Saudia operating CI500 outbound from RUH/JED tankering like crazy.

WTF is. EK doing? Burning away the bonus?

[SOPS]

I don't think EK has any idea what they are doing anymore. As someone said on here a few weeks ago....It is like watching a drunk man tying to put out a fire with a rag soaked in petrol.......

[B-HKD]

So is it confirmed? Ever flight going forward is being dispatched CI400? Except for freighters and the ULRs?

[electricdeathjet]

Yes, it's what I've heard from network control.

The funny thing is having to submit a report every time you slow down for turbulence and atc!! Not to mention the embarrassment of over speeding in the climb and arriving over max landing weight due to the less fuel burn of having to slowing down.

How much man power is going to be needed to deal with all that paperwork?

I'm totally lost on this one, I've spent all my professional life trying to fly efficiently and now I have to throw that out the window! What next, taxi every where at 30kts! Speed up in the hold? CI450? TOGA takeoffs?

These planes are going to take a beating, and so are WE if we don't comply, or overspeed, or break something....

[RoyalEnfield]

Yup CI400 is happening. Yesterday we were planned for a short mid-east turn at CI400. :ugh:

[mutt]

Closest to that is Saudia operating CI500 outbound from RUH/JED Nope, they only use 80. Although based on Saudi fuel costs, CI-500/600 would be appropriate, some powers that be, realised that burning extra fuel for the fun of it wasn't environmentally friendly.

[sluggums]

Yep we did it, plus over a dozen level changes...

[falconeasydriver]

Hmmmmm, writing a CSR because you slowed down?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fy3rjQGc6lA

[Check 'Six']

Finally a cost index that makes sense on the Super. 👍

[JAYTO]

Do you think they are doing this for our benefit. We get paid "Rostered Block". CI400 will reduce that rostered block every month. Due to the usual environmental and ATC factors we will never be able to fly at that speed all the time. Your 95 hour month has just been reduced to 91 paid hours saving a shed load of overtime. They would rather burn the money than give it to us.
Now get back to work you lazy pilots.

J

[jack schidt]

My two penneth...

They are so short on pilots that they are getting the flight hours down to a minimum, by going faster across the fleet, so that they can get more productivity out of the pilot workforce....... = less shortage of drivers

Just a thought

J

[SOPS]

And Jack wins today's prize.......you are spot on the money.:ok::ok:

[Tube Rider]

Environmental vandalism in the name of greed.

[SuckItUp]

It is totally about getting more NM per month out of us lazy pilots and the tucker chuckers in the back. Nothing else.


As far as the environment is concerned, its okay folks. One of the visionary dudes has a green vision.....so relax......


Why aren't you all resting for your next duty, and don't even think about having time for a BBQ!!!!! :zzz:

[fatbus]

Speed up to the desdi hold , makes lots of sense.

Does any think this has anything to do with pilot numbers? Really!!

[natops]

I wonder how the WSJ jumps into this new EK thing, CI400.

We all try to be a bit green, and EK pumps tons of gas extra into the air...
2tons extra on a 7 hr flight..... to be half an hour early.... bring it on!

This whole thing sounds like an impulsive reaction from top top top management.
Not even written down where this new rule came from.....

I feel a lot of panic on the top floor...slamming doors, pointing fingers etc.

Lets see where this goes....

[Emma Royds]

Just release the parking brake as soon as you can now. Let that clock run whilst waiting in the queue for push and start.

[SuckItUp]

E.R..................:ok::D:ok:

[PositiveRate876]

When the hangover subsides on Sunday morning, the CI joyride shall pass too.

[Kapitanleutnant]

I can see a benefit to EK at the midnight arrival bank. If they block in at 2329 or earlier, it's an extra day to them to use crew, no?

K

[QCM]

CI 400…fuel prices down,and 20% salary increase…easy maths !

[Emma Royds]

Or perhaps the pay rise has now been budgeted to cover the increase in fuel costs.

[fliion]

What's really sad about the whole scheme of things at the moment is - if there were reasonable people at Fleet Mgt level and there was a 'treat the boys and girls like Southwest Airlines' ie boost morale, genuinely listen to concerns and act on them, use a respectful and appreciative tone in wash-ups and emails, use pragmatic big picture solutions to swap issues etc - then this problem would not be so severe.

