Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Qantas direct JFK and Heathrow

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Qantas direct JFK and Heathrow

Old 6th May 2019, 02:13
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 3,067
Received 138 Likes on 63 Posts
Airline pilots are typically exposed to 2-4 mSv of radiation per year - well below the 20 mSv Australian occupational limit.
Have you measured this yourself from a dosimeter or is this just the company line? When you say radiation what type of radiation are you referring to?
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 03:07
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SYD
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by neville_nobody


Have you measured this yourself from a dosimeter or is this just the company line? When you say radiation what type of radiation are you referring to?
No I have't measured for myself but I have spoken to a previous QF Capt who did do that as part of his PHD and I didn't get the impression that these figures were off.. Those figures comes from various sources that I have read about ionising cosmic radiation. The CDC in the US (not exactly the company line) refers to an average of 3.07 mSv average annual dose and other estimates in the range of 0.2 to 5 mSv per year... Not sure what you're getting at but if you have some factual evidence or links to studies showing it as being higher than please share.
Vindiesel is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 05:52
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What would be interesting , would be a statistical analysis of the instances of cancer amongst the pilot body compared to the average population.
Looking particularly at cancers such as
  • Lymphoma. such as Hodgkin lymphoma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
  • Leukaemia..
  • Myeloma
  • Basal , squamous and melanoma skin cancers
  • Brain cancers.

When one considers , due to the stringent airline selection criteria , pilots in general tend to be healthier than the general populace what should these statistics present ?
Less or more prevalence of these types of cancer ?
If more , then what is the causative effect creating the outcome ?
blow.n.gasket is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 07:28
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This statement by Joyce is laying the ground for blaming the mainline pilots for the cancellation of 'Project Sunrise' . If you think how he used a confected fight with the Perth airport authorities over A330 to JNB and now B787 to Paris you will understand the mechanisms at play here.

This is of course BS of the highest order - the project has been on the backburner internally in QF for sometime.

To wit:
- AIPA have not been in specific negotiations over the new type and discussions to date have only been of a general nature. I confirmed this with a COM member today. He did concede that its possible that Joyce is setting up AIPA as a patsy so he can then use the Jetconnect pilot group to crew the 'Sunrise' aircraft, although this is the less likely scenario.
- The flight operations management personnel involved in the project (most notably RG) were pulled of it nearly four months ago. Right now there is no input into anything resembling development for a new type for mainline.

Expect several more leaks over the next month or so culminating in the above narrative being trotted out. So pathetic and so utterly predictable.
mohikan is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 07:31
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SYD
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Who is RG??
Vindiesel is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 08:49
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by blow.n.gasket
What would be interesting , would be a statistical analysis of the instances of cancer amongst the pilot body compared to the average population.
Looking particularly at cancers such as
  • Lymphoma. such as Hodgkin lymphoma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
  • Leukaemia..
  • Myeloma
  • Basal , squamous and melanoma skin cancers
  • Brain cancers.

When one considers , due to the stringent airline selection criteria , pilots in general tend to be healthier than the general populace what should these statistics present ?
Less or more prevalence of these types of cancer ?
If more , then what is the causative effect creating the outcome ?

From a medical standpoint, if pilots and cabin crew, when, as a sample contrasted to the general population experience higher rates of disease in the given categories than the general population, then a threshold is readily established.
This is the basis upon which most causal medical compensation cases are settled: That the people in the airline sample have rates of disease higher than the general population (the general sample) would be sufficient to establish liability.
It is the case in recent changes that if an employee in a given occupation contracts a certain type of disease (several cancers) it is assumed a causal link is established. In other words work in Industry A, diagnosed with disease A,B,C receive compensation. The claimant is no longer required to prove a causal linked, it is accepted.

Airlines have the sickness data, perhaps they hope no one makes the link.

Rated De is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 14:37
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Was talking with one of the Qantas pilot WH&S reps the other day.
They mentioned that this topic had been bought up by one or two of the HSR’s at a meeting recently.
Got the impression Qantas not too keen to dig too deep.
Up there with Qantas destroying all their pilot’s initial recruitment medical hearing test data !
blow.n.gasket is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 15:35
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 351
Received 111 Likes on 45 Posts
[QUOTE]I suspect their annual exposure would be more than doing a year's worth of 'project sunrise' flying across the equator at FL320-380[/QUOTE
Assuming of course an equatorial route is the standard as opposed to, say, a particularly southerly route in one direction or the other if the winds are favourable......Lots of options out there given the geographic location of the departure and destination ports.
C441 is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 17:45
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by blow.n.gasket
Was talking with one of the Qantas pilot WH&S reps the other day.
They mentioned that this topic had been bought up by one or two of the HSR’s at a meeting recently.
Got the impression Qantas not too keen to dig too deep.
Up there with Qantas destroying all their pilot’s initial recruitment medical hearing test data !
The last thing an airline would want is a discovery motion peeling back a thinly veiled level of sickness that demonstrates a sickness rate higher for any given disease, greater than the general population.
Workplace safety is a very powerful statute. Airline IR will be keen to ensure that only lip service is paid to this.
Rated De is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 17:54
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by mohikan
This statement by Joyce is laying the ground for blaming the mainline pilots for the cancellation of 'Project Sunrise' . If you think how he used a confected fight with the Perth airport authorities over A330 to JNB and now B787 to Paris you will understand the mechanisms at play here.

This is of course BS of the highest order - the project has been on the backburner internally in QF for sometime.

