Jetstar 787's
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetstar's A330 fleet ex SIN. Are they doing that well?
As of Mid July 2013
SINKIX: 4 weekly vs SQ 14 weekly
SINPEK: 3 weekly vs SQ 28 weekly (service started daily and gradually shrun)
SINMEL: 5 weekly vs SQ soon to be 28 weekly and QF apparently flying empty planes to Singapore now without the Europe feed, flying SINMELSIN at the same timing as JQ. JQ's SINMEL also started off daily and has shrunk to 5 weekly
SINAKL: 3 weekly vs SQ 14 weekly. Service also started off daily and shrunk
Total Weekly Services ex SIN: 15
Scoot as of Mid July 2013
SINBKK 7x weekly
SINSYD 7x weekly
SINOOL 5x weekly
SINTPEICN 3x weekly
SINTPENRT 7x weekly
SIN-Tianjin 4x weekly
SIN-Shenyang-Qingdao 3x weekly
SIN-Nanjing 3x weekly
Total Weekly Services ex SIN: 39
Anecdotally, JQ's A330s ex SIN don't seem to be leaving full, and QF is struggling to fill the Australia-SIN flights.
Qantas commitment to Asia Business Travel - Page 2 - FlyerTalk Forums
(You can also check seat maps on KVS just before QF flights close for check in - many SIN flights wide open)
I do wonder if Jetstar will continue to operate widebodies ex SIN for much longer.
Does anyone know why CAAS has this crew rest area requirement for Jetstar's A330s? Eg do SQ's A330s and 772s flying 7 hour flights have a similar crew rest area?
As of Mid July 2013
SINKIX: 4 weekly vs SQ 14 weekly
SINPEK: 3 weekly vs SQ 28 weekly (service started daily and gradually shrun)
SINMEL: 5 weekly vs SQ soon to be 28 weekly and QF apparently flying empty planes to Singapore now without the Europe feed, flying SINMELSIN at the same timing as JQ. JQ's SINMEL also started off daily and has shrunk to 5 weekly
SINAKL: 3 weekly vs SQ 14 weekly. Service also started off daily and shrunk
Total Weekly Services ex SIN: 15
Scoot as of Mid July 2013
SINBKK 7x weekly
SINSYD 7x weekly
SINOOL 5x weekly
SINTPEICN 3x weekly
SINTPENRT 7x weekly
SIN-Tianjin 4x weekly
SIN-Shenyang-Qingdao 3x weekly
SIN-Nanjing 3x weekly
Total Weekly Services ex SIN: 39
Anecdotally, JQ's A330s ex SIN don't seem to be leaving full, and QF is struggling to fill the Australia-SIN flights.
Qantas commitment to Asia Business Travel - Page 2 - FlyerTalk Forums
(You can also check seat maps on KVS just before QF flights close for check in - many SIN flights wide open)
I do wonder if Jetstar will continue to operate widebodies ex SIN for much longer.
Does anyone know why CAAS has this crew rest area requirement for Jetstar's A330s? Eg do SQ's A330s and 772s flying 7 hour flights have a similar crew rest area?
JQ currently operate A330 sectors up to 9.5 hours with two crew only... No crew rest allowed! Longer augmented flights generously utilise a pax seat for rest as there is no dedicated facility.
Hi LeadSled, you can't be VH registered and be administered by CAAS. CAAS only regulate 9V aircraft. The Jetstar A330s in Sing are still administered by CASA.
I suggest you all acquaint yourselves with the meaning and terms of an ICAO 83bis agreement, something I have pointed out before, but it obviously has not "registered". The provisions for an 83bis agreement are covered in Australian aviation legislation.
Such agreements are quite common.
To use 83bis agreements has been a long term aim of the QF senior management, it seems to be a tradeoff of legislative constraints and financial issues versus the obvious operational cost advantages of dealing with CAAS ---- and not having to deal with a very dysfunctional, very unpredictable and very expensive CASA AU.
I should imagine that the fact that it shafts Australian unions is the icing on the cake, as far as the current QF board is concerned.
But, it ain't all about labor costs.
Re: Ben Sandilands, I do indeed mean he is unusually well informed, compared to most commentators, many of whom are uninformed. To say he is "usually" well informed implies that he is sometimes not well informed, an occurrence so rare that I can't recall an example, and I have known the man for many, many years. He is a wonderful example the old fashioned traditional journalist, not you modern "Media Studies" graduate.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 24th May 2013 at 05:27.