Yes 92 hours is too much but most of the guys I know who are committed here for a few years due kids age are sick and tired of the treatment, the arrogance and the tone of certain individuals. They had EGT & others in there being the face and mouth of Fleet for years and yet somehow thought that this arrogance and punitive culture would not have an affect once choices developed in the market.

It's not just an reduction in hours and and increase in pay that is needed to keep people - it's cultivating stake holders that is key to retention.

Take the CI 400. I guarantee you if this happened in DAL or SWA etc there would have been a fleet wide email to the tune of: "Ladies & Gents, let us explain the recent development..."

Here, not a chance and and as long as the culture of zero professional respect continues...people will head for the exit.

Head scratching ....again.

f.

[PositiveRate876]

With a simple NOTAM, there's little room for errors.




















With an FCI, they run a high risk of spelling/grammatical errors, and a PROB30 that the whole FCI won't make any sense at all! That in turn would have to inevitably be recalled, amended incorrectly, then recalled again. Thus the NOTAM and no explanation.

[redkite1]

Suddenly I feel like a monkey in a circus.

[thrustidle74]

Suddenly I feel like a monkey in a circus.

I feel like one for a long time.

[El Peligroso]

Whine, whine, whine!

CI400 - yes please! Bring it on.... :ok:

[Gulf News]

The lack of explanation is typical of EK middle management incompetence, much like the amendment to the additional fuel policy last year that was only explained about a week after introduction. What is really amusing is the incredulous comments from ATC when requesting the flights present Mach number. On my Europe flight today we had no less than four ATC requests to slow down due to preceding traffic and two requests to change levels due slower traffic ahead. All a bit of laugh really. I won't complain to much because I don't particularly want to spend any more time in the seat than absolutely necessary but a short explanation to the crews as to the intent of the policy might go some way towarpds making the crew feel part of this "Awesome Team" as I hear us described so frequently in the company rag.

Something big has precipitated this and I doubt that we minions will ever know the true reason but I don't see it lasting long in a practical sense, so enjoy it while you can.

[donpizmeov]

You are giving the muppets too much credit. They have no freaking clue why they changed it. You have seen them try and work out manning numbers, do you really expect this to be any different?
This isn't our train set. If it breaks we don't get paid any extra to fix it. Sit back, stay safe and watch with amusement. I am sure there will be plenty of more things on the way.

[B-HKD]

Are they going to adjust schedules to reflect shorter flight times?

[glofish]

Whatever CI is on the flight plan, who cares? Fly the most appropriate speed, as many of us have done for some time now. It's called situational awareness, something they have lost a long time ago.

As for schedules, again, who cares? The duty time starts at the same times as before, as does discretion that should not be given by responsible airmen in such an environment.

Finally it is up to each and everyone to determine when enough is enough in the name of safety. The pressing 2 with insistence on 'sick fatigued' should pop up big time if we dare to continue to call ourselves responsible and competent airmen.

Moaning is fine, but you have to do the safe thing as well.

[PositiveRate876]

Block times are based on statistical flight and taxi times.


They've increased the CI to compile the statistics. Once new shorter block times are in place, we revert back to old CI.

[redkite1]

I disagree that the motivation is to reduce block times - they're overly optimistic as it is, reducing them further then going back to slow CI doesn't add up. I call crew shortage, my rough calculation is it will save about 30hrs per pilot per year. My guess, but it would be nice to be better informed.

[olster]

I was astonished at the volume of EK traffic in the Desdi hold the other night all with conflicting and similar call signs. Much kudos to all you EK professionals and ATC for keeping cool and amazingly error - free. If ever there was an example of systemic and corporate set up for potential serious error there it is. TEM in action.

[Yorkshire_Pudding]

I know 95h rosters for 777 FOs have become more common this last couple of months but just spoke with a mate who was rostered 99.8 in 28. Not much slack left in the system, regardless of overtime threshold. Everyone must be hitting 900.

[redkite1]

Yorkshire Pud - that's why I think it's crew running out of hours, or, in other words not enough pilots to cover all the flying - 'if we can't make them work longer, make them work FASTER!'

TOGA, think your missing the drift here; do a comparison of CI400 to CI40 on your next flight and then do the math. I stand by my claim - it's about 4 hours per month and 30 hours per year faster.

[jack schidt]

I would need to check the 30hr assumption, but if that is true then every pilot can fly either a ULR return, 2 European flights Or 4 local India or 10 otherwise flights nearby in the Gulf.

With a train set this big and the fuel cost so low, CI 400 is not the issue. Having pilots at the helm is perhaps the real problem and by creating 30hrs x 3500 = 105,000 would make a BIG difference to the business plan (and just pizz off the Americans more :O). 105,000 hours is more than an average airliners useable life, this plan might have some truth in the practice (rumour).

J

[JammedStab]

I would love to have a CI of 400. If you get tight on fuel, you at least can go to 0 and save some real fuel. Where I work we are so close to 0 already that going to 0 saves less than 100 kg and that is on a fairly long flight.

[jack schidt]

900 hrs with parking brake released will always be 900 hrs, no matter if CI0 or CI400+.

The unpaid part of the job is on the ground when the parking break is on, so no short cuts etc will have you working less days for the same reward. Get the 900 in the bank and for the rest of the time wonder why the others fly faster, shorter routes and leave the parking brake on when on stand for 20 mins due ATC.

J

[birdieonfirst]

Jeez...

You guys must think you're the centre of the EK universe! CI400 to make the pilots produce more - seriously???

BOF

[Kapitanleutnant]

And what would be your reason for it, BOF?

K

[InnocentBystander]

Thing is, 92 hours in a 31 day month pays for your basic salary, right? So the matter of how many miles you cover in those 92 hours matters, right? Speed counts.

You'll spend 20-45 minutes in the Desdi/Bubin hold no matter what, right? So speed matters, because whether you spend those after you've been in cruise for 20-25 minutes less counts.

We're short on crews, so having crews time out 30-40 hours less counts, because they can fly them another 30-40 hours.

Also, I think factoring will go away for sure soon and I think this panic move shows that they're desperate to make up for the resulting crew shortage.

[B-HKD]

Now that the NOTAM has been out for a few days, has anyone actually flown anywhere close to OFP speeds associated with CI400? B777/A380.

Considering its close to .860 on the B777, turbulence and ATC will surely be slowing things down constantly. Looking at the airborne times for some Europe-DXB flights (FRA/AMS etc.) I don't see any difference over the past few days.

On the other hand, there are plenty of operators using CI80-150 on the B777 now that the fuel price has come down. Surely even EK knows that CI400 just isnt going to happen when everyone else is cruising around at significantly slower speeds

[bigdaviet]

Now that the NOTAM has been out for a few days, has anyone actually flown anywhere close to OFP speeds associated with CI400? B777/A380.

Considering its close to .860 on the B777, turbulence and ATC will surely be slowing things down constantly. Looking at the airborne times for some Europe-DXB flights (FRA/AMS etc.) I don't see any difference over the past few days.

On the other hand, there are plenty of operators using CI80-150 on the B777 now that the fuel price has come down. Surely even EK knows that CI400 just isnt going to happen when everyone else is cruising around at significantly slower speeds

CI400 also changes your cruise level potentially as the FMC is prioritising time a lot more than optimum level.

[Avid Aviator]

CI 400 is somewhere in the region M0.85 to M0.86, the same as a B747 or A380 cruises at.
Has been .853 most flights near optimum.
It won't break the jet or kill your pax.
It might be smoother at M0.82 if you're in some turb, guess that's up to you.

Apart from tending to reduce descent speed from 325kt (bit close to the pole when in VNAV PTH for this chicken) I don't have a problem with it. If they get another flight per year out of me, who cares? Still same workload for me. Otherwise, I get home 10 mins earlier every sector!

Seems stupid though, those 10 mins (or 20 for two pilots) are costing about 2000 kg of fuel, or around $100 per minute.
Expensive pilots, I'd almost do >92 hours for $6000 an hour!!

[irish777]

Has anyone else noticed the co-notam has changed with 'P-EKA' as the originator? That, to me, is STC himself??

[170to5]

Avid

Not particularly intelligent thinking, in my opinion.

1) If they get one more trip from you per year, they will not pay you more. This means that per sector you are earning less and by extension, you do not feel that your services are worth what you are being paid now. Do you feel that you are being overpaid now? I do not. I feel like I am earning the absolute minimum that I am willing to work here for (of course that is perfect for EK, it's what they want). That includes the major inconvenience of having to live in Dubai, a long way from home, both physically and culturally - as for most of us.

2) You may not be quite as happy to plough through that fuel if the outcome is that next year PS comes around and the excuse for getting zilch (there will be a few to choose from, of course) is that fuel costs have skyrocketed. Only pilots and some (hopefully most) engineers will understand exactly why and we're not a majority...

My theory is to fly my 900 hours in the absolute minimum days possible. We all saw the WSJ article, the truths in it mean that I have no reason to give these people any more than my absolute minimum - they give me nothing more than theirs.

[777-200LR]

Flight times have become much more manageable with regards to the scheduled block. There will be a lot less what I call "charity time" for the company as flying up to the sceduled block becomes less likely.

And for those who are going to back their argument up by saying they will readjust the block times and then reduce the CI later on, you're far from any logic - that will only put them amongst the worst 'on time performing' airlines.

OTP will never be less than or equal priority to you :=

[Calmcavok]

A number of possibilities:

1. They keep the CI400 to allow a more accurate reporting time to reflect reality. The CI400 stays until fully EASA compliant, including FTLs, which I understand are less restrictive for most reporting time windows. Then reduce CI, and keep the more realistic reporting time and original schedule.

2. Keep CI400 until we recruit a LOT more pilots, and we find more augmenting, then CI reduces.

3. Keep CI400 while fuel prices are low, squeeze current crews for hours, reassess in a year or two.

4. Emirates want to improve their punctuality record. It's finally been revealed that a dispatcher's "5 mins for bags Captain" is actually on the dog-year scale.

I'm between 1 and 4.

[harry the cod]

170to5

"That includes the major inconvenience of living in Dubai, a long way from home, both physically and culturally..."

Sorry to spoil the party, but weren't you informed before you joined EK that this job was based in Dubai and was not a commuting contract?

Complaining about increasing working hours, lack of leave and other detrimental changes to our lifestyle is one thing. Complaining about something you were well aware of before you joined is quite another.

Harry

[170to5]

170to5

"That includes the major inconvenience of living in Dubai, a long way from home, both physically and culturally..."

Sorry to spoil the party, but weren't you informed before you joined EK that this job was based in Dubai and was not a commuting contract?

Complaining about increasing working hours, lack of leave and other detrimental changes to our lifestyle is one thing. Complaining about something you were well aware of before you joined is quite another.

Harry

Of course I knew that, my point is that living here means I expect compensation that makes it worth it! In my opinion, there is a point on the salary/t&c slippage where it's no longer worth it...that point is close or has passed for quite a few people, it seems...

[Rather Be Skiing]

170to5 "That includes the major inconvenience of living in Dubai, a long way from home, both physically and culturally..." Sorry to spoil the party, but weren't you informed before you joined EK that this job was based in Dubai and was not a commuting contract? Complaining about increasing working hours, lack of leave and other detrimental changes to our lifestyle is one thing. Complaining about something you were well aware of before you joined is quite another. Harry

I'm guessing he was told, Harry.

I suspect he is expressing the idea that moving to Dubai to live was an acceptable decision based on the contractual obligations promised. Living here becomes much less acceptable, however, when the increasing working hours and lack of leave increases the isolation from home.

[olster]

Many years ago when common sense made a regular appearance you were paid for an expatriate job a little more in order to compensate for being away from the motherland be that UK, US, Aus etc. The idealised version of that would be the famed Cathay 'A' scale of yore. This concept appears to have disappeared latterly. I might add that the EK pilot package does not compare favourably with legacy carriers in the 'developed' world. Although EK pays accommodation etc that is easily offset e.g. in the UK by the cost of income tax, NI and pension contribution.

[Kapitanleutnant]

Seems the CI400 is the final, last ditch effort by EK to keep the fleet flying… before some of the fleet is grounded.

[SOPS]

Sorry Harry, I will call you on this one, ( I normally agree with your posts). The contract I signed and the rosters it allowed me when I joined 9 years ago, did no way resemble what I had when I left. That is the problem, the continuing degrading of T and C. Harry, if your are happy to accept that, well done, others are not.
As you know, I was not one.

[777-200LR]

Could all those articles I've been reading in Flight International over the past 10 years about pilot shortage be finally coming true?!

There's no such thing as a bottomless pit and EK are starting to find that out. Stick around guys, we deserve to see the outcome

[CaptainChipotle]

Harry is happy here. He won't tell you directly but he'll brag about his investments and his friends (which we all have plenty).

It is a good point though, Harry. My contract isn't commuting, but it's not suicide either. It's been morphed into the ladder in the previous years.

[harry the cod]

If ever it's come across that I've bragged about investments then shame on me. Please tell me where and I'll remove it. That was never the intention and one that would hardly be appropriate anyway. I'm not a financial guru and have never claimed to be, merely following the basics of regular saving and living within your means. As for friends, no doubt the same number as everyone else although seeing less and less of them over the last few years. Which brings us nicely back on track.

I'm not agreeing that the T&C's we endure are by any means seen as ideal and I don't think I've ever said that. I will, however, admit to being content with my current lifestyle but this is in no way a direct reflection of the worsening conditions we've all experienced of late. My point is that Dubai is where we have to live and work. Those that try to make a real go of it with happy wife, kids at good schools, good villa location etc. have adapted far quicker and easier than those that don't. Some never do. Achieving this 15 years ago was easy, now less so and very much down to luck. For those that try to commute it's a nightmare and merely feeds the anger and resentment that so many hold. Add to this a reduction of leave to 30 days, forced leave, full flights and only 1 ALT, lack of credit for ground duties during a full months work and restricted days off and it's easy to see why the frustration builds. The list goes on. If you don't view Dubai as 'home' while you're employed here, forget it.

Unfortunately, whether we like to admit it or not, the overall package we have is still a pretty good one and while people still apply, the conditions will not improve. Only the recruitment team and senior managers will know how many and from what backgrounds are applying. That will be the giveaway for this years pay review. Having said that, how many of us would forgo this years pay rise for a return to a regular and guaranteed 80 hour month? Most, if not all i'd imagine.

We are all fighting to achieve the same goal. Work hard but get acceptable rosters to do so with sufficient rest. Receive a remuneration that's the going rate for professional pilots working for the 'Number 1 brand airline'. Finally, and perhaps most important of all, expect to be treated by management as they themselves would like to be treated, fairly and with respect.

I don't think that's too much to ask, do you?

Harry

[glofish]

I don't think that's too much to ask, do you?

Neither do most of us, but you said yourself:

My point is that Dubai is where we have to live and work.

and that seems to be an oxymoron!

[SOPS]

Good points Harry. Just one thing. If you have boys, when they turn 19, the can no longer live in Dubai. Then people may be forced to 'commute' just to see their families, and the happy family story suddenly changes very quickly.

[JammedStab]

What was the old cost Index?

[170to5]

What was the old cost Index?

Between 25 and 40...

[rakedwings]

No more short cuts please, spread the message around. Let's be wise in telling them how we are the missing link in this equation. Flying near the barber pole is sheer madness, just to cater for pilot shortage?.Some goon has come up with this bright idea to kiss up his boss.:ugh: Otherwise let's all brace, brace for the upcoming salary review.

[justanexample]

So the company is solving an apparent pilot shortage with shorter flying times...?

But forgets to look at the consequences this "cost saving structure" has on:

- safety ( almost fatigued pilots, will be now really fatigued, but not according to the FRMS model, that is NOT taking into account the exposure to higher noise levels)

Fatigue after work in noise - an epidemiological survey study and three quasi-experimental field studies Kjellberg A, Muhr P, Skoldstrom B - Noise Health (http://www.noiseandhealth.org/article.asp?issn=1463-1741;year=1998;volume=1;issue=1;spage=47;epage=55;aulast=Kje llberg)
http://www.google.ae/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CEUQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Farchiwum.ciop.pl%2F27980&ei=TDBCVZCjPIGN7Qbe5YD4Ag&usg=AFQjCNHlSo5znU6_RvSisJQlBVWiE0MZRA&bvm=bv.92189499,d.d2s

- The EK brand, from being the greenest suddenly you are the brownest
- etc...

Interesting, and well thought of, short term solution!

[Sheikh Your Bootie]

Has anyone posed the question at a Recurrent wash-up about this loony Cost index policy?? Interested to hear answers!

Personally habibis, I reduce to .85 (777) and save more fuel for eventualities that may occur (holding, wx etc..) No need for extra uplift these days :ok: Short sectors maybe different as i haven't done any yet to play around with the FMS CI.

