Jetstar looking for Contract FOs
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Off track, again
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Click on the link to listen to the interview on Radio NZ: Airline pilots seek injunction to stop Jetstar
For those who think ZQN is just another tricky little airport, just consider for a moment why the approach minima for a non-RNP approved operator is over 3000 feet AAL and the departure minima typically above 4000 feet AAL. Everything below that is visual manoeuvring around the mountains. Because of the terrain in the vicinity of the airport, the circuit pattern is a figure 8. There is terrain rising more than 6000 feet above the runway just a handful of miles away from it. Can you honestly say you have ever operated a medium sized jet to an airport with these levels of operational constraints before? Yes it's not rocket science flying in there, but believe me, local knowledge is invaluable.
For those who think ZQN is just another tricky little airport, just consider for a moment why the approach minima for a non-RNP approved operator is over 3000 feet AAL and the departure minima typically above 4000 feet AAL. Everything below that is visual manoeuvring around the mountains. Because of the terrain in the vicinity of the airport, the circuit pattern is a figure 8. There is terrain rising more than 6000 feet above the runway just a handful of miles away from it. Can you honestly say you have ever operated a medium sized jet to an airport with these levels of operational constraints before? Yes it's not rocket science flying in there, but believe me, local knowledge is invaluable.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Daghdaghistan
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget to mention the damn paraglider that has strayed into your path on your departure out of the Frankton Arm, or the parachute operation that is just around Tollgate... right when you want to go IMC....
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: NZ
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the whole thing comes down to "are Jetstar and Jetconnect both Qantas?" Effectively they want to shut down one subsidiary and directly replace it with another. In NZ you cannot make employees redundant and then relace them with other employees who are getting paid less. What Qantas are saying is that they are not doing that....the company's are completely seperate, wheras we know they are all part of the same parent company. It's a cynical attempt by Qantas to screw over NZers.
Imagine the stink if Air NZ was doing this to Australians.....the government would become involved quick-smart.
Maybe we should be talking to our MPs and expressing our disgust.
Imagine the stink if Air NZ was doing this to Australians.....the government would become involved quick-smart.
Maybe we should be talking to our MPs and expressing our disgust.
That's a pretty far stretch MC. Not even relevant. The comparable situation would be if ANZ closed Ansett and opened XYZ airline and offered the Ansett staff a job on significantly less.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Imagine the stink if Air NZ was doing this to Australians.....the government would become involved quick-smart.
The result was far worse for the Ansett employees than being offered reduced terms & conditions. Unless one considers redundancy payouts a better deal.
My inference to Ansett, was no in reference to the current situation. Only to the likelyhood the Australian Government would intervene in the situation.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Ncise
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Men,
I feel like a change.....from flying here in South Africa, why don't I come on down and do the Jetstar contract route for a while......
Who know's I might just help you'all out with yer rugga and cricket too
Only joshing.....have a great day and good luck to the Chiefs-BULLS rule OK
I feel like a change.....from flying here in South Africa, why don't I come on down and do the Jetstar contract route for a while......
Who know's I might just help you'all out with yer rugga and cricket too
Only joshing.....have a great day and good luck to the Chiefs-BULLS rule OK
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
For those who think ZQN is just another tricky little airport, just consider for a moment why the approach minima for a non-RNP approved operator is over 3000 feet AAL and the departure minima typically above 4000 feet AAL. Everything below that is visual manoeuvring around the mountains. Because of the terrain in the vicinity of the airport, the circuit pattern is a figure 8. There is terrain rising more than 6000 feet above the runway just a handful of miles away from it. Can you honestly say you have ever operated a medium sized jet to an airport with these levels of operational constraints before? Yes it's not rocket science flying in there, but believe me, local knowledge is invaluable.
NZQN has its own issues, but it certainly isnt anything more than a planning exercise and a challenge during certain weather conditions.
I've had a much higher level of stress operating out of somewhere like Phuket at Gross weight in the 767 picking our way around the active cells which stretch up to FL500 at times..all the while trying to conserve fuel as its gonna be tight getting into Copenhagen in 13hrs time thanks to a forecast cold front..and forecast CAT3 conditions.
Yep Visual circling at Vref + 40 over the lake would be a welcome change
I like a few others here had a close look at Jetstar NZ, I declined to pay for a test to tell me I was an axe murderer (I know that already) and that I can't fly jets to save myself.
