If divisors are at 175 one the 787 two things are happening.

1. Training is happening to the tune of 1 training slot per 7.8 crew.
2. Crew exceed regulatory limits within 12 months.

It's not sustainable and if it's happening in the short term it means a bunch of new promotions in the medium term.

EK...DXB to SFO is around 17 hours flight time. I'm sure this must be one of the longest long haul around. 48 hours ( chock to chock ) on the ground in SFO and then it's back to DXB. 2 local nights off in Dxb, and then it's time to go again. 93 hours flight time a month. That's is punishing.

Until I stopped flying, I did not realise just how tired I really was, and what it was doing to my body.

I won't fly this so I'm only a devils advocate. 175 stick in 8 weeks is 21.785 hours a week. 46 weeks flying a year after leave is 1006 hours a year. A fatigue management system is coming and I'd say you will end up doing the 1000 hours a year.

Wouldn't think so. 5 LAX trips is 170ish credit. It's 145 stick. Smack on MGH for the 787.

Under current scheduling a 5 day trip but could be reduced to 4. 25/56 or 20/56 worked and 152 hours tour of duty. Even on the 767 when we were regularly flying international, a 170 hour divisor would yield 145+ stick. I also did a couple of 80 credit hour rosters with 72 stick (160/ 84). 29-30/56 days worked. Total tour of duty hours in the 230-240 range.

Same for me. Totally across the board. Weight, blood pressure the whole nine yards. in the Dr's words 'Almost a different person'.

It's not till you stop you realise how hard it has been on your body.

Night credits are not to be pooh-poohed. Just sayin' ....

PS: Keg - I drank when I was away on maybe 2-3 trips per year and only then if it was a particularly 'good' crew. Otherwise I was a complete tea-totaler at work. I certainly don't judge people for drinking (far from it) I just could not have physically coped with it.
PPS: Keg - I hesitate to say this, and I mean NO disrespect at all, but you have 'only' been Blunderbussing for a short while. What I am alluding to is very long term tiredness. And it's a personal thing, I don't like it and a lot of other people I know don't either, but others seem to deal with it quite well. A study would be interesting - look at the photos of the fresh faced 20yo's in any business and compare them with the 60yo's. In my experience (anecdotal only) the QF guys don't look so hot...

Back to back to back to back 10/11 day LHRs with a DFW squeezed in to really screw things up.
I was never really tired with domestos
Different strokes and all that

Valid point Dragon man. However, your 43 additional stick hours assumes ALL 4 man crewing (no night credits). Every hour that is 2 or 3 man crewed has either 33% or 25% night credits. Your calculations are the worst possible case.

My belief is that the at least the first initial eight aircraft will all be used for ultra long hall,operations hence four man crew and no night credits. Two question for which I am looking for an answer if someone knows it. If under the 787 operation you fly to 900 hours and have say three weeks available where you can't fly but are been paid what will that pay be? Ie minimum guarantee or divisor? Secondly could you be used during that time to do simulator supports only? Thanks in advance.

This is true. I do know that I found jet lag the second time around on the 744 much easier than the first. The difference? Apart from a couple of very big nights (one with Going Boeing that he remembers far more of than I do), I looked after myself much more effectively the second time around. Still, I guess I'll know more if I'm still on the Bus in a couple of years. (Though truthfully I'd prefer to be heading to the 787).

A study would indeed be interesting and there is a PhD there for the keen. It'd need to be pretty in depth and include such things as food, exercise, and sleep diaries.

I'd say you're pattern protected to divisor if a PLH or paid MGH if a BLH. The duties you could would be whatever they can currently assign against pattern protection.

MGH or divisor pay
 

Once you hit the annual limit you will be paid MGH only. At least this was the case under the EBA when it happened to me. I don't think it would have changed under the WD.

Sounds like you guys need a law and accounting degree to understand how your pay works.....

Along with a major in cryptography and TLAs.

The Book
 

Back in June there was a story about AJ's former speech writer going rogue with a book about the lockout.
Anyone know the outcome of that?

Supreme Court Today. She has had the muzzle placed on and the keys to the padlock thrown away. We wont hear a word of the truth.

AJ gets away with it again

Keg

Remember they did one with UniSA several years ago? It was supposed to inform all sorts of interesting rule changes to deal with fatigue and included little wrist bands (today known as a FitBit) to record your sleep, sleep diaries and post-duty simulator sessions to assess your performance after a long duty.

That study went away, never to be heard of again and the results were never made publically available. Presumed they lifted a rock, didn't like the look of what was underneath it and gently placed it back, hoping that whatever was under there wouldn't escape.

Never lift the rock....

The Book
 

Thanks 1a,


No surprises there I guess.

Keg:
A 20yo is different to a 30yo and VERY different to a 40yo. 50 and 60 I don't know about yet, but it's not looking good!

Someone years ago said to me that your body changes when you get to 40. Naturally I didn't believe them. Naturally I was proven wrong! It was 'about' 40 when being 'tired' meant a lot more than it used to.

-- sorry guys - I thought this would reply under Kegs previous.

On the sleeping patterns assessments and wristbands etc. I hoped I would be wrong, but I did say at the time any report would never see the light of day. It's quite possibly voluminous enough to be of use to prop the legs of AJ's office chair up so he can reach the desk, so all that time and effort (and assessment sims people did after L O N G tours of duty) possibly weren't in vain after all:)

Sim study.
 

I think, but I'm not completely sure, that the Sim study ended up with an unforecast result.
Two sets of crews compared.
First set - consisted of two people, Captain and F/O called in from home. Refreshed. Not sleep deprived.
Second set - had all just done a 9 day JFK pattern. Capt and F/O [only] went straight into the Sim on arrival from LAX. No rest. Eyeballs hanging out.
But - guess what - The tired crews outperformed the fresh ones from home.
Hmmm. Why? The tired pairings had just been working together for 9 days, including a couple of demanding two man sectors together across the US to JFK and back and had gotten used to each other's style of operation.
The two from home had quite possibly never met each other and were coming in 'cold'.
About that time, it all went very quiet on the study. Didn't hear anything about it after that.
[Also, possibly, the crews might have been mismatched in terms of operational experience. The JFK crews would most probably have been senior guys and the guys on A days quite possibly junior in rank. Whether that is a + or a - you are free to debate.]

That's some pretty small control groups for a comparison! One in each.