No one has mentioned the fact that there is a de-markation issue here.

Do QF pilots wish to repeat history by interventing in Cabin crew disputes?

Last time the cc went on strike QF pilots intervened en masse to man doors and keep the airline flying.

Some say this was the cause of the atrocious relationship which exists between QF tech and Cabin crew.

AIPA should stand tough on this one.

anthony,

Are you for real?

S/O's over the years have stopped many a more serious incident from occurring, when things have gone wrong in an aircraft.

I know I would much rather have a S/O on the flight deck when a heavyweight RTO occurs out of LAX (to monitor correct actions like speed brake up, full reverse, braking etc) rather than sitting on his bum at R4 looking at the passengers. :ugh:

So yes, the more sets of eyes on the flight deck, the better.

Anyway, I think your post is a gee-up judging by your spelling, grammar and use of capital letters.

I have two questions!

1. How often do Qantas have an RTO? I mean a 'full on' V1-20 knots or less, not one where you realise that something is not quite right prior to 80 knots!

I have been invloved in two RTO's in my lifetime, one as a passenger and one as operating crew, on both occasions the problem was recognised very early in the take off roll and the aircraft were pulled up with minimum braking.

2. Secondly what is the PNF (or whatever it is called at QF) doing while all this is going on? Surely it is their responsibilty to monitor braking, reverse, speed brakes, etc...

While I agree that an extra set of eyes will always be an asset, it is important to remember that these aircraft are designed to be flown with two pilots!

My personal opinion is that it would be both safe and fall within the area of expertise and responsibilty of the S/O, however I do agree the situation is probably not 'ideal' or 'right' from a human resources perspective, which probably brings up the question, in the event of an evacuation initiated by cabin crew (as in the recent BA example), who would be in control/command of the cabin? CSM, or S/O?:eek:

........' also the latest rumour is that F/A's are now going to be multiskilled/multi endorsed to act as S/O's as well.

All priddy easy really ........sit in the back seat , Take tea and coffee orders for the F/O and Capt , Radio in the "requirements" for the next sector, and occasionally sit in the LH seat post/prior 5000' to refine their playstation skills !!!!

The cost savings will be immense and the corresponding added bonus' will put a smile on any QF exec's dial.

I too have serious issues with the demarkation argument.

Next we'll have the Capt coming down the back during the Economy meal service barking out:

"OK....which one of youse want Chicken or Beef ?"

"1. How often do Qantas have an RTO? I mean a 'full on' V1-20 knots or less, not one where you realise that something is not quite right prior to 80 knots!"

One high speed quite recently where all 4 crew missed a couple of the RTO actions. People do carry around tiredness in the long haul operation and the more crew monitoring the situaton on the flight deck the better.

I'm not saying you always need 3 or 4 crew. Of course it's a 2 pilot aeroplane. I just know where I would prefer to have the extra set of eyes sitting, and it's not at R4!

Surely you can't condone using pilots as flight attendants. My worry is Qantas may use this more than for what it is intended. I don't think the flight attendants would be overly in favour of this either!

It does say that it requires....

That is where you can stop the nonsense. Captains, just say "I need all my pilots on the flight deck during departures and arrivals". The answer is still in the hands of the PIC.

Along with... "No, Mrs Dixon cannot have the jumpseat. We have a busy day (discussing EBA issues!)"

;)

......YET !

And the limitation section states the minimum number of pilots is 2, right. Whats your problem? At cx relief crew will sit in empty cabin crew seats for t/o and ldg to make way for jump seat pax occasonaly. It sucks, but it gets the jump seaters on. Maybe qf so's contribute more to the t/o and ldg than ours. I always thought relief crew were there to allow for an extension of the flight/duty limits. Just looking at it from the outside.

Edited for clarity.

FAM section 6.3
Flight deck duty- As this relates, itis the time during which the S/O (or inflight relief) is deemed off duty for flight deck duty limits. They are deemed off duty for take off, climb and descent and landing.