To wit:
- AIPA have not been in specific negotiations over the new type and discussions to date have only been of a general nature. I confirmed this with a COM member today. He did concede that its possible that Joyce is setting up AIPA as a patsy so he can then use the Jetconnect pilot group to crew the 'Sunrise' aircraft, although this is the less likely scenario.
- The flight operations management personnel involved in the project (most notably RG) were pulled of it nearly four months ago. Right now there is no input into anything resembling development for a new type for mainline.

Expect several more leaks over the next month or so culminating in the above narrative being trotted out. So pathetic and so utterly predictable.
Plausible.
From a strategy point of view, Little Napoleon might be keen on Jetconnect, Jetstar, Network or Alliance 'taking the flying'.

However, the execution risk of such a gamble is incredibly high.
Once known that this is at play, it is highly probable that pilots will act.
A pilot body acting together can bring an airline's cashflow to zero.
Management are well aware of the feeble cashflow margins.

Qantas cannot absorb a well orchestrated individually driven campaign.

It is probable that the cashflow margin is under some pressure. Capital Expenditure deferments have been a key take-away from Little Napoleon's tenure.

Rated De is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 21:02
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: The street
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Red Herring

Absolute rubbish that Jetconnect would do Sunrise.
Breach of FWA section 318 to name but one. Great bargaining rumour from a Qantas angel
perhaps. A350/777 is an A380 replacement type anyway. Joyce been quoted in every media article saying that.
But desperate I suppose given they can’t crew aeroplanes in the subsidiary’s
FightDeck is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 21:36
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FightDeck
Absolute rubbish that Jetconnect would do Sunrise.
Breach of FWA section 318 to name but one. Great bargaining rumour from a Qantas angel
perhaps. A350/777 is an A380 replacement type anyway. Joyce been quoted in every media article saying that.
But desperate I suppose given they can’t crew aeroplanes in the subsidiary’s
Isn't it contract season?
Rated De is offline  
Old 7th May 2019, 00:56
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 108
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
787 SYD-SFO from the end of the year. In addition to HKG already.

Surely that’s enough to open a SYD base?
Sparrows. is offline  
Old 7th May 2019, 01:22
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NDB
Age: 53
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sparrows.
787 SYD-SFO from the end of the year. In addition to HKG already.

Surely that’s enough to open a SYD base?
Na, that would make to much sense.
OnceBitten is offline  
Old 7th May 2019, 02:50
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Sydney Australia
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rated De
Isn't it contract season?
Exactly! You nailed it!
Capt Colonial is offline  
Old 7th May 2019, 04:15
  #36 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,615
Received 599 Likes on 169 Posts
I feel that we have lost our way a bit in this thread. I was hoping for thoughts on crewing numbers eg I don’t think four crew is enough,rest facilities, crew toilet, additional pay, restrictions on the number of trips a bid period etc.
dragon man is offline  
Old 7th May 2019, 04:52
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SYD
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sparrows.
787 SYD-SFO from the end of the year. In addition to HKG already.

Surely that’s enough to open a SYD base?
Doesn't the 787 come off SYD HKG before it starts SYD SFO?
Vindiesel is offline  
Old 7th May 2019, 05:08
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Sydney Australia
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by dragon man
I feel that we have lost our way a bit in this thread. I was hoping for thoughts on crewing numbers eg I don’t think four crew is enough,rest facilities, crew toilet, additional pay, restrictions on the number of trips a bid period etc.
Well Yes, those are the major and very important concerns, Dragon Man.

However, if what Mohikan advises “that AIPA have not been in specific negotiations over the new type and discussions to date have only been of a general nature” Then I wonder, is this Qantas spinning the media or trying for some industrial leverage against its Pilot Group as a bargaining period approaches?

Mohikan stated: “I confirmed this with a COM member today. He did concede that it’s possible that Joyce is setting up AIPA as a patsy so he can then use the Jetconnect pilot group to crew the 'Sunrise' aircraft, although this is the less likely scenario”

I called one of the Pilots in the QPA. They said they have not had detailed talks either. So, it would appear to be a media or industrial exercise by Qantas management perhaps?

However, you are quite correct. The whole Longhaul Pilot group will need to be consulted regarding Project Sunrise by either representative body and certainly, I don’t expect that process will be a short-term exercise given the alleged errors created in EBA9.

Capt Colonial is offline  
Old 7th May 2019, 08:21
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Equatorial
Age: 51
Posts: 1,054
Received 115 Likes on 57 Posts
How is the SQ 350 configured? How is it crewed? No not 20 hours but not far from it!

This could be a very good indication of what works.

Why reinvent the wheel? Oh that right... Invented...

2 duties a month...

Sounds pretty good, as I said ex SQ blokes I knew that did it in the 340 days loved it.
Global Aviator is offline  
Old 7th May 2019, 08:37
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Qantas are not in the slightest interested in emulating what worked for a competitor.
Furthermore, a tour of duty's health impact can't be extrapolated to provide a comparison basis for an as yet untested tour of duty. A tour of duty currently beyond existing regulation. They will not undertake a scientifically rigourous examination of the health of the crew before committing to a new regime.

They will instead, begin a campaign of media seeding. They continue to lobby in Canberra.
Was not the likely new transport Minister a 'guest' albeit rumoured to be a little messy, on the first flight in Dubai? The 'game changing alliance' first flight?
They have almost the entire Parliament likely 'members' of the Chiarman's lounge.

A quick scan down the non-existent member list would likely show Carmody, S a member.
With CASA in the back pocket, soft corruption ensures an outcome more suited to the commercial/IR elements than the medical health of their crews.

Whether or not they intend doing anything, other than gain a bit of 'column inches' in a quiet news week is perhaps worthy of consideration.
Rated De is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.