Project Sunrise
It’s about getting properly rewarded for an increased productivity of approximately 30% and doing a 22 hour TOD. It’s about having proper seperate crew rests with temperature control and proper noise insulation. It’s about scheduling and do you have east and west divisions to lessen jet lag, how many should you do in a roster, you need special standby crews as the crews must have a certain number of days off prior to operating. There are lots of things that need to be sorted out and it won’t be done in a few weeks as Qantas want.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What this whole silly saga is reminiscent of is a crafty PR campaign with a substantial dollop of (as Extrashot says) F.U.D
T Shirt Todd, crafts a media plan for a delivery aircraft to have judas sheep, wannabee climbers with a few selected Frequent Flyers for relevance sit on an empty aircraft as it is delivered from the United States.
Roll out for Chefs, some head gear and the cash strapped duplicitous media and the circus rolls on.
Then lever a pilot body with poor leadership, knowing full well the former AIPA President sits obediently at your feet.
With an equally duplicitous "Regulator" with the pilots on board it is waved through.
By all mean Little Napoleon go fly longer distances, but how about given the penchant for "diversity and inclusiveness" Qantas make sure that the science supports the health outcome..
Then the pilots can make informed choices.
That is not what perfectly inadequate executive management with their ever obedient dingle-berry of IR negotiators concoct.
All reasonable suggestions Birdie, but let’s start at 18 hours, the current ‘planned’ limit rather than 20 hours as you suggest. This would then ensure that the inevitable extensions beyond 20 hours are already planned for in preparing a crew member for such duties.
It would be hoped that the eventual ‘ruleset’ for these flights would be in part based on the evidence of the PER-LHR and MEL-LAX 787/380 studies rather than the minimal Sunrise research flights, but I’m not confident that it will transpire that way.
It would be hoped that the eventual ‘ruleset’ for these flights would be in part based on the evidence of the PER-LHR and MEL-LAX 787/380 studies rather than the minimal Sunrise research flights, but I’m not confident that it will transpire that way.
This reading is very interesting, especially the original A340 flights.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sing...ghts_21_and_22
There must be some good data on the this that QF could use?
I’ve said it before but someone who did these flights said the biggest challenge was recency as this was the only flight they did.
Would that not be the ultimate roster? 3 of these ULH in your 6 week block?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sing...ghts_21_and_22
There must be some good data on the this that QF could use?
I’ve said it before but someone who did these flights said the biggest challenge was recency as this was the only flight they did.
Would that not be the ultimate roster? 3 of these ULH in your 6 week block?
"Minimum three days off before pattern with tour of duty more than 20 hours "
I understand the need for recovery time AFTER an ULH but why do you think you need 3 days BEFORE the flight? I'd have thought 24 hours - or a normal day/night would be sufficient ?
I understand the need for recovery time AFTER an ULH but why do you think you need 3 days BEFORE the flight? I'd have thought 24 hours - or a normal day/night would be sufficient ?
Using 100 hours in 30 days as I really don’t know how your rooster works.
Yea basic thoughts.
22 hour duty each way = 44 hours.
2 of them = 88 hours.
For say 12 days?
What am I missing in my simplified thoughts? Or would it be 3 patterns in the 6 week block if that is how it works?
Yea basic thoughts.
22 hour duty each way = 44 hours.
2 of them = 88 hours.
For say 12 days?
What am I missing in my simplified thoughts? Or would it be 3 patterns in the 6 week block if that is how it works?
Last edited by Global Aviator; 26th Jan 2020 at 08:50. Reason: Typo
Seriously?
Return from previous 2 crew overnight home from Asia and stump up for a 20hr tod?
You would fit well into Qantas management with an attitude like that.
Because I think it’s unsafe to have arrived home from a 12 hour overnight flight arriving into SYD at midday and then only the next day off before signing on the following day to do a 20+ hour tour of duty! I think it’s unsafe to have done a day trip (usually a minimum 8 1/2 hour tour of duty and often closer to 10 or 11 after delays) and then sign on the next day for a 20+ hour tour of duty.
Lets keep in mind there is zero current data on this. No one knows what the fatigue looks like. It would be unsafe not to be cautious.
Lets keep in mind there is zero current data on this. No one knows what the fatigue looks like. It would be unsafe not to be cautious.
That's fine - there is a total lack of research on this question. Personally I'd have said 2 full nights in my own bed would be about right before taking on a full 24 hr stint as long as I get a few days off after but that is going to be the problem - individuals vary in their needs and the airline will want conformity. Younger people have a greater tolerance of this sort of disruption.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The FAA consider ULR flying on a case by case basis.
There is no such consideration in Australia.
CAsA will blanket improve the TOD extension (ie: GREATER than 20 hours) then Qantas can swing the aircraft into whatever they like.
Chairman's lounge membership is a wonderful thing.
The FAA is currently using a case-by-case approach to approve ULR city pairs. They are approving these operations by issuing a nonstandard operations specification paragraph, (OpSpec A332) "Ultra Long Range (ULR) Flag Operations in Excess of 16 Hours Block to-Block Time" to air carriers intending to conduct ultra-Iong-range operations.
16 hours considered ULR...
Haven't Qantas extended that to 20 already?
The case-by case- basis of approval for the FAA requires route data, scientific modelling: a rather long list.
Three "research flights" on a different aircraft ain't it.
Qantas prefer the FUD concept of approval.
Hence my question on what would be your ultimate rooster or way to operate Sunrise?
Would it be like the original SQ 340 where that’s all you do?
I don’t do LH or ULH genuine question. I certainly couldn’t imagine anything worse than mixing the ULH with shorter 2 crew trips.
I know many EK guys and some of their patterns seem very tough!
Would that be a negotiation tool? Only fly ULH with possible domestic sector for recency or SIM?
Would it be like the original SQ 340 where that’s all you do?
I don’t do LH or ULH genuine question. I certainly couldn’t imagine anything worse than mixing the ULH with shorter 2 crew trips.
I know many EK guys and some of their patterns seem very tough!
Would that be a negotiation tool? Only fly ULH with possible domestic sector for recency or SIM?
IMO, only two per 8 week roster both in the same direction, east or west and minimum 2 weeks off between trips.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wellington
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wellington
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for Short Haul, if there is another No vote (results out tomorrow) then the will look expand Jetconnect to domestic operations and expand Network also...
Personally, I think it is all BS, but I would put nothing past them.
Beating will continue until morale improves.
FUD- that's all they've got.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wellington
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have done 180hr divisors on the LH award, it is not...sustainable.