F/O for life
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Liquifaction Island
Age: 64
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
before the inclusion of freighter only oasis/asl/dragon air age 65 commands were at aprrox 81/2 to 9 years
So even with 65 (retirement) simple maths would add 10years.
But not that simple as there were many pilots amongst this group who were already over 55 and even over 60.
Not all pilots will go to 65
And not all will stay due double tax basing fiasco and the newer generation who think anyone in management is an idiot.
Currently commencing command course is heading to the 12 year point by june.
Another factor affecting this is the joining rate in the previous years ahead of you.
in the period 2000 -11/2001 (i.e. 9/11) the rate was high so from mid 2001 to the end of 2001 you should anticipate late 2013 or early 2014.
So heading to 13 years just with the joining rate impact add in 6-8 years increase purely for 65 and time to command should extend out to 15 -19 years.
As 2011 courses only produced 65 commands assuming the remaining 16 pass.
At most that can be increased up to 90.
Ciggie packet maths find out who is starting in particular month see how far behind you are take 30% off due base not suitable divide by 75 would give you an idea +/- by 8-12 months.
Lots of variables
So even with 65 (retirement) simple maths would add 10years.
But not that simple as there were many pilots amongst this group who were already over 55 and even over 60.
Not all pilots will go to 65
And not all will stay due double tax basing fiasco and the newer generation who think anyone in management is an idiot.
Currently commencing command course is heading to the 12 year point by june.
Another factor affecting this is the joining rate in the previous years ahead of you.
in the period 2000 -11/2001 (i.e. 9/11) the rate was high so from mid 2001 to the end of 2001 you should anticipate late 2013 or early 2014.
So heading to 13 years just with the joining rate impact add in 6-8 years increase purely for 65 and time to command should extend out to 15 -19 years.
As 2011 courses only produced 65 commands assuming the remaining 16 pass.
At most that can be increased up to 90.
Ciggie packet maths find out who is starting in particular month see how far behind you are take 30% off due base not suitable divide by 75 would give you an idea +/- by 8-12 months.
Lots of variables
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cupboard
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
turnandburn,
Repeat The FO's who got promoted in 2011 joined in 2000, and ended up being captains in their 12th year with the company. This is not the current rate, this is the rate for those in their 12th year with the company, as they benefited from earlier expansion and younger retirement ages of those ahead of them.
Repeat: The new joiner in 2011, at assuming a rate of 49 new captains per year and 1600 pilots head of him, will have to wait 32.6 years.
Repeat: The calendar year in which a command course begins has no effect on the number of promotions in a calendar year. The 16 you say began their training in 2011 will count in 2012, just as those who began in 2010 but finished in 2011 counted as new captains in 2011, not in 2010. Beginning a course is irrelevant: Finishing the course and being promoted is what creates a new captain, and in 2011 there were 49.
Repeat: While there are variables (training rates, retirement rates, etc.) and other factors (FO's on bases staying on bases, failures, expansion/reduction etc.) the point is that the current rate as of 2011, which is known after all the variables and factors are included for that whole year, is 49/year, and with 1600 pilots ahead of a new joiner, and that works out to 32.6 years from joining to promotion to captain. Even if the rate unrealistically doubles and is sustained forever at 98/year and nothing else changes, that would mean 16.3 years for a new joiner. But the current time to command for a new joiner is 32.6 years.
So, for those who joined in 2000, it is around 11-12 years, for those who joined in 2011, it is around 32 years, and for everyone in between, it varies between 11 and 32 years depending on how soon they joined after those in 2000.
Repeat The FO's who got promoted in 2011 joined in 2000, and ended up being captains in their 12th year with the company. This is not the current rate, this is the rate for those in their 12th year with the company, as they benefited from earlier expansion and younger retirement ages of those ahead of them.
Repeat: The new joiner in 2011, at assuming a rate of 49 new captains per year and 1600 pilots head of him, will have to wait 32.6 years.
Repeat: The calendar year in which a command course begins has no effect on the number of promotions in a calendar year. The 16 you say began their training in 2011 will count in 2012, just as those who began in 2010 but finished in 2011 counted as new captains in 2011, not in 2010. Beginning a course is irrelevant: Finishing the course and being promoted is what creates a new captain, and in 2011 there were 49.
Repeat: While there are variables (training rates, retirement rates, etc.) and other factors (FO's on bases staying on bases, failures, expansion/reduction etc.) the point is that the current rate as of 2011, which is known after all the variables and factors are included for that whole year, is 49/year, and with 1600 pilots ahead of a new joiner, and that works out to 32.6 years from joining to promotion to captain. Even if the rate unrealistically doubles and is sustained forever at 98/year and nothing else changes, that would mean 16.3 years for a new joiner. But the current time to command for a new joiner is 32.6 years.
So, for those who joined in 2000, it is around 11-12 years, for those who joined in 2011, it is around 32 years, and for everyone in between, it varies between 11 and 32 years depending on how soon they joined after those in 2000.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Repeat: While there are variables (training rates, retirement rates, etc.) and other factors (FO's on bases staying on bases, failures, expansion/reduction etc.) the point is that the current rate as of 2011, which is known after all the variables and factors are included for that whole year, is 49/year, and with 1600 pilots ahead of a new joiner, and that works out to 32.6 years from joining to promotion to captain. Even if the rate unrealistically doubles and is sustained forever at 98/year and nothing else changes, that would mean 16.3 years for a new joiner. But the current time to command for a new joiner is 32.6 years.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cupboard
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So as of Dec 31st, 2011, and despite 49 promotions in 2011, you're saying there were more than 49 promotions in 2011, because of their seniority numbers, right?
The variables are included in 1600/49, because those 49 are the end result in 2011.
Repeat: 32.6 is the current time to command for a new joiner as of right now, until the next promotion or the next variable or factor changes, all of which can change the rate either way.
Repeat: 32.6 is not the current rate for someone who joined in 2001-2010, or who will join in 2012 and beyond.
The variables are included in 1600/49, because those 49 are the end result in 2011.
Repeat: 32.6 is the current time to command for a new joiner as of right now, until the next promotion or the next variable or factor changes, all of which can change the rate either way.
Repeat: 32.6 is not the current rate for someone who joined in 2001-2010, or who will join in 2012 and beyond.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Number 49 capt as of 31 Dec 11 ..... on 1 Jan 11 he looked at the seniority list and saw who was last promoted ..... call him 'Number 1'. Number 1 was more that 49 places ahead of Number 49. So Number 49 being in possesion of a crystal ball from RH said ... "bugger me, no promotion in 2011 then" .... but he was wrong, why?
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Liquifaction Island
Age: 64
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree only 49 completed commands in 2011
I was more interested in estimating when current F/O s will commence commands in the next 5 years beyond that, variations really become to large.
personally more interested what i time i would start.
5 years and beyond is speculation at best.
However the trend does not look good.
maybe plot it against the price of gold
I was more interested in estimating when current F/O s will commence commands in the next 5 years beyond that, variations really become to large.
personally more interested what i time i would start.
5 years and beyond is speculation at best.
However the trend does not look good.
maybe plot it against the price of gold
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cupboard
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gotcha to bang your head! But yes, there are more than 49 seniority numbers between 2011's first and last new captains, and I thought we figured out that will vary too.
Yes, 32.6 assumes every FO does his course and gets promoted. Wasn't that implied in the variables and factors thing? What if 10 more planes go to Air China this year and 10 more to Air Hong Kong next year and 10 more to Dragonair the year after that, and the price of fuel quintuples and air travel falls by 75%, how does that affect the rate?
OK, so let's assume 25% of FO's refuse/fail/quit the course: 24.5 years
Or how about 50%: 16.3 years.
Amended Repeat: In general, with plenty of unknowns and no way to predict the future, and lots of variables and factors that come and go that change the rate in both directions at random times, the time will vary but generally increase from approximately 11 to 32 years depending how soon after 2000 that someone joined, with the worst case being the most recent joiners...in general.
Yes, 32.6 assumes every FO does his course and gets promoted. Wasn't that implied in the variables and factors thing? What if 10 more planes go to Air China this year and 10 more to Air Hong Kong next year and 10 more to Dragonair the year after that, and the price of fuel quintuples and air travel falls by 75%, how does that affect the rate?
OK, so let's assume 25% of FO's refuse/fail/quit the course: 24.5 years
Or how about 50%: 16.3 years.
Amended Repeat: In general, with plenty of unknowns and no way to predict the future, and lots of variables and factors that come and go that change the rate in both directions at random times, the time will vary but generally increase from approximately 11 to 32 years depending how soon after 2000 that someone joined, with the worst case being the most recent joiners...in general.