Notwithstanding this limitation, having a pilot sitting on the flight deck doing duties associated with employment is duty time.
To imply that the pilot is therefore "off duty" during this period implies as per the CAO 48 he is actually resting. Is the pilot sitting in the crew rest? Is the pilot sitting in P class in a rest seat?

Now the pilot is to be sitting on a door acting as a primary. Thus to suggest he is actually "resting" for the purposes of flight and duty limitations is ridiculous.

QFinsider, I think you are misreading the CA. TOD limit with 3 pilots is 14 hours scheduled, extendable (by each individual pilot) to 16 hours in the event of delays etc. Duty time starts at sign on. This means for LHR-BKK in summer, given a 12:00 (say) flight plan, if there is a 10 minute slot time delay any pilot can refuse to go because taxi times each end will certainly take the TOD over 14:00.

Also, on a tightly scheduled tour of duty, how does this affect flight deck duty times?:ugh::=:rolleyes::*

:uhoh: Is it right it was suggested to QF by the AIPA? :confused:

One weak white tea thanks.

mustafagander,

I edited the post for clarity.
The arguement that the relief pilot is off duty for calculation of limitations is the point in question. Considering an S/O off duty whilst sitting working on the flight deck simply as he does not occupy the control seat clouds the logic of duty associated with employment. This is where the CAO is clear. To now state that the pilot is perform statuatory duties in the cabin removes any doubt as to the not on duty (hence resting) arguement..

I also have issues with the certified agreement being amended, unilaterally. AGAIN

So doesn't this mean that the flight would still be short 1 Cabin Crew for the whole flight? Therefore the other CC would have to work harder to fill in for the missing CC. I would want a bonus for that.:eek:

CC Working harder
 

What generally happens when one CC short is that the CSM & CSS take up the slack by not having proper crew rest.:(

I can see the insidious nature of the company bean counters and managers at work ......yet again.

If this is just not rumour #384,275,294, I believe this is the latest in another bonus orientated idea to cut costs through reducing cabin crew numbers.

If it is true and the fact that the L/H cabin crew have just agreed to a huge savings in cost to the company through the latest EBA then it is a huge slap in the face for all those who want to work with the company.

Is this an insight into the company's idea for cutting crew numbers on the A-380?

If it is true it will be interesting to see if the FAAA does anything about it....

As well, it has been pointed out by others that another set of eyes and ears on the flight deck is invaluable as well as a method of helping to reduce crew fatigue.

I sincerely hope that this is just another wind up......

QFInsider, it is ONLY the "flight deck duty" limit which is affected by where the S/O might happen to find him/herself on the aircraft or indeed anywhere Charlie Q may wish to send him/her.

The duty clock starts running at scheduled or actual (if later than sched) sign on time, end of story. Early Antarctica charters had an early sign on (paid) to allow for the cold weather survival briefing before the flight, if I remember correctly.

lowerlobe, it is true...have seen the FSO with my own two eyes. It provided quite a laugh at briefing (well for the Captain and F/O anyway!).

According to a CSM I spoke to about it, the new A330-200s are the issue here. 8 Crew members and 8 doors (unlike the -300 which has also 8 doors but 10 crew). If one crew member goes sick upline (Mumbai would have to be the obvious one!) then they can get themselves out of there without delaying the service. Obviously the more sensible option would be to roster 9 crew and god forbid, increase the level of service at the same time!!!

All that said and done it's still a crock of **** and they'd have to drag me kicking and screaming down to man a door if it was required, at which point I'd suddenly and amazingly develop the same stomach bug that caused the flight attendant not to fly in the first place and demand to get off the aircraft. ;)

TL

maybe they can use the second s/o who paxes home on the mumbai flight whilst the operating crew do an all nighter with 3 guys.....:hmm:

all to save about 2hrs o/t. If that was the -400 there would be a HUGE FUSS made cause god-forbid anything should happen to the crew of the flagship :rolleyes:

on that note, when the A380 comes in will this take over as "the" fleet, maybe knock for -400 guys down a peg or to :ok: