Rosters-Now v's then

[73qanda]

I fly narrow bodies out of NZ.
Fatigue is a hot topic right now in our type of Airline flying as the sector lengths regionally allow some pretty long duties at all times of the day and night.
I am not sure if we as a pilot group are just more aware of fatigue or if the rosters have actually got worse since the 70's 80's and 90's ( I started flying in the 2000's).
If you were flying narrow bodies regionally in Australasia both then and now, what do you think?
Has the 'efficiency' of the rostering systems/CAR's made the job more tiring or are we just assuming that to be so?
What was a typical roster like 30 years ago?
Did red eye trans-Tasman even exist then?
Anyone got a copy of an old roster they can post?
Cheers,
QandA

[PoppaJo]

In the late 90s I flew about two sectors a duty, 60hrs a month, and my girlfriend kept telling me I have too much time off

Now I fly about 4 sectors, 90hrs a month, and my now wife keeps nagging me that she never sees me!

[hoss]

PoppaJo, some might say you've had the 'best of both worlds'. Around for the girlfriend and away from the wife. 😛

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Rosters back then were designed to facilitate the flying of aeroplanes around the place, and now they are predatory practices designed to suck the very life out of you for reasons of profit maximization. Simple.

I'm just glad to be nearing retirement.

[RodH]

Before the " war " in 1989 we had it so good as far as domestic flying duty hours in a roster went. Most of us " block holders " would be pushing it to have done 650-700 hrs per year .Quite often we would fly one leg and pax home ! Quite a few days were of no more than 4 sectors and some just 2 and I am not talking International we are talking domestic East Coast of Australia with flights to the West. I was a fairly senior Training Capt . and could virtually pick what block I wanted and usually went for the most flying hours but there was not a real lot compared to today.
Upon reflection we were paid a lot for doing not a lot.
When I had to go overseas due to the " war " I really found out what it was to have to do a good days work.
Some will howl me down but that is how I found it!
I do not for one minute decry that the wheel has gone the other way and that a huge lot of pilots are doing a real lot of flying hours and maybe too many for safety but the thread starter asked for a comparison so this is what I have posted.

[reubee]

What was a typical roster like 30 years ago?
Did red eye trans-Tasman even exist then?

30 years ago you did not have B737/A320 buzzing across the Tasman four times a day.

AKL-PER-AKL was a once a week B747 that overnighted in PER and flew back during the day.

AKL-SYD-AKL (NZ) or SYD-AKL-SYD (QF) was a once a day 747 affair for both NZ and QF at respective respectable times. (UA and CO were operating once a day on this route as well)

I don't think any of NZ's 737 island services operated beyond midnight, perhaps the once a week AKL-NAN-RAR-PPT did.

Very different schedules, hence I'd imagine very different rosters. You couldn't fly 3 TT sectors a day because there weren't any aircraft doing 3 TT sectors, same with red-eyes.

[Possum 15]

Before the " war " in 1989 we had it so good as far as domestic flying duty hours in a roster went. Most of us " block holders " would be pushing it to have done 650-700 hrs per year .Quite often we would fly one leg and pax home ! Quite a few days were of no more than 4 sectors and some just 2 and I am not talking International we are talking domestic East Coast of Australia with flights to the West. I was a fairly senior Training Capt . and could virtually pick what block I wanted and usually went for the most flying hours but there was not a real lot compared to today.
Upon reflection we were paid a lot for doing not a lot.
When I had to go overseas due to the " war " I really found out what it was to have to do a good days work.
Some will howl me down but that is how I found it!
I do not for one minute decry that the wheel has gone the other way and that a huge lot of pilots are doing a real lot of flying hours and maybe too many for safety but the thread starter asked for a comparison so this is what I have posted.

That's a fair summary.

[27/09]

I suspect one big difference between Now and Then is back Then most of the people responsible for running the airline had personally experienced the effects of time zone changes, middle of the night flying etc and the schedules and rosters reflected this. Whereas Now most of the people running the show have only worked 8 till 5 in one time zone and have no ****ing idea of the effects time zone changes/sleep patterns have on a person, and the schedules and rosters reflect this.

[Keg]

Qantas wide body domestic flying rosters are much better now than they were 15-20 years ago. That said, we are doing the hours in less days at work so the flying is more efficient.

[Gate_15L]

Not to make the fatigue aspect irrelevant, but as some has said, 20-30 years ago, there was maybe a widebody, that flew once a day across the Tasman.

And look how much ticket prices were and the volume of traffic. High ticket prices, low volumes of traffic.

Now that we have 3-4 flights a day from each port across the Tasman, with smaller narrowbody aircraft, we have greater frequency, more aircraft, and more importantly, more jobs.

I know that there are probably those with the single digit senority numbers that probably bemoan the fact that there are now vast narrowbody fleets plying the Tasman, stealing their flying. But the reality is, the demand is for greater frequencies of flights leaving when they want to leave, going direct to where they want to go, not one large aircraft flying once a day, unless it is with a very large discount, on the way to somewhere else.

The reality is, redeye Trans-Tasmans are, to be blunt, one of the reason we probably have jobs. Yes, it allows utilisation of a otherwise idle asset, which yes, I do agree is not the most ideal time to be flying. But there is a demand for it, whether it be due to the large discount flying at that time of night or simply because it was the most convient. Schedules are driven by commercial. Its up to technical and resource planning/rostering to make it happen safely.

The biggest problem IMHO is not the redeye duties themselves but it is how they are rostered and how suitable rest periods are NOT protected by some operators, after and before the redeye duty.

[t_cas]

"The biggest problem IMHO is not the redeye duties themselves but it is how they are rostered and how suitable rest periods are NOT protected by some operators, after and before the redeye duty."

Therein lies the detail.

[Ken Borough]

Very different schedules, hence I'd imagine very different rosters. You couldn't fly 3 TT sectors a day because there weren't any aircraft doing 3 TT sectors, same with red-eyes.

But Qantas used to schedule duties like SYD/CHC/MEL/SYD or SYD/MEL/AKL/SYD in one duty day.

[CurtainTwitcher]

But Qantas used to schedule duties like SYD/CHC/MEL/SYD or SYD/MEL/AKL/SYD in one duty day.
He is talking thrice crossing the Tasman in a single duty, probably without crew augmentation Ken. That's a big difference to tacking on one short one at the beginning or the end with augmentation.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

So the rosters before the war were financially unsustainable?

[framer]

It's only unsustainable if the product is offered at an unsustainable price. It is only offered at an unsustainable price if competitors have a regulatory advantage. Competitors only have a regulatory advantage if we "open the skies". We would only ' open the skies' if we were of the belief that a pure " free enterprise" ideology was acceptable to us from a commercial/ sovereignty/ safety perspective when applied to Airlines.
In short, if everyone has to build rosters that afford well rested crews, the ticket price goes up by $3 a ticket and life rolls on.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Bingo framer

Fatigue management is worth a measly few bucks and even that's too much. Safety first-ish eh?

[Chronic Snoozer]

Hoss. Thats a contender! POTY.

[Buckshot]

Flying tired: airline pilots on tough rosters battle fatigue (http://www.theage.com.au/business/aviation/flying-tired-airline-pilots-on-tough-rosters-battle-fatigue-20160413-go5fmo.html)

[john_tullamarine]

So the rosters before the war were financially unsustainable?


One needs to keep in mind, pre-deregulation (and concerns regarding post-deregulation reality was the main driver for management strategies during the period which is not talked about much here), ..


(a) basically a controlled, cost-plus operation for both players


(b) the higher cost during those days was airframe related so both paid considerable attention to juggling that cost .. hence lots of cancellation and substitution to keep load factors up .. which led to a significant minority of one's month being taken up with paxing.


.. as Rod indicated .. it was a wonderful lifestyle for crews (other, I guess, than for those at the bottom of the seniority on Type list). More than once I heard the cry "aircraft were only to get the crew from one party to the next .. " .. not that I ever indulged in party-going activities, of course :O

[Keg]

An interesting insight from Jamie Freed.

Flying tired: airline pilots on tough rosters battle fatigue (http://www.smh.com.au/business/aviation/flying-tired-airline-pilots-on-tough-rosters-battle-fatigue-20160413-go5fmo.html)

[Led Zep]

Don't bring too much attention to it. You'll get us all replaced by drones that much quicker. :ooh:






:}

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Nice article even if there is one common mistake within. Generally speaking, pilots are not highly paid, they are adequately paid for the responsibility they bear and especially the revenue they generate. Most of us make clear profit for our employers equal to our entire years salary every couple of weeks.