Last edited by Iron Skillet; 3rd Jan 2012 at 04:24.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: VHHH
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let me have a go:
How many places are there between the first command in 2011 and the 49th? Let's say there are 100, that means the company had to screen, offer, assess, train etc in order to produce 49 commands. Let's assume 49 commands out of every 100 is the natural rate for this company.
If the target is 98 commands a year, we can then assume the front 200 FOs on the list (excluding those who have been at the top of the list for a long time and are likely to stay there for whatever reason, with due respect) will get a shot. From this simplistic scenario no 1601 will be in that batch of 200 in the 8th year. But over this 8 year period, how many of the 102 who remain an FO after their first attempt/assessment will come back for their second attempt?
Let X be the average number of FOs between the first new command to the last in any year.
Let C be the average number of new commanders each year over the next 20 years.
Let N be the number of FOs who make a second attempt when the time comes and let's assume that to be 2 years after their first attempt.
(let's assume all FOs succeed on their second attempt)
Let T be the year since joining the seniority list when a person would begin the command process ie assessment, accepting or turning down a course and beginning the actual course.
T = (1600 / X) + [(1600/X - 2) * N]/C
An example: 200 seniority numbers produces 98 new commanders, the company targets 98 new commanders a year for the next 20 years. All first time failures will have a second attempt and passes.
T = (1600/200) + [(1600/200 - 2) * 102]/98
= 9 yrs
Obviously, this number is not consistent with the reality. The reasons are in the assumptions: 200 and 98 are likely to be higher than average. If we use 49 commanders out of 80 and target 80 commanders a year, both not difficult to imagine, it would give T = 20 yrs 2 mths
How many places are there between the first command in 2011 and the 49th? Let's say there are 100, that means the company had to screen, offer, assess, train etc in order to produce 49 commands. Let's assume 49 commands out of every 100 is the natural rate for this company.
If the target is 98 commands a year, we can then assume the front 200 FOs on the list (excluding those who have been at the top of the list for a long time and are likely to stay there for whatever reason, with due respect) will get a shot. From this simplistic scenario no 1601 will be in that batch of 200 in the 8th year. But over this 8 year period, how many of the 102 who remain an FO after their first attempt/assessment will come back for their second attempt?
Let X be the average number of FOs between the first new command to the last in any year.
Let C be the average number of new commanders each year over the next 20 years.
Let N be the number of FOs who make a second attempt when the time comes and let's assume that to be 2 years after their first attempt.
(let's assume all FOs succeed on their second attempt)
Let T be the year since joining the seniority list when a person would begin the command process ie assessment, accepting or turning down a course and beginning the actual course.
T = (1600 / X) + [(1600/X - 2) * N]/C
An example: 200 seniority numbers produces 98 new commanders, the company targets 98 new commanders a year for the next 20 years. All first time failures will have a second attempt and passes.
T = (1600/200) + [(1600/200 - 2) * 102]/98
= 9 yrs
Obviously, this number is not consistent with the reality. The reasons are in the assumptions: 200 and 98 are likely to be higher than average. If we use 49 commanders out of 80 and target 80 commanders a year, both not difficult to imagine, it would give T = 20 yrs 2 mths
Last edited by Guru; 3rd Jan 2012 at 04:46.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yet another way of looking at it: Everyone joins an airline at the age of 20 and progresses through to becoming a capt but then retires at age 65. The airline has a fixed ratio of capt to total pilots .... this ratio in CX as of the last seniority list is 998/2509 (not including those not yet allocated a seniority number). Thus as everyone progresses through their career with no airline expansion taking place and a steady rate of recruitment and retirement everyone will be made a capt after 24.1 years of service. They will then remain a capt for 15.9 years.
This scenario is pessimistic in a number of its assumptions (averge join age is prob higher, leaving age is definately lower, expansion may be occuring in fits and starts, the crew ratio driven by economic needs may well fall etc ...) However, it still comes out with a better number that the 'boundary' defined by the OP.
The above model may well provide a 'better boundary', but reasonable prediction needs to take place if the aim is to forcast how long I must remain an FO. If you throw your hands up in the air and say "there are way to many unknowns" and still come out with silly figures you might as well not take part in the predictive exercise in the first place.
This scenario is pessimistic in a number of its assumptions (averge join age is prob higher, leaving age is definately lower, expansion may be occuring in fits and starts, the crew ratio driven by economic needs may well fall etc ...) However, it still comes out with a better number that the 'boundary' defined by the OP.
The above model may well provide a 'better boundary', but reasonable prediction needs to take place if the aim is to forcast how long I must remain an FO. If you throw your hands up in the air and say "there are way to many unknowns" and still come out with silly figures you might as well not take part in the predictive exercise in the first place.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yea but.....
All great guessing, but...
As it stands now many senior FOs are stayng on bases. This will not happen as much in the future.
My prediction is that the 50% uptake being suggested will drop and most if not all FOs of the future will put their hand up for command. Historically the failure rate on initial courses varied as high as 30%. However the failure rate on second courses was much lower maybe 5%.
So you need to adjust the rate accordingly.
If you join today, 1500 slots before command. 80 commands for 5 years, then slow down, 40-50 commands for 5 more years then bigger retirements and 60 per year after that. Add in 20% loss rate and you get 480 no.s / years 1-5, then 240 in years 6-10, and 72 every year after that. So join today = 20 years time to command
Big what if no expansion ? I don't see much in the next ten years. So 20 years may be CONSERVATIVE !
FG
My 2c.
fG
As it stands now many senior FOs are stayng on bases. This will not happen as much in the future.
My prediction is that the 50% uptake being suggested will drop and most if not all FOs of the future will put their hand up for command. Historically the failure rate on initial courses varied as high as 30%. However the failure rate on second courses was much lower maybe 5%.
So you need to adjust the rate accordingly.
If you join today, 1500 slots before command. 80 commands for 5 years, then slow down, 40-50 commands for 5 more years then bigger retirements and 60 per year after that. Add in 20% loss rate and you get 480 no.s / years 1-5, then 240 in years 6-10, and 72 every year after that. So join today = 20 years time to command
Big what if no expansion ? I don't see much in the next ten years. So 20 years may be CONSERVATIVE !
FG
My 2c.
fG
The variables are included in 1600/49, because those 49 are the end result in 2011.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Where You Aren't
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all, you all should shut up and wait for Numero Crunchero to come to the rescue.
Secondly, most of you sound like the types who get all bent out of shape when someone doesn't say, "Clear right" when he's taxiing eastbound on H approaching H7 for a left turn!
All your bickering about 16 vs 32 years is so irrelevant! By that time, CX will be a Chinese airline. If you think the Cat A/B/C/D crap is laughable now, just wait until upgrades are solely offered based on subjective evaluations. By the time your 16-32 year upgrade comes along, seniority will be completely irrelevant.
Thread over!
Secondly, most of you sound like the types who get all bent out of shape when someone doesn't say, "Clear right" when he's taxiing eastbound on H approaching H7 for a left turn!
All your bickering about 16 vs 32 years is so irrelevant! By that time, CX will be a Chinese airline. If you think the Cat A/B/C/D crap is laughable now, just wait until upgrades are solely offered based on subjective evaluations. By the time your 16-32 year upgrade comes along, seniority will be completely irrelevant.
Thread over!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Up in the air
Age: 58
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oval, I will not comment on your style and debating skills, as they are obvious.
But let me explain to you just this:
This is a discussion about a best-case scenario, not a worst-case scenario.
Of course there might be even more bad news to come, there could be another SARS, a major oil crisis, hard landing of China followed by political instability,maybe even a war in Iran or in Korea, nobody knows (except you, of course)
Thread reopened.
But let me explain to you just this:
This is a discussion about a best-case scenario, not a worst-case scenario.
Of course there might be even more bad news to come, there could be another SARS, a major oil crisis, hard landing of China followed by political instability,maybe even a war in Iran or in Korea, nobody knows (except you, of course)
Thread reopened.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to open old wounds regarding ASL, but I know of several DEC on that scheme. Whilst having considerable previous Command time and being DEC, they were, nonetheless, subjected to the ruthless 6 month course. CX, essentially, gave them the upgrade course. Equally, I know of several F/Os, hired under that scheme, who were subjected to a six month square bashing & some, failed. My question being, why is CX quite so ruthless ? The attrition rate appears high & complicates the 'Time to Command' debate. There is something terribly wrong with the Selection procedure if lots of people, subsequently fail the course, whatever the course might be. In house, Right to Left should be very straighforward when dealing with a known entity, a Company FO with established track record. Cripes, I am glad that I failed all four attempts at Selection. I would clearly have failed the course. A rare, GOOD selection decision. Last attempt was DEC, ASL but after a few mates got seriously harmed in local pubs, I was glad to get the one line reject letter.