That's great LeadSled. It might be covered by Australian legislation but is it covered by the Singapore regs? I find it very difficult to believe that CAAS would buy into regulating a VH registered aircraft, knowing them well.
DrPepz, would like your opinion here.
DrPepz, would like your opinion here.
I find it very difficult to believe that CAAS would buy into regulating a VH registered aircraft,
Why would it be a problem for CAAS, they are a competent organisation, and genuinely ICAO compliant. Jetstar already has a substantial operation in Singapore, as we all know. Adding another bunch of aircraft would be no big deal for CAAS, and effectively it makes no difference where the aircraft are registered, any more than it makes a difference when non VH- aircraft are operated on an Australian AOC.
However, I did say in my original comments that I did not know on which register the JQ 787s would appear.
An 83bis agreement is part of the Chicago convention.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 24th May 2013 at 14:50.
The AOC would already have to be in place w9..........the 83bis agreement would be intended to cover an aircraft from a non-Singaporean operator that was intended to be leased (operated) by a Singaporean AOC holder.
CAAS AC AOC-8(1) covers the transfer of State of Registry responsibilities under 83bis agreements.
Given the recent (ongoing??) highly-publicised 'antics' of CASA, it would be surprising if CAAS did NOT insist on the transfer of State of Registry responsibilities from CASA (the other Authority) as a necessary precondition to maintain effective oversight of any VH-registered aircraft operated under a CAAS-approved 83 bis agreement.
Others may disagree though.
Article 83 bis
Transfer of certain functions and duties
(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of Articles 12, 30, 31 and 32(a), when an aircraft registered in a contracting State is operated pursuant to an agreement for the lease, charter or interchange of the aircraft or any similar arrangement by an operator who has his principal place of business or, if he has no such place of business, his permanent residence in another contracting State, the State of registry may, by agreement with such other State, transfer to it all or part of its functions and duties as State of registry in respect of that aircraft under Articles 12, 30, 31, and 32(a). The State of registry shall be relieved of responsibility in respect of the functions and duties transferred.
Transfer of certain functions and duties
(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of Articles 12, 30, 31 and 32(a), when an aircraft registered in a contracting State is operated pursuant to an agreement for the lease, charter or interchange of the aircraft or any similar arrangement by an operator who has his principal place of business or, if he has no such place of business, his permanent residence in another contracting State, the State of registry may, by agreement with such other State, transfer to it all or part of its functions and duties as State of registry in respect of that aircraft under Articles 12, 30, 31, and 32(a). The State of registry shall be relieved of responsibility in respect of the functions and duties transferred.
14.3 CAAS generally does not transfer its safety oversight responsibilities to other Authorities. However, CAAS may accept the transfer of State of Registry responsibilities from another Authority, if it deems it necessary to maintain effective oversight of the aircraft.
Others may disagree though.
SIUYA,
I, for one, agree entirely with your comments.
I have been involved with a number of arrangements where regulatory authority has been transferred, these were all arrangements between FAA and UK CAA.
The one thing that usually applies is that the tech. crews have to have a license commensurate with the state of registration. When Qantas operated N- aircraft on its AOC, we all had to have FAA ATRs or CPLs. Before any of you start jumping up and down, CASA regularly issues appropriate licenses and ratings against foreign licenses, as an administrative exercise, as those around in '89 will well remember.
Tootle pip!!
I, for one, agree entirely with your comments.
I have been involved with a number of arrangements where regulatory authority has been transferred, these were all arrangements between FAA and UK CAA.
The one thing that usually applies is that the tech. crews have to have a license commensurate with the state of registration. When Qantas operated N- aircraft on its AOC, we all had to have FAA ATRs or CPLs. Before any of you start jumping up and down, CASA regularly issues appropriate licenses and ratings against foreign licenses, as an administrative exercise, as those around in '89 will well remember.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 25th May 2013 at 06:40.
LeadSled...
With the licences, if the AOC holder's flight crews did not hold Australian licences, CASA could also render valid FCLs issued by another Contracting State in accordance with para 1.2.2.1 of Annex 1.
