Qantas Fleet Order Speculation
An FRMS won't save you.
From what I can see it'll allow you to work more BoCs straight, as it assumes your body clock has synced.
So much for family life and all that.....
From what I can see it'll allow you to work more BoCs straight, as it assumes your body clock has synced.
So much for family life and all that.....
Do night credits work on a London pattern. errr no. Do night credits work on a LA pattern. Errr no. They may work on the first sector but after that Local day time goes out the window.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: australia
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've done 2 pilot/4 sector days, 3 pilot/2 sector days and 4 pilot/1 sector days (some 2)
I've been fatigued on all combinations but I can tell you only one usually needs a whole day to recover after...4 Crew ULH.
I don't care about how much time you think is off asleep if you do the math. The reality is that much less sleep is had than mentioned and the body knows when you get home.
FFRATS
I've been fatigued on all combinations but I can tell you only one usually needs a whole day to recover after...4 Crew ULH.
I don't care about how much time you think is off asleep if you do the math. The reality is that much less sleep is had than mentioned and the body knows when you get home.
FFRATS
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: thelodge
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FFRATS,
Agree. When your doing multiple ULH flights its cumulative fatigue with the jetlag too, added to the fact that the sectors are long.
If the new types start flying further this will only get worse.
Of course the company want you to do another 4-8 days away for free!
Imagine if AIPA rolled over every EBA and gave away major conditions every time.
Eventually you will end up with nothing.
Agree. When your doing multiple ULH flights its cumulative fatigue with the jetlag too, added to the fact that the sectors are long.
If the new types start flying further this will only get worse.
Of course the company want you to do another 4-8 days away for free!
Imagine if AIPA rolled over every EBA and gave away major conditions every time.
Eventually you will end up with nothing.
And if we don't make some concessions, we will still end up with nothing. No new aircraft, no career, possibly no job.
This is a good deal. Provides the company with certainty so they know how much it will cost. Provides the mainline pilots with certainty should the new type show up. Will make the senior filth squirm with fear about psn bidding. I don't think we could really have expected much more.
Look forward to seeing the full package.
This is a good deal. Provides the company with certainty so they know how much it will cost. Provides the mainline pilots with certainty should the new type show up. Will make the senior filth squirm with fear about psn bidding. I don't think we could really have expected much more.
Look forward to seeing the full package.
Nunc est bibendum
FFRATS
I've done 2 pilot/4 sector days, 3 pilot/2 sector days and 4 pilot/1 sector days (some 2)
I've been fatigued on all combinations but I can tell you only one usually needs a whole day to recover after...4 Crew ULH.
I've done 2 pilot/4 sector days, 3 pilot/2 sector days and 4 pilot/1 sector days (some 2)
I've been fatigued on all combinations but I can tell you only one usually needs a whole day to recover after...4 Crew ULH.
All this is somewhat irrelevant to the deal in front of us though. It's either a reasonable package or it's not. Given the pay/ lifestyle I did on the 767 and the proposed 787 pay/ lifestyle, I reckon this deal is reasonable.
If you want to selectively cherry pick some premium rates on offer in China at the moment you may want to compare the industrial relations landscape as well.
The higher the $$$, the MUCH greater the risk.
The higher the $$$, the MUCH greater the risk.
Fear Campaign's fear campaign is all about cherry picking figures to support his argument and totally ignoring the totality of the package and industrial situation.
Why the constant reference to DFW-SYD? It is hardly an indicative sector to compare the old and new awards given it is not just the absolute longest sector length in Qantas but the lowest commercial sector in the entire world!!
He keeps postulating that the 787 may only be replacement type, so why not look at all the Asia sectors that it will replace the 330 on and use that in your comparison? SIN, BKK, CGK, NRT, HND, MNL, HKG, PVG. And not just the sectors we do now but the opportunity the aircraft provides to return to the many routes we abandon over the last decade (MEL/PER/CNS-NRT, ADL-SIN, SYD-BOM, etc, etc.) Qantas have made numerous statements of its greater intent to serve Asian destinations directly. During the crew dial-in briefings the Network Planning representatives have made clear that have many plans for new or resumed routes throughout Asia if only they had the airframes to do so.
Reducing night credits and overtime payments will clearly have an effect on ULH sectors but just because the aircraft is capable of these sectors is far from the assumption that that is ALL it will do.
So instead of looking at the longest sector on the planet or inventing new, even more far-fetched, possibilities (SYD-JFK) and imagining how hard done-by you'll be, look at the total picture of where the aircraft is likely to fly. I can't see that it will be any worse off than the A330 on any Asian sectors.
And if you truly feel that it will start flying all sorts of new ULH routes, (SYD-JFK/ORD/Sau Paulo, PER-FRT/CDG/ATH, etc.), then isn't that FANTASTIC!?! That means growth, promotions and pay-rises!
Why only focus on the worst case scenario?
Why the constant reference to DFW-SYD? It is hardly an indicative sector to compare the old and new awards given it is not just the absolute longest sector length in Qantas but the lowest commercial sector in the entire world!!
He keeps postulating that the 787 may only be replacement type, so why not look at all the Asia sectors that it will replace the 330 on and use that in your comparison? SIN, BKK, CGK, NRT, HND, MNL, HKG, PVG. And not just the sectors we do now but the opportunity the aircraft provides to return to the many routes we abandon over the last decade (MEL/PER/CNS-NRT, ADL-SIN, SYD-BOM, etc, etc.) Qantas have made numerous statements of its greater intent to serve Asian destinations directly. During the crew dial-in briefings the Network Planning representatives have made clear that have many plans for new or resumed routes throughout Asia if only they had the airframes to do so.
Reducing night credits and overtime payments will clearly have an effect on ULH sectors but just because the aircraft is capable of these sectors is far from the assumption that that is ALL it will do.
So instead of looking at the longest sector on the planet or inventing new, even more far-fetched, possibilities (SYD-JFK) and imagining how hard done-by you'll be, look at the total picture of where the aircraft is likely to fly. I can't see that it will be any worse off than the A330 on any Asian sectors.
And if you truly feel that it will start flying all sorts of new ULH routes, (SYD-JFK/ORD/Sau Paulo, PER-FRT/CDG/ATH, etc.), then isn't that FANTASTIC!?! That means growth, promotions and pay-rises!
Why only focus on the worst case scenario?
Nunc est bibendum
I'd be prepared to go a little higher to 85%. Wouldn't surprise me if it goes higher again to 90%. The more who attend the road shows, the more I reckon will be inclined to vote yes.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: thelodge
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh Dear Beer Baron,
Few too many beers making typing and reading difficult for you?
What does "the lowest commercial sector in the world", that you have written, translate to in English?
You've suggested that the 787 will be an A330 replacement.
How do you know that?
If the 787 pays more than the A330 flying to Asia then why would the company start new routes there? or even return to flying old ones? It costs them more than the A330 by your own admission.
So on one hand your saying it won't fly the ULH routes where the pay is drastically reduced, but it will fly to Asia(and grow) where it costs Qantas more.
Interesting logic.
SO MANY pilots are asking the wise question, what if the 787 is NOT a growth airplane and just a replacement type for the 747?
Any 747 S/O would be an idiot not to consider what would happen to he or she, should the 787 be a replacement type and they get assigned to the 787.
The facts are that the 747 fleet will require D checks soon at the cost of around $30 million plus per aircraft.
That fleet flies 90% ULH flights and will very likely be replaced by the 787. By Qantas own admission it is the first aircraft to be replaced.
As a Captain on Qrewroom wisely suggested, those routes will be SCL,JNB,LAX and very likely DFW. Or will they keep the greedy, senior, piggy in the trough A380 pilots you so despise on that route?
Of course you cannot compare a roster entirely of DFW, but I and others have never suggested that!
Your relying on misquoting me as the basis of your argument.
I've never said the 787 will do SYD-JFK.
The 777X or A350-1000, should it come further down the track, will have this ability. If zero overtime is agreed upon for the 787, it will not be agreed to by Qantas for future types that will do incredibly long sectors.
It's food for thought. Are you suggesting pilots cannot consider the possibilities?
What is the crime in comparing a very likely roster for the 787 that will most certainly include overtime sectors?
Have you thought about what will happen if the 787 comes and you still don't get a promotion?
Perhaps you will and that's fantastic, however people have a right in the absence of ANY concrete announcements, information, ETC to consider "WHAT IF"
Few too many beers making typing and reading difficult for you?
What does "the lowest commercial sector in the world", that you have written, translate to in English?
You've suggested that the 787 will be an A330 replacement.
How do you know that?
If the 787 pays more than the A330 flying to Asia then why would the company start new routes there? or even return to flying old ones? It costs them more than the A330 by your own admission.
So on one hand your saying it won't fly the ULH routes where the pay is drastically reduced, but it will fly to Asia(and grow) where it costs Qantas more.
Interesting logic.
