738/787 Mixed Fleet Flying

[Sidestick_n_Rudder]

Hi guys,

Does anyone know if any airline does 737 and 787 Mixed Fleet Flying? It is technically possible and described in 737 OSD document, just wondering if anyone actually went for it and, if so, how does it work in practice?

Cheers,

SnR

[Twiglet1]

TUI UK I think but it may be 6 months on one and 6 on the other so not MFF

[djanello]

TUI Belgium does it.

[Themax23]

Hi,

We're combining 737NG/Max and 787 at TUI Belgium yes.

In practice, roster is completely mixed, you can fly a 737 sector on day 1 of the week, then depart on a 4 days 787 mission on day 2. On average, 1 or 2 long hauls per month, the rest is filled with 737 flights.

Very nice to be able to fly both as they both are very nice to fly ! The 787 for its comfort and the 737 for the fun of flying a lot on nice destinations. But it requires more work to keep updated on both types, reading books of both aircraft at the same time, and try to not mix knowledge of one onto the other.

[olster]

Not a good idea. Flare height differential for starters. They were told sometime ago. Could end in tears but the bean counters and their brown nose mates in management get their way.

[Themax23]

Not a good idea. Flare height differential for starters.

You get used to that very quickly, you can easily switch between both. It's like walking and riding a bicycle, you can do both, you've learned both, and you can instinctively switch from one skill to the other without thinking.

[Tomaski]

I've had jobs where I was qualified in more than one type and yes it is doable but the key is fly both regularly and be very very clear on which memory items go with which aircraft. Just need to go if not slowly then at least not quickly and very methodically reminding yourself wich plane your in.

[olster]

Oh, that’s ok then.

[olster]

Ok, I’ll bite. Having been in an airline that mixed flew 2 differing fbw Airbus types, a big one and a small one, the Regulator stopped it after one too many heavy landings so I would suggest it is not as simple as that. Apart from the obvious that the 737 and 787 are completely different and incompatible. I used to work for Thomson and these points were made. So as long as the targets are met and the bonuses come rolling in who cares eh?

[t-bag]

What he said ^^^^^^^
Flown both, trained and examined on both.
Asking for trouble, it will bite someone someday soon.
Sorry - edit , unless you are a test pilot or belgian skygod.

[Yaw String]

Neos Spa,based in Milan.

[Peter47]

As a matter of interest, could you combine flying as a cruise relief pilot on a 787 with the 737? It could be a way of keeping up the number of landings performed by ULH crews.

[craka]

Why would you want to? You are making huge manpower savings for the company. Massive.

The more types the more pilots the more jobs the more upgrades. Less type ratings less jobs etc etc. surely that’s industrial 101.

This bulls$1t attitude the MFF is good for the pilots needs to stop here.

Who cares about the practicalities of it, industrially you are screwing yourselves if you allow it.

Move on........

[A and C]

About Time ! With any luck it will come to an airline near me soon !

[beamer]

I used to fly the 75 and 76 and I thought that was questionable as one could go months without flying the widebody. If the 75 and 76 were disparate types albeit with similar though different flight decks, what price the 'similarities' between the 73 and 78 ?

[Smythe]

You get used to that very quickly, you can easily switch between both. It's like walking and riding a bicycle, you can do both, you've learned both, and you can instinctively switch from one skill to the other without thinking

until an abnormal condition, and instinct goes all to hell between the variants.

Complacency between these variants is a big problem.

[A and C]

I can’t help feeling that the difficulty’s of flying two types are being overplayed.

[msbbarratt]

Ok, I’ll bite. Having been in an airline that mixed flew 2 differing fbw Airbus types, a big one and a small one, the Regulator stopped it after one too many heavy landings so I would suggest it is not as simple as that.

I would be interested to know how was that resolved. Were pilots regularly cycled between the 2 fleets (e.g. 6 months one, 6 months the other, plenty of sim time inbetween)? Or did crews tend to remain on one type following the regulator's intervention? Or, something else! Thanks

[olster]

This was some time ago in a predominantly long haul airline with a couple of A320s attached to a fleet of A340s, It did not go well due to the differential flare height between the two types and routinely hopping between the two aircraft. The Airbus fbw types have genuine synergy and it should be feasible but in those long distance common sense days it was abandoned as having too many risks mainly hard landings. Now we have the new breed of @rselicking managers who promote 737/787 MFF as though they have reinvented the wheel. Cost savings of course and you might have thought that Boeing would strive to prevent further risky operations in the light of recent events. Here’s an example: your 787 pilot now flying to Palma on the now renamed 7378200, how is he / she to deal with a malfunctioning MCAS event? The 737 has an archaic non normal paper QRH as opposed to a modern electronic system. Two completely different methods of non normal management separated by decades of technological advances. Also and finally to answer the ‘overplaying’ of MFF issues statement that is I believe in modern parlance trolling or as I prefer to say just plain stupid. We never learn.

[A and C]

Olster, I. Rather take exception to the Troll label , it is you who has started the name calling.

Anyhow back to the subject, flying is a perishable skill and the current fashion for avoiding hand flying the aircraft has its price and that is the loss of already poor flying skills in the airline business.

I regularly fly with people approaching command who have only flown three types of aircraft and have never gone beyond 70 degrees of bank. While being fine managers of an airliner their default opinion is auto flight.

As someone who flys a lot of different aircraft I have yet to try to land an airliner at SEP height but I might on reflection be forced to agree with you in that the average airline pilot has been parted from his (hers) flying skills by the current automation culture and therefore is no longer capable of flying more than one type of aircraft.

[olster]

Ok, A and C sorry if I used more pejorative language than I should. However.... I have long since tried certainly within a well known airline to argue against MFF particularly the Boeing variety. It is a bean counters wet dream but of course without any idea technically of the challenges and risks. Couple that with our own breed of upwardly thrusting training managers a large proportion of whom in reality know the square root of foxtrot alpha. Aided and abetted by the new generation of pilots such as the 12 year old Belgian Chuck Yeager already posted here who merely want an extra type rating and the perceived glamour of long haul. Have a look at the overhead panel on even the newest 737 versus the 787. What are the memory items on each and can you remember them while ‘startled’. I haven’t even touched the surface and did I mention the differing flare heights...?

[Callsign Kilo]

I rather like the idea, in theory. At the end of the day they are merely aeroplanes. If you can fly & operate you should be fine.
I fly one of the types and I have friends that fly the other. They appear vastly different in many areas however there are certainy some similarities (however I think the former outweighs the later!?). There's clearly an element of risk and that needs to be managed properly. Thats the concern though; familiarity with one, unfamiliarity with other possibly mixed with the onset of fatigue, poor weather, an unfamiliar destination etc. I'm sure the authorities/regulators will be watching closely. As for the bean counters, an obvious win