SYD base screwed
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 333
Likes: 5
From: Earth
You are right, the 50-1000 won't see much of SYD. It will be used what it was designed for, ULH. On NA routes the 350 is a better cargo lifter especially to eastern NA. 777 will be used for capacity increase around Asia/pacific
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
From: somewhere above the sea
I think you'll find that commercially, the high yielding Australian traffic, and especially Sydney, will require the A50, precisely because it's not an old plane. They'll have to put the latest and greatest on this route, if they want to be 'customer centric'.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
From: The sky
Think again, the Er with the new seating config will be a slot limited airport buster. Jam it full and go with no weight issues. The 350 is great but it is a runway limited airplane in some cases, it chews up the pavement.
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 336
Likes: 2
From: Australia
So looks like they've magically found exactly the number of base positions in Brisbane and Melbourne for the 10/11 guys n girls in Sydney that are required to move.
So were Brisbane and Melbourne under manned before or are they now over manned?
So were Brisbane and Melbourne under manned before or are they now over manned?
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 419
Likes: 18
From: Retired-ville
Many crew are suggesting these slots have just materialized out of thin air, and semantics aside, I would suggest they have increasingly been available, just simply not released by CX for every eligible crew to apply for.
Whilst I have no dog in this race, as I'm not interested in applying for an Australian base, it does seem fair that the Basings agreement, the very mechanism which allows crew to apply for a base, is the very same agreement that offers some protections to crew when there is a reduction in crewing.
As to whether this should be classed as a type change or reduction in crewing, some would say it's a subjective viewpoint depending on your own position. The company have made theirs, be it correct or not, some agree, and not surprisingly, some do not.
As evidenced by one AOA forum member using the phrase "based for life brigade" to describe based pilots, it is unfortunate that this again seems to have driven a wedge between hk crew and based crew, and has us dissecting the words and intent in the Basings agreement. We're all on the same team, we know where our vitriol should be directed.
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 401
Likes: 1
From: hongkong
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 401
Likes: 1
From: hongkong
Basings are candy for crews in Hong Kong... almost all ports are drastically undermanned just check the crew lists. There's no way the company will hand out transfers while CC and TB are in force.... regardless of cost savings.
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 5
From: London
Everybody. Sit on your hands, stop begging the company for basings. Don't do the company's work for them. They WILL get desperate enough to issue more basings. If not, then no probs, stay in HK, manage your roster, take the money and if you are not happy, quit and find a company that treats you properly. Don't sell our last bit of silverware for pennies.
Joined: Jul 2007
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 1,953
Likes: 172
From: with the ex-CX pond scum (a zoologist was once head of Flight Ops)
Why would they 'get desperate enough to issue more basings'? The new joiners Traf is voluntarily training for them are so cheap to keep in Hong Kong there is no incentive for new bases any more.
Last edited by Captain Dart; 1st July 2017 at 02:32.