SO MANY pilots are asking the wise question, what if the 787 is NOT a growth airplane and just a replacement type for the 747?
Any 747 S/O would be an idiot not to consider what would happen to he or she, should the 787 be a replacement type and they get assigned to the 787.
The facts are that the 747 fleet will require D checks soon at the cost of around $30 million plus per aircraft.
That fleet flies 90% ULH flights and will very likely be replaced by the 787. By Qantas own admission it is the first aircraft to be replaced.
As a Captain on Qrewroom wisely suggested, those routes will be SCL,JNB,LAX and very likely DFW. Or will they keep the greedy, senior, piggy in the trough A380 pilots you so despise on that route?
Of course you cannot compare a roster entirely of DFW, but I and others have never suggested that!
Your relying on misquoting me as the basis of your argument.
I've never said the 787 will do SYD-JFK.
The 777X or A350-1000, should it come further down the track, will have this ability. If zero overtime is agreed upon for the 787, it will not be agreed to by Qantas for future types that will do incredibly long sectors.
It's food for thought. Are you suggesting pilots cannot consider the possibilities?
What is the crime in comparing a very likely roster for the 787 that will most certainly include overtime sectors?
Have you thought about what will happen if the 787 comes and you still don't get a promotion?
Perhaps you will and that's fantastic, however people have a right in the absence of ANY concrete announcements, information, ETC to consider "WHAT IF"
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: AUS
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The facts are that the 747 fleet will require D checks soon at the cost of around $30 million plus per aircraft."
Ah no, that's not the "fact" at all. What's your source for that? 3 of the 12 are due, not 'the fleet'. That's why the plan for a long time has been to keep the last 9 until 2021.
Ah no, that's not the "fact" at all. What's your source for that? 3 of the 12 are due, not 'the fleet'. That's why the plan for a long time has been to keep the last 9 until 2021.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: AUS
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"SO MANY pilots are asking the wise question, what if the 787 is NOT a growth airplane and just a replacement type for the 747?
Any 747 S/O would be an idiot not to consider what would happen to he or she, should the 787 be a replacement type and they get assigned to the 787."
Isn't it widely known that there is an increase in fleet size planned? Have you actually asked anyone what the plan is?
747 S/Os have RIN displacement rights to the 330 or to the 380, where some of the most junior pilots are. How do they end up being assigned to the 787?
Any 747 S/O would be an idiot not to consider what would happen to he or she, should the 787 be a replacement type and they get assigned to the 787."
Isn't it widely known that there is an increase in fleet size planned? Have you actually asked anyone what the plan is?
747 S/Os have RIN displacement rights to the 330 or to the 380, where some of the most junior pilots are. How do they end up being assigned to the 787?
It seems that you may be the one struggling with your reading skills Fear Campaign.
Nope. Never said that.
Ahhh... Never said ANYTHING like that. In fact having been an A380 pilot for several years I'd have serious depression issues if I "despised" said pilots.
Why do I suggest the 787 will replace some A330 flying? Well because it is almost exactly the same size as a 333, burns 20% less fuel and by the time they arrive en masse the oldest A330's will be approximately 15 years old.
Again, your comprehension skills let you down. I did not say the 787 would cost more than the A330 on these routes, I was referring only to crew costs. The 787 will burn about a thousand litres less fuel per hour, pilot costs will be almost almost the same, the savings for the company are obvious. That is why they will start new routes and return to old ones.
Yes, there has been little "concrete" information about the future fleet plan but that is not to say we are making our decision in a vacuum. The Chief Pilot, in emails to crew on the 27th of April and the 27th of May, specifically referred to a "net hull increase, growth and promotional opportunities for pilots".
Given how vociferously you are posting on this forum I am fairly sure you would also be following the discussion on Qrewroom. As such you should have seen the AIPA president, who was comprehensively briefed by executive management, stating that "The 787 fleet plan is for net growth of the international fleet". He also stated that it will fly "a mix of North American and Asian" routes.
Again, as I'm sure you are aware, the AIPA CoM are bound by non disclosure agreements and the company is bound by continuous disclosure provisions to the ASX so they can't provide information much more "concrete" than that. Especially given the board has not yet approved the purchase. But that is surely better information to go on than the worst case scenario (or fear campaign) that you are choosing to believe and broadcast.
So on one hand your saying it won't fly the ULH routes
A380 pilots you so despise
Why do I suggest the 787 will replace some A330 flying? Well because it is almost exactly the same size as a 333, burns 20% less fuel and by the time they arrive en masse the oldest A330's will be approximately 15 years old.
why would the company start new routes there? or even return to flying old ones? It costs them more than the A330 by your own admission
Yes, there has been little "concrete" information about the future fleet plan but that is not to say we are making our decision in a vacuum. The Chief Pilot, in emails to crew on the 27th of April and the 27th of May, specifically referred to a "net hull increase, growth and promotional opportunities for pilots".
Given how vociferously you are posting on this forum I am fairly sure you would also be following the discussion on Qrewroom. As such you should have seen the AIPA president, who was comprehensively briefed by executive management, stating that "The 787 fleet plan is for net growth of the international fleet". He also stated that it will fly "a mix of North American and Asian" routes.
Again, as I'm sure you are aware, the AIPA CoM are bound by non disclosure agreements and the company is bound by continuous disclosure provisions to the ASX so they can't provide information much more "concrete" than that. Especially given the board has not yet approved the purchase. But that is surely better information to go on than the worst case scenario (or fear campaign) that you are choosing to believe and broadcast.
Any 747 S/O would be an idiot not to consider what would happen to he or she, should the 787 be a replacement type and they get assigned to the 787."
Those and some pundits here have one thing on their minds, IT's ALL ABOUT ME!
They offer nothing of a future for junior pilots.
Following their line of thinking, all pilots have a few considerations to make, a future on a pretty good deal all things considered,or redundancy, and what might happen if the three amigos quest for the deal being shot down.
It would take one moment for a deal to be placed out there for anyone who was interested and they'd be killed in the rush from people all over the world.
Can't Happen?
Look what's happening to employees and other groups across the group throughout the domestic and international network!
And by that I mean old contracts being replaced by new contracts and new holding companies established to employ said people. Project purple anyone?
ugh:
What is the rush? Given the AIPA President's scare mongering and the fact Alan Joyce congratulated him is more the reason to vote NO. Let me get this straight we have a new set of terms and conditions written into the current agreement(Which allows for a reduction in numbers) means that unless this is massive expansion then all junior crew unable to hold seniority to remain on the A380 will experience these T&Cs which by the way means a 50% paycut for crew currently on the A380 and 40% drop given the flying these aircraft will do compared to the A330. The B747 could easily be gotten rid of in two years and the A380 for that matter. The fact there is still Wide-Bodied positions in Jetstar for a major loss-making long haul operation seem to me that the Long Haul pilot body are able to sell themselves down the drain. I have retired but not before time! As an aside Merrill Lynch have predicted a 62 cent dollar by the end of 2016! This year the CEO and senior management team at Qantas will set records around the world for the biggest bonuses in an airline since the GFC. All this for an airline that has NOT transformed at all!
Nunc est bibendum
Given the AIPA President's scare mongering.....
Personally I don't think Nathan has scaremongered at all. I think he's been quite clever at articulating the 'plan' as far as he can without breaching the NDA. The plan is pretty clear. If the plan changes to the extent that the junior crew you speak of are RIN'd to the 787 then the least of their/ our concerns will be the terms and conditions that we are earning. They/ We will be lucky to just have a job.
No one was fussed when current crew were RIN'd on current WD terms and suffered financial detriment- significant for some- yet here is the opportunity to get on planned expansion and suddenly we are concerned about crew being RIN'd and suffering financial detriment?
We are back to YVR. Seasonally at the moment because we don't have the airframes to do it permanently. I suspect when the airframes turn up we'll do it daily. We are back to SFO and there is scope to expand into there from both BNE and MEL with the right aeroplane..... except we don't have it yet. MEL- DFW and perhaps even BNE- DFW also raises the potential of a continuation to JFK. They're talking NZ- USA again and perhaps that may be DFW as well as LAX.....particularly if we do DFW- JFK.
In short, the potential expansion routes the 787 can make a good return on investment is significant. I've no doubt qantas will get them. The question is whether current Qantas pilots operate them on the proposed rates (which seem reasonable and fair to me and still exceed every other Australian operator's costs for similar type aeroplanes) or whether someone else operates them.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keg
Just how exactly are other pilot's going to operate them as red tails?
Lots of scaremongering along these lines with scant little detail as to how Qantas might do this whilst creating an even greater surplus of its' own pilot's as some other aircraft (B744 & A330) are retired!
Just how exactly are other pilot's going to operate them as red tails?
Lots of scaremongering along these lines with scant little detail as to how Qantas might do this whilst creating an even greater surplus of its' own pilot's as some other aircraft (B744 & A330) are retired!