I've also been involved in 83bis arrangements in the past - some were easy, but others were a nightmare.
With the licences, if the AOC holder's flight crews did not hold Australian licences, CASA could also render valid FCLs issued by another Contracting State in accordance with para 1.2.2.1 of Annex 1.
I've also been involved in 83bis arrangements in the past - some were easy, but others were a nightmare.
CAAS accepted the Jetstar Asia A320s getting transferred from VH to 9V registration, so there is some predecence?
If the A320s that were transferred from VH to 9V registrations were first-of-type on the 9V register, then there would be a 'sort of' precendence transferring B787s onto the 9V register if they were also first-of-type onto that register. Lot's of paperwork involved if that was the case.
But if they weren't first of type onto the register they're being transferred to, then its no big deal transferring a type from one register to another, providing the airworthiness paperwork is acceptable to the State of Registry that you are transferring the aircraft to (more or less, in Golden Book terms!).
But there's absolutely no need to transfer the registrations from VH to 9V registry under an 83bis arrangement, providing the CAAS is agreeable to the proposed arrangement.
As I've previously stated, this sort of thing isn't all that straightforward, so others may disagree with my interpretation.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: On the equator
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just wondering then, if the aircraft are VH registered, and crews have CASA flight crew licenses, then are the flights operated under Australian Air Law with respect to flight duty and flight time limitations?
training wheels...
If the duties and functions normally attached to the State of Registry are transferred pursuant to Article 83 bis, the State of the Operator will be internationally responsible and liable for them and will implement them in accordance with its own laws and regulations.
Flight time, flight duty periods, duty periods and rest periods for fatigue management are covered under Annex 6 Part I:
But if the crews of VH-registered aircraft are operating on CASA licences, my interpretation is that the existing (State of Registry-approved) FDTLs will apply, irrespective of any 83 bis agreement.
However, as previously stated, others may disagree.
If the duties and functions normally attached to the State of Registry are transferred pursuant to Article 83 bis, the State of the Operator will be internationally responsible and liable for them and will implement them in accordance with its own laws and regulations.
Flight time, flight duty periods, duty periods and rest periods for fatigue management are covered under Annex 6 Part I:
For the purpose of managing fatigue, the State of the Operator shall establish regulations specifying the limitations applicable to the flight time, flight duty periods, duty periods and rest periods for flight crew members.
However, as previously stated, others may disagree.
Last edited by SIUYA; 26th May 2013 at 01:41.
SIUYA,
When we operated N registered aircraft on a UK AOC, we all had to have FAA licenses, but all provisions of the UK AOC applied, including FDT requirements.
At that time, FAA FDT rules would have been far more restrictive.
Tootle pip!!
When we operated N registered aircraft on a UK AOC, we all had to have FAA licenses, but all provisions of the UK AOC applied, including FDT requirements.
At that time, FAA FDT rules would have been far more restrictive.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 27th May 2013 at 05:30.
OOPS!
LeadSled,
Yes, I think the point you make is correct, and that what I should have said is that the State of OPERATOR FDTLs would apply, irrespective of the VH registration or CASA licences.
I didn't completely RTFQ of training wheels' question, and assumed that the crews AND aircraft came from the same OPERATOR (lessee) of the VH-registered aircraft.
But............it doesn't necessarily follow that crews AND aircraft come from the same operator, so you're correct.
My bad!
These sort of arrangements can be bloody complex, and I'm happy to accept I stuffed up!
Yes, I think the point you make is correct, and that what I should have said is that the State of OPERATOR FDTLs would apply, irrespective of the VH registration or CASA licences.
I didn't completely RTFQ of training wheels' question, and assumed that the crews AND aircraft came from the same OPERATOR (lessee) of the VH-registered aircraft.
But............it doesn't necessarily follow that crews AND aircraft come from the same operator, so you're correct.
My bad!
These sort of arrangements can be bloody complex, and I'm happy to accept I stuffed up!
Last edited by SIUYA; 27th May 2013 at 09:24.
This article suggests the 787s will be delivered end of September and operational in November. Any idea what international routes they will fly?
Would MEL-SIN be likely?
Australia's JetStar to get its first 787 in late September - ch-aviation.ch
Would MEL-SIN be likely?
Australia's JetStar to get its first 787 in late September - ch-aviation.ch