What's the deal with Rostering with both KA and CX?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vancouver
Age: 43
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's the deal with Rostering with both KA and CX?
kind of off topic for some, who knows, maybe it could be place to vent
i have a computer science background and often analyze computer based system without noticing it.
I've been noticing how bad the KA/CX rostering is, how people don't get what they want and how it is a manual process.
Is it REALLY a manual process by the rostering folks? what are some of the criterias in your mind that would give you a happy life as a pilot? Criterias that jump out?
i'll be surprised if an algorithm cannot be produced if all the criterias are gathered. so please humour me, and let's here it!
What would float your boat?
E.
i have a computer science background and often analyze computer based system without noticing it.
I've been noticing how bad the KA/CX rostering is, how people don't get what they want and how it is a manual process.
Is it REALLY a manual process by the rostering folks? what are some of the criterias in your mind that would give you a happy life as a pilot? Criterias that jump out?
i'll be surprised if an algorithm cannot be produced if all the criterias are gathered. so please humour me, and let's here it!
What would float your boat?
E.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's keep it simple.
The company want 900 hours a year out of me (currently they are getting about 500). I want maximum time off.
Average sector length is about 6 hours.
900/6 = 150
365-150 = 215 Days off.
Work hard when you are at work and then enjoy the time off. Especially when the financial rewards are getting less and less.
Of course other ground duties interfere such as SEP, simulator, TEM etc and if the roster isn't efficient enough we will require a day off after 6 days of a duty cycle. However it really shouldn't be that hard to guarantee 180-190 days off per year.
The company want 900 hours a year out of me (currently they are getting about 500). I want maximum time off.
Average sector length is about 6 hours.
900/6 = 150
365-150 = 215 Days off.
Work hard when you are at work and then enjoy the time off. Especially when the financial rewards are getting less and less.
Of course other ground duties interfere such as SEP, simulator, TEM etc and if the roster isn't efficient enough we will require a day off after 6 days of a duty cycle. However it really shouldn't be that hard to guarantee 180-190 days off per year.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: flagrant arbour
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The rostering is truly sad at KA. Soon after starting here, I got on the S1 bus with a bunch of the office staff at knock-off time and sat next to one of the girls from rostering. While on a public bus (something about 'staff in confidence'?), she pulled out sheets of paper with a monthly table of pilots' names and began rubbing out the penciled-in duties and filling in new ones - true story. Little wonder that a system so severly lacking produces such a poor product.
Thankfully KA will go across to the new CX system later this year.....I hear they have 2 girls and a much bigger sheet of paper.
Thankfully KA will go across to the new CX system later this year.....I hear they have 2 girls and a much bigger sheet of paper.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah but with the bigger paper comes bigger eraser (rubber) !!
Also get bigger holes in schedule.
One of the reasons they have not gone to a computer generated Roster is that the company wants too much imput into who gets what. Specific trainers are given specific students, line checks etc. (not oout of the norm for a training department) but it goes much deeper. They also must leave some flights open and fill from reserve, something that they could not do with a computerised system as it would have to follow the rules (as programmed of course).
Other than, that there is really no reason for not doing it.
FG
Also get bigger holes in schedule.
One of the reasons they have not gone to a computer generated Roster is that the company wants too much imput into who gets what. Specific trainers are given specific students, line checks etc. (not oout of the norm for a training department) but it goes much deeper. They also must leave some flights open and fill from reserve, something that they could not do with a computerised system as it would have to follow the rules (as programmed of course).
Other than, that there is really no reason for not doing it.
FG
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: suitcase
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How does 8-9 per month sound with MAX 2 at a time... (sometimes single...) Oh, did I mention, finish late and start early?? Trule sh1te....
Aside from that... mmmm nothing really...
ta ta
Aside from that... mmmm nothing really...
ta ta
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: flagrant arbour
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KA days off
From 1 Jan 06 - 31 Jan 07 (13 mths to round-out the discrepancies), there were 116 weekend days, plus ~ 11 public holidays over the same period (depending on your religious and national affiliations eg. HKGers actually get 16), makes ~127 days off enjoyed by the average 9 to 5 workin' Joe.
In that period, KA assigned me only 116 rostered days off (avg of < 9 days/mth) - pretty damning comparison considering the flying schedule is tantamount to shift work. Also, 95% of the flying is into China and several roster changes per mth is the norm...need I justify my argument further??
In that period, KA assigned me only 116 rostered days off (avg of < 9 days/mth) - pretty damning comparison considering the flying schedule is tantamount to shift work. Also, 95% of the flying is into China and several roster changes per mth is the norm...need I justify my argument further??
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: suitcase
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HEALTHY amount??? You into S&M???????
On the A330 you will get a HEALTHY amount of time away but little (or atleast less than A320) flight time/overtime
On the A320 it's HEALTHIER but still too much duty time compared to actual block time... Then again... WHO F@CKING cares about flight time???? You???
Thought the min hours was 4000 so shouldn't worry anyone too much I would have thought...
ta ta
On the A330 you will get a HEALTHY amount of time away but little (or atleast less than A320) flight time/overtime
On the A320 it's HEALTHIER but still too much duty time compared to actual block time... Then again... WHO F@CKING cares about flight time???? You???
Thought the min hours was 4000 so shouldn't worry anyone too much I would have thought...
ta ta
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
computer science???
Effective rostering is not about computer science, its mathematics - the correct terminology is constraint satisfaction programming (CSP).
Confusion lies in the term programming and most assume it has to do with comouters- granted computers make the complex mathematic calculations easier and possible but the basis of the solution is nonetheless mathematics and not computer science.
As for roster "efficiency" or "optimization", this is a function of the number of constraints. The more constraints, the more likley combinatorial explosion occurs and as a result no feasible solution is found.
CSP is thus called because at best one seeks to find a "feasible" solution that satisfy all constraints. If no solution si found then some constraints may need to be relaxed.
So, in a nutshell, if you want "good" rosters, the best place to start to is revamp the COS and AFTL to keep it as simple as possible, i.e less constraints greater likelihood of a satisificing solution.
Keep adding constraints and you run yourself into the ground - no pun intended
Confusion lies in the term programming and most assume it has to do with comouters- granted computers make the complex mathematic calculations easier and possible but the basis of the solution is nonetheless mathematics and not computer science.
As for roster "efficiency" or "optimization", this is a function of the number of constraints. The more constraints, the more likley combinatorial explosion occurs and as a result no feasible solution is found.
CSP is thus called because at best one seeks to find a "feasible" solution that satisfy all constraints. If no solution si found then some constraints may need to be relaxed.
So, in a nutshell, if you want "good" rosters, the best place to start to is revamp the COS and AFTL to keep it as simple as possible, i.e less constraints greater likelihood of a satisificing solution.
Keep adding constraints and you run yourself into the ground - no pun intended
