The EK Screwtape Letters
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The EK Screwtape Letters
Anyone get a letter on the topic of fuel uplift? I presume 30% of our captains do every month according to what it says. I refer to the letter that somewhat libelously implies that professional integrity is in question because the recipient may be uplifting a bit too much fuel and this obviously impacts someone else's bonus.
At this point I will drop the popular term "Profit Share" as this implies some sort of equality basis is behind it. I can't really see how this can be if one declares a figure and then gives other multiples of this to various post holders in a company. Take it to the ridiculous conclusion: "A profit share of 1 dirham will be awarded to all, but there are a select few that are getting a multiplier of a million factored in for the excellent job they are doing". This somewhat skewed process causes some more senior post holders to take unbelievable actions like coming up with schemes to enhance this bonus whatever the consequences. Greed is a damaging motivator. We have seen whole countries wrecked by this phenomenon. I abhor it in the company that pays my wage and I have invested so much time and effort in.
Of course I am talking about the scheme to monitor, record and process data in order to take action on any captain who is in the top 30% of those uplifting any fuel above that nominated in the OFP in any month. Apparently these villains are frivolously taking far more fuel than anyone back on the ground actually thinks is necessary.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for saving fuel and not uplifting anything beyond what I think is appropriate for the circumstances. It’s good for my (factored by 1) bonus, the environment, fits in with my professional ethics and is of course what is required and entrusted to me by the company who clearly don't actually trust me quite as much as I believed. So much so that they take the statistics then send me a not so friendly letter, loaded with insinuation and menace. It troubles me even more that this also goes on my record and a statistical database which could be reviewed at some future date should they need to find evidence of a substandard performance. Big brother and his penchant for keeping statistics and data without worrying too much about what it all means.
It is this data collection that is now being used for justifying a bonus rather than necessarily furthering the interests of the company as a whole. Anyone collecting data where they can control what is included, what is left out and how it is processed can use this to prove almost anything. As Disraeli so eloquently put: There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics. In this case statistics are used show how the instigators of this poorly conceived scheme are driving down the additional fuel uplift decided by trained licensed, current and competent ( and real!) captains so they can proudly display this warped statistical showpiece to their superiors to empirically demonstrate their case for the disproportionate rewards they strive continuously to gain or justify. I think if someone gave me the free hand to cherry pick and process data, I could probably prove that I alone was saving millions for the company every year, or perhaps the 330 lot are better than the 777 bunch who in turn outperformed the 380 folk. I need not even adjust for weight; after all I get to chose how the data is processed. Now there's an idea. Who knows - perhaps it’s in the pipeline.
I think we can all see where this could lead. Maybe the next iteration could be based on not only what you uplift, but what you actually burn. Welcome to the world of excessive taxi speed and unstable approaches etc.
I've been in the company long enough to see various fuel saver programs wither and die. Essentially because the variables that need to be included in a network of this size to give meaning to the program are complex and eventually sensible managers who were not receiving bonuses any larger than anyone else, and most of who actually flew on the line, decided the negative consequences outweighed any benefit. No one conceived of insulting letters on company letterhead or data stored in perpetualis. Ah - the days of honour and integrity amongst professionals. Welcome to the morally bankrupt 21st century.
So what are the parameters that are fed into this Machiavellian piece of uninformed computer programming? Does anyone know? Are there bonus (pardon the pun) points if the fuel is actually used on the trip thereby avoiding a diversion or worse? I hear that if one uplifts on a tankering sector because the ZFW drops and more fuel can then be carried (as required) for the return that this actually counts against you! I must have got the wrong end of the stick on this one because I truly cannot believe we have been debased to this.
Nor do I remember being informed of this program and the factors on which it works. It might have been in my email I suppose. I make a valiant effort to separate that which I am required to know from the endless stream of self congratulatory, irrelevant or disinteresting digital garbage that arrives in my company email every day. I'm sure no one actually believes that any human could keep up with it all. It is all part of the lamentable culture of evading accountability by telling everyone everything in preparation to avoid blame in any eventuality. Playground rules: "I told Johnny Sir - It’s not my fault"
While I find it puerile that a company should attempt to define its employees worth by meaningless statistics, I don't actually care if I get spotlighted for carrying fuel into a monsoon covered airfield, or to deviate around large areas of weather, or cater for facts I know the dispatcher cannot know or appreciate. The alternative is far more frightening to explore.
