swh

'CX do it 4 crew with a short stay, normally around 20 hours in the hotel before returning'

.....errrrm, no we don't, it's almost always at least 30 hours and normally longer

LRpilot

'European airlines don't fly only eastbound sectors, you have the chance to mitigate fatigue with different patterns.......'

....what a complete load of nonsense

Max Reheat: I will assume you were bored and were simply intending to wind people up with your comment. BA and VS have FAR better fatigue mitigation rules that we do. There are longer layovers, and proper rest once back home. They also offer far more in way of options (at least in the case of BA) to get a break from long haul, with an extensive short/medium haul fleet to bid onto if needing a break. Sure, let's talk 3-man in CX, but ONLY if it comes with the proper 1st world work rules, pay and benefits. It's bad enough that SO's are being screwed on housing, now the company wants to take away what little comfort they have on the job as well.

Sorvad,

Just a correction . The first LHR flight and the Sunday MAN flight have a 24 hour layover at the port . Some of the night flights have a longer slip

But if there are any delays departing HK as seen in the recent weeks the crews will be out of hours very quickly

Point taken oriental flyer.....I'm referring more to Europe based crew...can't think of any pattern I've done recently that's had any less than 30 hrs rest...used to be a bit of an issue with the 253 and physiological rest but haven't experienced that lately

ASR-F forms are conveniently located in the stationary wallet inside the cockpit.
A fillable PDF version is also available for download on the appropriate website.

And now, a few words from the gospel of OPS-A 11.9.1:

Thou shalt submit an ASR-F to proactively report a fatigue risk, and thou art encourageth to submit same if thou hast found thyself guilty of exercising the sin of controlled-rest. Amen.

Could you give us an idea which airlines you're referring to and how you can be so sure that these airlines will supposedly continue to "properly respect you over the years you dedicate to them"?

Also you say:

Doesn't OM-A 7.1.7.2 apply in the 3 man context - or is that what you're referring to?

STP

ANO (HK) Article 55: Fatigue of crew-responsibilities of crew.

(1) A person shall not act as a member of the crew of an aircraft to which this Article applies if he knows or reasonably suspects that he is suffering from, or, having regard to the circumstances of the flight to be undertaken, is likely to suffer from, such fatigue as may endanger the safety of the aircraft or of its occupants.

Capitulate and fly 3 man..you'll never get a BA style roster..it'll be a 28 HR layover..back with 3 days off and a bag of compressed regionals at the back of a fatigue clock..don't fight this one and its game over...3 man JFK?!!!..it's sickening the way this job has panned out..

A good number of flights this spring were forced to be operated 3 man against RPs. So the notion of a phased and planned introduction of 3 man Europe flights is a joke. I can guarantee that flights will operate 3 man willy-nilly as they run out of crew and have to cobble together a plan. That's one of the things that has to be considered when comparing CX with other airlines. A stable roster with a solid rest and recovery plan is one thing, CX's rostering mess adds another dimension entirely.

The potential for delays and cancellations is also high. With 4 man ops the FDP is 18hrs and the crew get on and divide up the rest in some sensible fashion. Not so with 3 man ops. It's not a case of 3 pilots, 15hr FDP, and get on with it. A basic FDP has to be extended by inflight rest. If the required FDP is 14hr30 and all three pilits have a basic FDP available of 13hrs, all well and good. A small delay can be accomodated and remain legal. Throw in some roster disruption with one crew member turning up with a basic FDP of 11hrs or 11hr30 and life starts to get complicated, tiring, and very soon illegal. One pilot may need 6hrs rest, another 3hrs, and the third may have to be burned out to achieve this. The potential for extreme fatigue is high, especially for those FOs who find themselves being burned out.

I don't want 3 man long range ops as I'm concerned it might kill me. However, I can see how it may be workable if there is the flexibility to have a sensible rest plan, the roster is stable, and there is decent recovery period (5/4/3?). Unfortunately CX doesn't do sensible, stable or decent.

3 man to Europe
 

Wasn't it Air New Zealand that cut their London layovers down (based on science than shopping time)
Never easy to talk fatigue science and industrial relations, never a good mix

And therein is the problem.

NO ONE is adverse to talking 3-man and developing sensible (dare I say it) RPs to deal with it, mitigate fatigue, work out reasonable economics, and figure a coherent way to implement it which isn't dangerous. What we are seeing with the 'limited' operations is the wedge approach.

But what's the track history here ?

The FIRST THING the company did when they found themselves short is throw the RPs out the window. And has been said attempt to willy nilly cobble together crews (as it's notorious for doing in times of stress as it is). When the fatigue mitigation procedures, RPs, and sensibility became too difficult, the company simply turned its back on it. Not only this, but it resorted to a form of bastardized continuous reserve windows which only makes the situation worse. Plugging short term holes, burning duty hours, and inadvertently timing people out with no rhyme or reason. Rather than seeking solutions which benefit everyone.

You can ask anyone what rostering is like. Unstable is a polite term. Chaotic is better with hair brained schemes to work around and exploit loopholes in the base FTLs as it is. Not only is it a big deal in terms of fatigue, it's inefficient as well. There is no long term planning or strategy and what's worse it doesn't need to be like this. It hurts everyone.

Trafalgar:
Not at all; but it is necessary, every now and then, to try to add a little realism to the incessant, mindless ranting that frequents these pages!
I am as equally anti 3-man ULR as you; however, what I am certain of is that CX will change the rostering (dare I say it -PRACTICES) that it empolys to accommodate the reduced crewing. They are acutely aware of the impact down-route sickness would have on the operation.
Who is to say that we would not find rostering similar to BA/VS?
You are however, correct in your assertions about 5 year fleet swaps, though of my mates in BA, I don't see too many bidding to the A320 from the A380/744, even with 3 man ULR!!!!
But if you are so adamant that being able to swap fleet is a good thing, why don't you petition Anna and the board to fully incorporate KA into CX and then you could have a stab at your 'breaks' periodically.

The UK CAA FTLs limit their layover to a minimum of 48 hours. It's not because of kindness from the companies. The HK FTLs allow 3 Crew ULH with a 24 layover, so it will happen.

Well in that case Dan, they can get stuffed.. wankers!

3 man, no flipping way.

You guys are taking 'industrial action' aren't you?
What do you expect? Kisses and hugs?

Maybe it's time we are given another survey to rate our dear managers.

Because the last survey and the "survey after the survey" had such a nice outcome.

Who else, The Pilots......:\

Dan - not sure CAP371 has that. More likely a combo of industrial / common sense and these days fatigue risk driven. Under EASA anything is up for grabs but certainly in the UK airlines are having to support what trip combo's they do with FRM etc etc.

Mr. Purley, keep in mind we have pilots based in HKG but also UK, Germany, USA, Canada, Aus, NZ... so again, who's daytime? ;)

Mr Angry - have another try, I'll make it easier !
 

Is the flight crewed by three "pilots" on three different time zones hence three different "day times" ?

that work for you ...