JQ reaches new heights, just not today.

[Pearly White]

JQ operating a 321 today VH-VWX MEL-SYD-MEL at FL270 up and FL280 back while all other jet traffic is sitting happy between FL340 and FL390 either way. Flights also delayed due "Engineering". Problems with pressurisation?

[morno]

Yeah they just decided to go without it.

What a stupid effing question and who really gives a toss :ugh:

By the way, they can fly at whatever level they want. Maybe they wanted to go faster.

[A320 Flyer]

Went up and back twice today in a 73. Was a ****house ride at times above 280/290. In other news….. engagement

[AQIS Boigu]

JQ operating a 321 today VH-VWX MEL-SYD-MEL at FL270 up and FL280 back while all other jet traffic is sitting happy between FL340 and FL390 either way. Flights also delayed due "Engineering". Problems with pressurisation?


Maybe they legally dispatched with a Pack or a Bleed under the MEL and were required to follow an Ops procedure?!

Nothing to report - move on please

(You can fly all the way to Europe or the US with a pack U/S under the MEL - even at FL310)

[AviatoR21]

They probably flew well below REC MAX and OPT due to fear of coffin corner which is a topic of debate at JQ on the NEO. Airbus says it’s ok but fear culture has set in.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

There are a number of reasons why one would choose to fly in the high 20’s in a jet. None of them really warrant discussion other than out of curiosity. The crew had reasons, safety wasn’t compromised, move on.

P.S. FL280 and below are non-RVSM levels.

[PW1830]

A fair question and an opportunity for those with the systems knowledge to share the possible reasons with an interested party. Nothing top secret - things happen in aviation and there are ways to get the pax where they want to go with minimal reduction in safety and ultimately the pilot gets paid.
Went ADL- PER at 240 one day - made up an hour on 390 plan, onward service SIN back on schedule. Had an early beer and no one asked any questions.

[cLeArIcE]

Well, you can fly Sydney to Melbourne pretty quickly at F240 and Mach .79 :E.. So I've heard.

[das Uber Soldat]

They probably flew well below REC MAX and OPT due to fear of coffin corner which is a topic of debate at JQ on the NEO. Airbus says it’s ok but fear culture has set in.
huh? I regularly fly the NEO near REC MAX. Its fine.

[Bula]

They probably flew well below REC MAX and OPT due to fear of coffin corner which is a topic of debate at JQ on the NEO. Airbus says it’s ok but fear culture has set in.

Too many drivers believe Vls is the bottom of coffin corner. Next time you go flying have a look where Alpha Prot is, a long way below Vls when compared to the CEO family.

Though by definition, below 15000, green dot is calculated exactly the same as the CEO family (however limited to 250 kts below 10000’ from memory), the upper level calculation differs. However theoretically Vls still maintains 1.28 VS, the picture on the PFD is fundamentally different.

I believe this is due to the redesigned wing root. Allows higher flight with the more powerful engines while not limiting the aircraft aerodynamically. You run out of thrust before you run out of wing.

[AviatoR21]

I’m just commenting on what I read from your tech department that they are encouraging you guys to fly at OPT and not fear. No fuel savings from the NEO flying 2-4000’ below OPT.

[Bula]

I’m just commenting on what I read from your tech department that they are encouraging you guys to fly at OPT and not fear. No fuel savings from the NEO flying 2-4000’ below OPT.

A321 NEO 94t ISA OPT FL320 CI = 10

FL320 = 6.15 kg/nm
FL300 = 6.188 kg/nm
FL280 = 6.294 kg/nm

Just because it’s less than 100kg, doesn’t mean there isn’t a fuel saving.

Then you select Mach. Say 0.79

FL320 = 6.275 kg/nm
FL300 = 6.33 kg/nm
FL280 = 6.53 kg/nm

[aussieflyboy]

You’ll need to save that 100kg for when you rock up to your bay and have to wait 10 minutes for a marshaller and then another 100kg because no-one bothered to plug in ground power.

[Ollie Onion]

A321 NEO 94t ISA OPT FL320 CI = 10

FL320 = 6.15 kg/nm
FL300 = 6.188 kg/nm
FL280 = 6.294 kg/nm

Just because it’s less than 100kg, doesn’t mean there isn’t a fuel saving.

Then you select Mach. Say 0.79

FL320 = 6.275 kg/nm
FL300 = 6.33 kg/nm
FL280 = 6.53 kg/nm


Yea, but you get there quicker :-)

[Colonel_Klink]

Well, you can fly Sydney to Melbourne pretty quickly at F240 and Mach .79 :E.. So I've heard.

And some new frequencies to talk to as well. I’ve been handed over to CBR approach on one SYD MEL flight 😁

[Icarus2001]

No fuel savings from the NEO flying 2-4000’ below OPT.

​​​​​​​ A321 NEO 94t ISA OPT FL320 CI = 10

FL320 = 6.15 kg/nm
FL300 = 6.188 kg/nm
FL280 = 6.294 kg/nm

​​​​​​​Scratching head.

[Capn Bloggs]

Scratching head.
​​​​​​​Why? Bugs? It's kgs/mile, not miles per gallon.

[Ollie Onion]

So over 1000nm if will cost you 144kg to go 4,000’ lower? Who cares, I wasted that today waiting for ground power with the engines running and no APU. Not to mention the 400kg I wasted at the holding point in Sydney a couple of months ago waiting to be released due to a noise movement quota for departures.

[Icarus2001]

Why? Bugs? It's kgs/mile, not miles per gallon.

Because he/she/they seem to have proved the point.

[Capt Fathom]

Well if you’re going to lose it at the holding point or parking bay, why not make up for it in flight? It all counts!

[a_pilot]

It all counts!

Exactly.

What I find contradictory, is that many years ago (before external power use), some pilots used the excuse "why should we care about fuel efficiency if they leave the APU running all night". Ok I understand your point of view.

Yet now when they are using ground power to avoid the APU running all night, some pilots still don't care. They long forgot their original excuse about blaming the company for running the APU all night and still don't try to operate efficiently as a professional even when the company is making an effort.

[cLeArIcE]

Exactly.

What I find contradictory, is that many years ago (before external power use), some pilots used the excuse "why should we care about fuel efficiency if they leave the APU running all night". Ok I understand your point of view.

Yet now when they are using ground power to avoid the APU running all night, some pilots still don't care. They long forgot their original excuse about blaming the company for running the APU all night and still don't try to operate efficiently as a professional even when the company is making an effort.
Oh I don't care because JQ treats us like ****. Couldn't careless what they do with the aircraft over night. Treat me with some respect and fix our rosters and maybe I'll care. But until then I couldn't give a ****.

[Ollie Onion]

Oh I don't care because JQ treats us like ****. Couldn't careless what they do with the aircraft over night. Treat me with some respect and fix our rosters and maybe I'll care. But until then I couldn't give a ****.


100% with you.

[a_pilot]

I couldn't give a ****.

Some people need a reality check.

Take a look at CX and VA and take note off all the ex CX pilots happy to throw away 10 years of seniority or more to come back to return to Australia to work for a LCC at the bottom of the seniority list. Says a lot I think.

Take a look at Network and the battles they are facing.

No, I am not management either.

[Lookleft]

The number one problem at Jetstar is the rostering. From that problem all other problems flow like the sick leave and disengagement issues. To change the system so that there is some form of control that the pilots can have over their lives seems to be be beyond the ability or authority of Flight Ops management. I suspect that the CP has told the EM level what the issue is but in their eyes he is just another pilot and he needs to get on board the HR wrecking ball or get out of the way like the previous CP did. all the Cathay pilots will be singing the same tune after 12 months (or shorter) on the line when they find that the work-life balance they thought they were signing up for simply isn't there.

I remember my mother saying "Think of all the starving children!." when I was expected to eat broad beans on the dinner plate in front of me. Thinking of others at that point in time did not change the fact that there were still broad beans in front of me that I had to eat.

[Ollie Onion]

Some people need a reality check.

Take a look at CX and VA and take note off all the ex CX pilots happy to throw away 10 years of seniority or more to come back to return to Australia to work for a LCC at the bottom of the seniority list. Says a lot I think.

Take a look at Network and the battles they are facing.

No, I am not management either.

What a load of rubbish, Australian airlines have always lagged behind on terms and conditions as Management have always used the fact that expats want to come home as proof that our contracts are great. Fact of the matter is though that Cathay, Emirates etc were not great places to be over covid and with Hong Kong now under Chinese rule and the shutting of satellite bases many pilots decided to ‘come home’. Don’t confuse that with pilots overseas being attracted home by great contracts, these expats will be complaining like the rest of us once they realise just how much the new Optimiser/FRMS combo sucks. The only solution is to take FTG and Sick days to maintain some form of control over your sleep and health.

[a_pilot]

Cathay Pacific (https://simpleflying.com/cathay-pacific-lost-half-senior-pilots-since-2019/)

Rubbish?

At least half the pilots resigned.

They didn't all leave just to come home. I know at least one personally working elsewhere overseas.

Don’t confuse that with pilots overseas being attracted home by great contracts

Be happy that you have a job in Australia even if the contract might not be the best, as this is more important to some people, is what I was trying to say. This was always a trade off or compensation for being away from home. Look at the "whole package" including where you live.

If you don't give a ****, imagine if you were living in some 3rd world corrupt ****hole or a country that is racist and makes you feel 2nd class? Yet you are still not happy in Australia.

Take a reality check.

[Chronic Snoozer]

Be happy that you have a job in Australia even if the contract might not be the best, as this is more important to some people, is what I was trying to say. This was always a trade off or compensation for being away from home. Look at the "whole package" including where you live.

If you don't give a ****, imagine if you were living in some 3rd world corrupt ****hole or a country that is racist and makes you feel 2nd class? Yet you are still not happy in Australia.

Take a reality check.

The reality is the pilot profession has been undermined by IR policies, outsourcing and inflation. You’re saying that pilots should “be happy” with having a job in Australia. It’s that type of surrender-monkey attitude that brings a tear (of laughter) to the eye of the HR boffins stalking this site. How did we ever make it out of the coal mines on 0.30c a day?

When you say “3rd world corrupt ****hole of a country that is racist”, could you narrow it down a bit because there’s quite a bit of competition? Australia has 3rd world infrastructure, a smidge of corruption and might be a teeny weeny bit racist some would argue. Throw us a bone. Maybe we should just accept that and go for a decent pay rise instead eh?

Any management mug (or pilot sympathiser) that tosses out the adage “Well if you don’t like it, leave” will cop the retort “Why should I leave because you can’t do YOUR job?”

[Ollie Onion]

Cathay Pacific (https://simpleflying.com/cathay-pacific-lost-half-senior-pilots-since-2019/)

Rubbish?

At least half the pilots resigned.

They didn't all leave just to come home. I know at least one personally working elsewhere overseas.



Be happy that you have a job in Australia even if the contract might not be the best, as this is more important to some people, is what I was trying to say. This was always a trade off or compensation for being away from home. Look at the "whole package" including where you live.

If you don't give a ****, imagine if you were living in some 3rd world corrupt ****hole or a country that is racist and makes you feel 2nd class? Yet you are still not happy in Australia.

Take a reality check.

Any there you have it, don’t worry about the inferior contract and crappy management just ‘be happy’ you work in Australia. That is why our contracts are so far behind.

[Window heat]

Back to the original question…..the thing I found most interesting about this thread is that some people thought it was best to pour ****e on the OP.

There are many reasons people fly well below optimum. the I don’t know the OP’s role/type or experience but they may not have come across this before.

[Gas Chamber]

Some people need a reality check.

Take a look at CX and VA and take note off all the ex CX pilots happy to throw away 10 years of seniority or more to come back to return to Australia to work for a LCC at the bottom of the seniority list. Says a lot I think.

Take a look at Network and the battles they are facing.

No, I am not management either.

you're definitely a gas lighting tool though…and most likely management.

[a_pilot]

Australia has 3rd world infrastructure, a smidge of corruption and might be a teeny weeny bit racist some would argue.

Many are very happy to live in Australia just to be close to friends and family if no other reason. This is most important to many people.

I couldn't give a ****

Lucky you don't work for Bonza hey ?
Take a reality check.

[Gas Chamber]

Many are very happy to live in Australia just to be close to friends and family if no other reason. This is most important to many people.



Lucky you don't work for Bonza hey ?

where do you work? Interested given your ridiculous comments

[Pearly White]

Back to the original question…..the thing I found most interesting about this thread is that some people thought it was best to pour ****e on the OP.

There are many reasons people fly well below optimum. the I don’t know the OP’s role/type or experience but they may not have come across this before.
Water off a duck's back.

I have never flown an Airbus, never will, and I don't fly much at all these days except for fun, but I've probably flown higher and faster than most here. With a handle like yours you might understand.

Just thought it odd that one aircraft was flying lower on multiple sectors that day than other aircraft of the same type with the same paint job. Interesting theory that old mate is concerned about flying near the edge of the graph, and I get that. But 280 is way below the Armstrong line, and as was pointed out, not quite as fuel efficient. The accountants must have missed that flight.

[das Uber Soldat]

Water off a duck's back.

I have never flown an Airbus, never will, and I don't fly much at all these days except for fun, but I've probably flown higher and faster than most here. With a handle like yours you might understand.

Just thought it odd that one aircraft was flying lower on multiple sectors that day than other aircraft of the same type with the same paint job. Interesting theory that old mate is concerned about flying near the edge of the graph, and I get that. But 280 is way below the Armstrong line, and as was pointed out, not quite as fuel efficient. The accountants must have missed that flight.
Reported turbulence most likely reason. Nobody is flying at 280 because they're scared of REC MAX.