Its mighty fine sailing past most other planes at .85, or If I need .86 :p:p

SyB :zzz::zzz:

[motley flight crue]

The cost index is completely irrelevant to fuel uplift. Fly 400, as before, if you need fuel for holding, wx etc. then bloody take it. Your the captain. What's the difference on your decision for fuel CI400 or CI 20?

[Eau de Boeing]

Apparently according to rumour control in the college of knowledge, this was meant to come out only for African flights in a bid to improve OTP, however the "needful" was done at some point and it got transmitted to everyone costing thousands and thousands.

Not claiming this is a definitive answer but if it is true then I think someone responsible won't be sticking around for the Prophet Cher. :ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Mr Angry from Purley]

Justanexample

So the company is solving an apparent pilot shortage with shorter flying times...?

But forgets to look at the consequences this "cost saving structure" has on:
- safety ( almost fatigued pilots, will be now really fatigued, but not according to the FRMS model, that is NOT taking into account the exposure to higher noise levels)

I'd probably be more worried about the effects of shift work for things like diabetes than noise related - You might be clutching at straws but i'll do some checking
The FRMS Model EK use is a "One size fits all" so I'd also be wary of that. :\

[jack schidt]

Gentlemen,

Could the answer to the unexplained CI400 be that it is designed to get people back to Dubai quicker to allow them to go onto their next duty that much sooner and not make the following day a day off or rest? There could be a lot of smoke and mirrors around the few flights that this is actually meant to be targeting which will change the roster times and make people work the following day?

Beware rushing, this increase in fuel burn and a throw away of the departure from a destination for gate occupation in DXB is a shambles. Something is going on and the reason that you are not being told is because the result is not good news for you.

900 hrs will always be 900 hrs no matter how fast you go, fly safe.

J

[sluggums]

No, basically what happened was that little Timmy threw a hissy fit during a meeting...

[Kernow 101]

OTP targets..............and we prob wont even hit them with CI400 :8

[alwayzinit]

As we all, who fly em, know. The best place to make up time is on the ground!

True to form our push back and pull forward, at a snails pace, took over 15mins from brakes release, then another 10 mins wait while another jet did the same thing.

CI400 is not going to help with numpty stuff like that.

[Panther 88]

Bottom line. With the closure of Yeman airspace the Eastern Africa flights were running close to an hour late. A proposal was made to speed up THOSE flights only. That is until commercial got involved and said, wow if you can do that with those flights, why not all flights? And of course who won that argument? Just wait a week or two until the ASRs top out and fuel used figures come in. CI400 will be a distant memory and we will be back to not leaving a few minutes early without approval from VPNC.

[donpizmeov]

I freaking hope not. Cost index 999 next please. Less time in the tube the better.

[Wingman82]

Ek is short of pilots. Many fo's gone. With ci 400 they are generallyreducing the crew costs due to overtime of many pilots (many pilots called out on days off and many rostered overtime!) AND by the same time reducing your flight time for each sector by 10-15 min in average. They now can plan you on a KWI or DOH or DMM,MCT in addition. Easy guessing.

[trimotor]

We will only really know the depth of any FO shortage when 2 captains are rostered together, if on is RHS qualified. I am and have recently had quite a number of XX days in a row and not been called..

[donpizmeov]

Wingman,

Your productivity is based on actual block, not flight time. Going faster does not reduce your productivity payment.
For them to squeeze another flight into your roster you still get productivity if the total block time crosses the threshold.
For us its an increase of 6 to 12 kts of TAS, changing from .84/.85 to .86. So best case, on a 7 hour trip you save 10min. But only if you weren't slowed down somewhere. So if you are restricted by the 900hr/365 or 100hrs/ 28days, 18 sectors would be needed to squeeze a KWI in. Hmmmm, maybe an old 330 roster, but they were not timing out were they?
If people are stupid enough to work on a day off a high cost index will not stop them.

[TineeTim]

Whatever is driving this, and I strongly suspect the GCAA/WSJ article, it can't be crew hours. That might be a nice side benefit but no way is it the driving force. The time savings is just too small relative to the cost. I'lll take a guess that the average savings across all the sectors is around 10 minutes each. Those 10 minutes are costing hundreds of thousands of $$ every day. That's a bloody expensive KWI return every 5 months or so. These guys love money too much to waste it that way. No, a well connected official was named and shamed in the most widely read business publication on the planet. Not to mention the beloved 'Brand'. Band Aid is now applied until they can find something else. Hope it's not a tourniquet.

[trimotor]

Very medical analogies, TT!

[Fellowship of the drink]

It is most likely a response to the WSJ article.

To increase the CI for specific flights (particularly the ones that are duty limit challenged) would an admission of guilt. A blanket CI increase would be the perfect balance of not admitting guilt and saving face.

[Dropp the Pilot]

On my last flight we saved 10 minutes of "face" and burned 3700 kg of fuel to do so.

It's painful.

[Wingman82]

Dont you guys think anyway that it is ridiculuos not to comunicate to your beloved pilots, WHY all of a sudden we fly faster and what the reason is? Like in the army, you dont have to know why,execute your orders.

[donpizmeov]

Totally agree. They should have communicated why. But they are muppets. No one has turned up to to last few post recurrent wash ups lately too. Also not communicated. Just left the dudes waiting.

[alwayzinit]

Dropp, burning an extra 3500kgs and then single engine taxiing. :ugh:

The whole situation seems totally disjointed and disorganised.

[Outatowner]

No one has turned up to to last few post recurrent wash ups lately too. Also not communicated.


Everyone's a winner. No one wants to listen to it anyway. :ok:

[B-HKD]

Any explanations on the real reason for CI400?

Fuel price is on the up again, and CI400 is costing ~1% per flight.

[Visual Procedures]

Its already been said.. But.. First hand straight from the dispatchers mouth:

They got an email from STC that it will be so.

On time performance was the reason.

They spend so much time juggling every cost of the flight then this. They also think its crazy.

[Qwerti]

Quoting Boeing Aero:
the numerator of the ci is often called time-related direct operating cost (minus the cost of fuel). items such as flight crew wages can have an hourly cost associated with them, or they may be a fixed cost and have no variation with flying time. engines, aux- iliary power units, and airplanes can be leased by the hour or owned, and maintenance costs can be accounted for on airplanes by the hour, by the calen- dar, or by cycles. as a result, each of these items may have a direct hourly cost or a fixed cost over a calen- dar period with limited or no correlation to flying time.
in the case of high direct time costs, the airline may choose to use a larger ci to minimize time and thus cost. in the case where most costs are fixed, the ci is potentially very low because the airline is primarily trying to minimize fuel cost. pilots can easily understand minimizing fuel consumption, but it is more difficult to understand minimizing cost when something other than fuel dominates.

Interesting to see the real reason behind EK's choice.

[B-HKD]

Although the schedules are padded to account for DXB ground delays, there is only so much they can pad.

It is a fact that EK's direct operating costs are below those of the European/American legacy carriers.

I think that ultimately this was done to protect hub connections. EK's bread and butter is the transfer of pax and cargo, and protecting that transfer is essential to the bottom line. Hence the recent and significantly cheaper cost of fuel allows them to fly faster albeit burning slightly more, to ultimately improve OTP and reduced missed connections, without increasing the fuel bill (if the price stays under $80). And the added benefit of squeezing a few more flights out of the same crew.

[haveago]

Had a cost index of 15 today.

[B-HKD]

Had a cost index of 15 today.


Which flight?

[haveago]

Was a 330 flight to one of our glamourous destinations. There is new company notam out that basically says fly at filed speeds even if arriving early, but if late we can use unto cost index 400 to minimize arrival delay.

[Kapitanleutnant]

Yep.. looks like it's another thing that was here one day, gone the next.

back to normal CI's…

K

[SOPS]

So now you have had, protect the hub, RTA, slow down, don't depart early, speed up, slow down again. Did I miss anything?

[B-HKD]

It is pretty clear now that the whole point of CI400 was to encourage delayed flights to make up some time en-route.

The sensible NOTAM would have read "....when operationally necessary use of up to CI400 is encouraged/permissible" :ok:

instead they decided to go with "Every flight will no be planned at CI400" No explanation, nothing. :confused::confused::confused:

Of course very high CI's are normal day to day ops at many other major carriers. To make up delays, protect connections, curfew arrivals etc. EK just chose to implement this in the least transparent and logical manner.

[fliion]

Yep...81,000 dits ...& the chapter about moving on.

:0

f.
Ps Sorry SOPS ..couldn't resist ; >