That said, I don't think the contract guys are a bad idea...all of you that moan about the pay have the option of not working for them
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Daghdaghistan
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah but at least worse came to worse, you could clip a cell haughhey right? 
Sure you won't fly into one purposely but worse case scenario you could clip a wing into a bit of cloud and come out if you misjudged it
You can't do that with a 6000 ft mountain.... it tends to bite the wing off....
Sure you won't fly into one purposely but worse case scenario you could clip a wing into a bit of cloud and come out if you misjudged itYou can't do that with a 6000 ft mountain.... it tends to bite the wing off....
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: house
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have flown A320 in and out of NZWN on average weekly over the last four years.
Give me the A320 any day!
Handled right, using the A/C as it was designed, no worries.
Much lower work load than B737.
Give me the A320 any day!
Handled right, using the A/C as it was designed, no worries.
Much lower work load than B737.
terronnd - interested to hear the specifics as to why. I fly NGs (no airbus exp) and I am not interested in starting the A vs B pissing contest, just want to know what specific differences(handling, automation, systems etc.) make the 320 lower workload into a crummy weather airport.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: house
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Slice
Have to say this is my personal view, I know others might not agree and I can't speak about the NG, have only flown the 300.
In short the FMGC (FMC) computed wind alters the target approach speed to maintain a constant G/S up to a point I think is Vfe -5.
If you let the system do the work more brain power can be spent actually flying the A/C and as the Auto Thrust is at work there is no manual manipulation of the thrust levers (remain in detent)
Of course one is not relieved of making sure the A/C is doing the right thing, it is possible that a little nudge of power might be needed on a really bad night, or you might hit the stops with the side stick, but all going well you just have to fly the thing to the ground and plop it on somehow.
The aircraft makes a nice go around and I am a believer that if the wx is so bad you have to go, then perhaps we should not have been there in the first place, rather than saying 'well it would have been OK in the Boeing'
I always felt like a one arm paper hangar in the -300, but I did like it, however I love the Airbus.
Cheers
Have to say this is my personal view, I know others might not agree and I can't speak about the NG, have only flown the 300.
In short the FMGC (FMC) computed wind alters the target approach speed to maintain a constant G/S up to a point I think is Vfe -5.
If you let the system do the work more brain power can be spent actually flying the A/C and as the Auto Thrust is at work there is no manual manipulation of the thrust levers (remain in detent)
Of course one is not relieved of making sure the A/C is doing the right thing, it is possible that a little nudge of power might be needed on a really bad night, or you might hit the stops with the side stick, but all going well you just have to fly the thing to the ground and plop it on somehow.
The aircraft makes a nice go around and I am a believer that if the wx is so bad you have to go, then perhaps we should not have been there in the first place, rather than saying 'well it would have been OK in the Boeing'
I always felt like a one arm paper hangar in the -300, but I did like it, however I love the Airbus.
Cheers
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've had a much higher level of stress operating out of somewhere like Phuket at Gross weight in the 767 picking our way around the active cells which stretch up to FL500 at times..all the while trying to conserve fuel as its gonna be tight getting into Copenhagen in 13hrs time thanks to a forecast cold front..and forecast CAT3 conditions.
Challenging some days, yep, but not difficult.
Having operated a -300 into ZQN for the last 4 years I can confirm it really is a challenging and unique place to fly in and out of. But I doubt it is uniquely challenging. I suspect that a lot of the comments here are based on not having flown into other dangerous places and so they only have one point of reference if you like.
I actually think having a mixed crew of contract pilots can be an advantage as someone said previously, better to have one person experienced on type and one on destination rather than two newbies with no, or little, experience one aspect. One of the lessons I have taken from that place is to have escape route A, B AND C planned.
Maybe I'm missing something about Wellington because I really don't think it is that big a deal. I've operated there many times in 40kt plus winds (I recall 58kt was the highest) from both the north and south, and while it an be interesting I have never been surprised by anything that's happened. I reckon it's pretty predictable really.
I actually think having a mixed crew of contract pilots can be an advantage as someone said previously, better to have one person experienced on type and one on destination rather than two newbies with no, or little, experience one aspect. One of the lessons I have taken from that place is to have escape route A, B AND C planned.
Maybe I'm missing something about Wellington because I really don't think it is that big a deal. I've operated there many times in 40kt plus winds (I recall 58kt was the highest) from both the north and south, and while it an be interesting I have never been surprised by anything that's happened. I reckon it's pretty predictable really.