[Band a Lot]

Before the war airline travel was very expensive too much for many and mostly big business and government paid flights were the norm.

I seem to recall a F28 flght Carnarvon - Perth return in 1980's at around $800 ($1,700 in today money maybe).

Look at Darwin - Gove mainly government and big business mainly sector around $800. Take the mine out and the government wont go much, will be no flights.

Before the war rosters were good no they were great for the pilots, but several were not happy at the deal they had. Today is a result of stupidity of passed forced on the new and will take many more years to get better rosters if ever. My memory is the pilots of that era got a far bigger pay rise than they asked for in return for working more for it and they agreed - bring on the regulation rule book on duty - Oh look Redeye works well and within duty times.

[Pakehaboy]

I fly at an airline that has 15,000+ pilots,we are under FAR 117 rules,fly the narrow body but havee done wide as well.The jury is still out as to whether these new rules will work or need to be gutted,personally they need to be just that.
The fatigue/roster issue is heating up for sure,I fly 82-85 hrs per month,mostly good pairings,but several are quite fatiguing.Crew planning,scheduling don't give a rats about pairing or the rosters as long as they are legal,the company sees it the same way.

It's seems everywhere you go,this topic has no boundaries,we are all in the same boat,fatigue is a personal thing.Ive sat and listened to grievance committes trying to pay protect pilots who have called in fatigued,only to find out that they are the ones that created their mess by picking up and loading their rosters and lines to 100+hrs,and the fatigue is self induced!!,but legal under FAR 117

On checkin ,we have to acknowledge a Fit-to-fly,if yr not,you go home.Are airlines building and forcing fatiguing rosters on pilots?sure they are!,I see it every day,but as usual, until something catastrophic happens,we are just blowing wind.For the larger airlines with stronge unions,the issue is far more pressing,their ability to exert pressure on mgt,govt agencies,to stop certain practices will hopefully prevail,and that will filter down to the less powerful groups.Until then,we are at their mercy,you either fly the roster,or you don't
Either way,it's a personal choice

[framer]

I agree, it is a very personal choice.
I do think there is a global recognition amongst Airline crew that the rosters are getting tougher and long term the impact on health is severe. Short term the impact on family life is severe. The impact on safety is real.
I imagine the intent of the various flight and duty time laws was to ensure safety, they probably went a fair way to achieving that when written ( I don't really know as I wasn't flying) but now with both short flights and long flights leaving at all times of the day they do not. The rest periods do not account for the physiology of the human body and as such pilots find themselves fighting sleep hormones when signing on and trying to sleep when the body has just registered the sun coming up. Short term this can be managed but after months/ years/ decades chronic fatigue sets in and depression/ cancer/ heart disease follow. The science on this is immature but clearly points to major health issues.
If this were is openly acknowledged by ICAO and the various XAA's the only thing that will happen to the industry is that the ticket prices will stabilise a fraction instead of continuing to become cheaper each and every year ( inflation adjusted). and we will have a safer transport system.

[CurtainTwitcher]

If this were is openly acknowledged by ICAO and the various XAA's the only thing that will happen to the industry is that the ticket prices will stabilise a fraction instead of continuing to become cheaper each and every year ( inflation adjusted). and we will have a safer transport system
Problem is framer, there is always a manager willing to throw someone else under the bus for a buck. Unless the rules are completely harmonised internationally (never going to happen), someone will always seek to game & arbitrage the rules to shave a few cents here and there.

Even worse, new pilots to the industry think they can get ahead by assisting those same managers to get experience, so they can get the "good jobs", not realising, that they are actually cutting their own throats in the long run.

This is the "genius" of globalization - create a giant for market for, and have labour race itself to the bottom.

[Hoofharted]

The mob I fly for have no regard for rosters at all. Their entire business model is based on "under employing" and then relying on inflicting short notice (some after sign on) changes on the crew as and when required. There is no regard given for EBA, CWA or any shall we say "reasonable fairness" when it comes to stuffing the crew around on a regular basis. :yuk: