Cx257
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cx257
Okay so let me get this correct CX253 a 3man crew to Europe diverts to Copenhagen for a sick passenger who was thankfully okay
Then despite being in contract compliance the crew elect to use discretion to continue to UK Seriously how are we ever going to get this situation sorted if people keep helping out
There are 2 issues here
which set of duty time limits did the crew use because now we are talking 2 sectors so the max 3 man ULR no longer applies . The crew did not achieve the required rest due to the diversion
We are in contract compliance for a reason , to show the company that our goodwill is worth something but when crews extend to help out It is damaging to the rest of us . We also had a golden opportunity to make the 3 man a very expensive operation and hopefully put it to bed once and for all BUT NO here we have yet another crew helping out I give up
Then despite being in contract compliance the crew elect to use discretion to continue to UK Seriously how are we ever going to get this situation sorted if people keep helping out
There are 2 issues here
which set of duty time limits did the crew use because now we are talking 2 sectors so the max 3 man ULR no longer applies . The crew did not achieve the required rest due to the diversion
We are in contract compliance for a reason , to show the company that our goodwill is worth something but when crews extend to help out It is damaging to the rest of us . We also had a golden opportunity to make the 3 man a very expensive operation and hopefully put it to bed once and for all BUT NO here we have yet another crew helping out I give up
Last edited by Synchronize; 4th Feb 2016 at 00:59. Reason: Wrong flight number
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was the 253, not 257 so LON based crew. Given that info, it could only have been one of two Captains, and sure enough the company got lucky. Next thing you know he'll be going into training!
The big question remaining is "was it legal?"
The big question remaining is "was it legal?"
Names please..........
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry about the incorrect flight number But that aside can anyone explain to me which set of duty time limits were used and how it was legal
Secondly an engineering manager travelling as a passenger managed to get a quick turn around .
So Continuing with that logic . if I have a crew member travelling as a passenger then it's acceptable to use them as the 4 the crew member to achieve better rest if the operating crew are tired .
A golden opportunity to expose the very limited cost saving of 3 man crew vs 4 man wasted What a w-nker.
Secondly an engineering manager travelling as a passenger managed to get a quick turn around .
So Continuing with that logic . if I have a crew member travelling as a passenger then it's acceptable to use them as the 4 the crew member to achieve better rest if the operating crew are tired .
A golden opportunity to expose the very limited cost saving of 3 man crew vs 4 man wasted What a w-nker.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was giving the boys the benefit of the doubt. The wording in AFTLs is pretty woolly as usual but I suspect the extra sector would attract the 45 minute penalty.
In which case...... Legal? NO and safe or smart? A resounding NO!
Do some questions need to be asked?
BTW whilst digging for the flight times etc. It appears the Capts. Real Time roster is blocked.
In which case...... Legal? NO and safe or smart? A resounding NO!
Do some questions need to be asked?
BTW whilst digging for the flight times etc. It appears the Capts. Real Time roster is blocked.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After a closer look at the AFTLS.
Two sectors would give 12:15 plus half the total in flight relief plus the 2hrs discretion.
So probably just snuck in.
Regardless not a brilliant idea in my humble opinion.
Two sectors would give 12:15 plus half the total in flight relief plus the 2hrs discretion.
So probably just snuck in.
Regardless not a brilliant idea in my humble opinion.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: U/S
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree CR. how about the mention of getting in hot water with the FAA over not following clearances exactly???? The mention of slight deviations "because we've always done it this way".
Seems that bending the rules is a very big part of the CX culture.
Seems that bending the rules is a very big part of the CX culture.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Breaking the rules is okay ONLY when it benefits the company
However if anything had gone wrong in this instance those crew would have been thrown under the bus without hesitation.
Plus more than a 2 hour extension is only permitted in an emergency Don't think this counts as an emergency .
However if anything had gone wrong in this instance those crew would have been thrown under the bus without hesitation.
Plus more than a 2 hour extension is only permitted in an emergency Don't think this counts as an emergency .
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Not in a Bus
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silberfuchs - howdya mean chap? NOT a challenge, just that in your role you're much more upto speed on AFTLs than a lot of us - if I'm correct in guessing your identity. What's your take on the max? Tnx WN.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: HK MTR
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct me if I'm wrong however it is half rest if rest is taken in a bunk >3 hours. The question that needs to asked is how much rest did they actually get? I suspect 1 or 2 got planned rest and the last did not therefore 1 of the 3 crew members would have been more limiting.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would say CN & F/O got 3:50, maybe 4:00 at a stretch on the first sector, RQ rested the rest making it just legal within the AFTLS. Needed max discretion though which is madness IMHO at the end of a 3-man pattern!