I hope others don't care either and have the courage to air their views on the subject. I have taken off fuel where I can and put on where I feel the need is appropriate. Sometimes I've been wise and sometimes overcautious but at least I’m still here. I constantly reflect on my decisions and use experience as I gain it. I also know they must be tempered to cater for the assessment, knowledge and comfort of the others in the flight deck. I have probably flown with at least half the pilots in the airline and have yet to see one take any more that they believe is necessary. I have at times pointed out I think the choice is excessive and given my reasons, and at times accepted reasoning behind taking more. And if I take more, I work out exactly what I believe is needed not using the "slap on a couple of extra tonnes" formula. I do this, but so do 99% of my colleagues so why are 30% getting insulting letters?
So why write this epistle? Simply because I feel a dangerous precedent is being set for all the wrong reasons. And it is an entirely inappropriate way to attempt to bring down fuel burns. I haven't seen any attempt to publish scientific literature or examples of fuel usage or saving strategies in a flight profile, I haven't seen ground-school attempting to educate the thousands of company pilots in the carriage of fuel and the assumptions and risk factors and costs behind fuel uplifts. Surely if unnecessary fuel is being carried then it is a matter of education rather than malicious waste from the pilots? If there is a problem then time should be allocated and resources made available to train the crew, rather than supply a set of rules and some fragmented and woefully inadequate information in a few manuals while at the same time dragging the cane out of the cupboard again.
I guess this takes us right back to accountability.....
At this point I will drop the popular term "Profit Share" as this implies some sort of equality basis is behind it. I can't really see how this can be if one declares a figure and then gives other multiples of this to various post holders in a company. Take it to the ridiculous conclusion: "A profit share of 1 dirham will be awarded to all, but there are a select few that are getting a multiplier of a million factored in for the excellent job they are doing". This somewhat skewed process causes some more senior post holders to take unbelievable actions like coming up with schemes to enhance this bonus whatever the consequences. Greed is a damaging motivator. We have seen whole countries wrecked by this phenomenon. I abhor it in the company that pays my wage and I have invested so much time and effort in.
Of course I am talking about the scheme to monitor, record and process data in order to take action on any captain who is in the top 30% of those uplifting any fuel above that nominated in the OFP in any month. Apparently these villains are frivolously taking far more fuel than anyone back on the ground actually thinks is necessary.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for saving fuel and not uplifting anything beyond what I think is appropriate for the circumstances. It’s good for my (factored by 1) bonus, the environment, fits in with my professional ethics and is of course what is required and entrusted to me by the company who clearly don't actually trust me quite as much as I believed. So much so that they take the statistics then send me a not so friendly letter, loaded with insinuation and menace. It troubles me even more that this also goes on my record and a statistical database which could be reviewed at some future date should they need to find evidence of a substandard performance. Big brother and his penchant for keeping statistics and data without worrying too much about what it all means.
It is this data collection that is now being used for justifying a bonus rather than necessarily furthering the interests of the company as a whole. Anyone collecting data where they can control what is included, what is left out and how it is processed can use this to prove almost anything. As Disraeli so eloquently put: There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics. In this case statistics are used show how the instigators of this poorly conceived scheme are driving down the additional fuel uplift decided by trained licensed, current and competent ( and real!) captains so they can proudly display this warped statistical showpiece to their superiors to empirically demonstrate their case for the disproportionate rewards they strive continuously to gain or justify. I think if someone gave me the free hand to cherry pick and process data, I could probably prove that I alone was saving millions for the company every year, or perhaps the 330 lot are better than the 777 bunch who in turn outperformed the 380 folk. I need not even adjust for weight; after all I get to chose how the data is processed. Now there's an idea. Who knows - perhaps it’s in the pipeline.
I think we can all see where this could lead. Maybe the next iteration could be based on not only what you uplift, but what you actually burn. Welcome to the world of excessive taxi speed and unstable approaches etc.
I've been in the company long enough to see various fuel saver programs wither and die. Essentially because the variables that need to be included in a network of this size to give meaning to the program are complex and eventually sensible managers who were not receiving bonuses any larger than anyone else, and most of who actually flew on the line, decided the negative consequences outweighed any benefit. No one conceived of insulting letters on company letterhead or data stored in perpetualis. Ah - the days of honour and integrity amongst professionals. Welcome to the morally bankrupt 21st century.
So what are the parameters that are fed into this Machiavellian piece of uninformed computer programming? Does anyone know? Are there bonus (pardon the pun) points if the fuel is actually used on the trip thereby avoiding a diversion or worse? I hear that if one uplifts on a tankering sector because the ZFW drops and more fuel can then be carried (as required) for the return that this actually counts against you! I must have got the wrong end of the stick on this one because I truly cannot believe we have been debased to this.
Nor do I remember being informed of this program and the factors on which it works. It might have been in my email I suppose. I make a valiant effort to separate that which I am required to know from the endless stream of self congratulatory, irrelevant or disinteresting digital garbage that arrives in my company email every day. I'm sure no one actually believes that any human could keep up with it all. It is all part of the lamentable culture of evading accountability by telling everyone everything in preparation to avoid blame in any eventuality. Playground rules: "I told Johnny Sir - It’s not my fault"
While I find it puerile that a company should attempt to define its employees worth by meaningless statistics, I don't actually care if I get spotlighted for carrying fuel into a monsoon covered airfield, or to deviate around large areas of weather, or cater for facts I know the dispatcher cannot know or appreciate. The alternative is far more frightening to explore.
I hope others don't care either and have the courage to air their views on the subject. I have taken off fuel where I can and put on where I feel the need is appropriate. Sometimes I've been wise and sometimes overcautious but at least I’m still here. I constantly reflect on my decisions and use experience as I gain it. I also know they must be tempered to cater for the assessment, knowledge and comfort of the others in the flight deck. I have probably flown with at least half the pilots in the airline and have yet to see one take any more that they believe is necessary. I have at times pointed out I think the choice is excessive and given my reasons, and at times accepted reasoning behind taking more. And if I take more, I work out exactly what I believe is needed not using the "slap on a couple of extra tonnes" formula. I do this, but so do 99% of my colleagues so why are 30% getting insulting letters?
So why write this epistle? Simply because I feel a dangerous precedent is being set for all the wrong reasons. And it is an entirely inappropriate way to attempt to bring down fuel burns. I haven't seen any attempt to publish scientific literature or examples of fuel usage or saving strategies in a flight profile, I haven't seen ground-school attempting to educate the thousands of company pilots in the carriage of fuel and the assumptions and risk factors and costs behind fuel uplifts. Surely if unnecessary fuel is being carried then it is a matter of education rather than malicious waste from the pilots? If there is a problem then time should be allocated and resources made available to train the crew, rather than supply a set of rules and some fragmented and woefully inadequate information in a few manuals while at the same time dragging the cane out of the cupboard again.
I guess this takes us right back to accountability.....
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dubai
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuel Intimidation Letters
Nicely put Pixy.
I also question their rationale in calculation methodology of; "you've loaded an average of "X" tons for the last "Y" number of flights and therefore cost the Company "Z" tons in burnt fuel" Did their analysis include the 15 -20 minutes I spent in the Desdi Hold the last 4 trips I've done?? Is this an average burn per Ton +/- ZFW or an actual Burn?? I have loaded additional discretionary fuel for a reason, one which I am entitled to for safety above all! Please don't give me a flight plan with thunderstorms enroute, at my Destination AND Alternate and no holding fuel in deepest darkest Africa!! I don't give a Rat's @rse if it's not "required" by the OM-A, it's not practical! Take a look at the Roster of the Person who signed the "Letter" and tell me how productive he is compared to a normal line Pilot. If we were seriously trying to save money; get all the Management Pilots back to "work", replace them with Clerks!
I have and I'm sure many others out there have loaded extra fuel and through judicious use of speed have stayed ahead of the "Pack" and thus avoided holding, especially into DXB at midnight, thereby SAVING the Company money! As one of the "30%" crowd myself, I must admit being questioned about my "Decision Making" skills (which have never been an issue in my SIM or Line Checks for the past 30 years!) quite insulting. This Company's management style is based on fear & intimidation "you're lucky to have a job etc..." My Decision is to take their Yellow piece of paper and file it with the others in the big green container out the front of my Villa! (with all the other Letters of intimidation). Considering all the fatigue, crap Rostering and decreasing standards of maintenance, training and morale, I for one will not be flying around MIN fuel!
Rant over!
I also question their rationale in calculation methodology of; "you've loaded an average of "X" tons for the last "Y" number of flights and therefore cost the Company "Z" tons in burnt fuel" Did their analysis include the 15 -20 minutes I spent in the Desdi Hold the last 4 trips I've done?? Is this an average burn per Ton +/- ZFW or an actual Burn?? I have loaded additional discretionary fuel for a reason, one which I am entitled to for safety above all! Please don't give me a flight plan with thunderstorms enroute, at my Destination AND Alternate and no holding fuel in deepest darkest Africa!! I don't give a Rat's @rse if it's not "required" by the OM-A, it's not practical! Take a look at the Roster of the Person who signed the "Letter" and tell me how productive he is compared to a normal line Pilot. If we were seriously trying to save money; get all the Management Pilots back to "work", replace them with Clerks!
I have and I'm sure many others out there have loaded extra fuel and through judicious use of speed have stayed ahead of the "Pack" and thus avoided holding, especially into DXB at midnight, thereby SAVING the Company money! As one of the "30%" crowd myself, I must admit being questioned about my "Decision Making" skills (which have never been an issue in my SIM or Line Checks for the past 30 years!) quite insulting. This Company's management style is based on fear & intimidation "you're lucky to have a job etc..." My Decision is to take their Yellow piece of paper and file it with the others in the big green container out the front of my Villa! (with all the other Letters of intimidation). Considering all the fatigue, crap Rostering and decreasing standards of maintenance, training and morale, I for one will not be flying around MIN fuel!
Rant over!
Last edited by EK_Bus Driver; 26th Aug 2011 at 04:41.
Yep, stupid.
PARTICULARLY when Ops will throw on another four tonnes seemingly with abandon.
Do the individual despatchers get letters if THEY put more average extra fuel than their colleagues?
PARTICULARLY when Ops will throw on another four tonnes seemingly with abandon.
Do the individual despatchers get letters if THEY put more average extra fuel than their colleagues?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excellent post Pixy. Fuel decisions and fuel management are two of the few areas where we are able to demonstrate our professional judgement. I thought the Mid East was awash with cheap fuel. Looks like the bonus criteria is the motivating factor here.
Mate of mine, like you, stood up for himself, long time ago, questioning the fuel policy of a bucket & spade operation he was forced to endure as a result of redundancy. He didn't last long. The other sheep, continued to fly around , cooking the books & making it all look legal. He once commented;"How I get from Departure to destination and arrive with more fuel than I left with, is a real mystery !!"
Joining a Mid East Operator, he was astonished with the lack of fuel awareness and was the only one to carry flight plan fuel on a regular basis because the company policy was so generous. He put that down to the price of cheap fuel but the policy existed at 'expensive' uplift points like Europe, too.
My worry is that you guys will be intimidated by this situation & will make a few risky calls in order to stay out of the 30% league. Be very careful out there & , possibly, try a group representation to fleet management in order to express your concerns. Of course it will fall on deaf ears if the same management are bonus orientated. What a dreadful Industry we are now having to suffer.
Mate of mine, like you, stood up for himself, long time ago, questioning the fuel policy of a bucket & spade operation he was forced to endure as a result of redundancy. He didn't last long. The other sheep, continued to fly around , cooking the books & making it all look legal. He once commented;"How I get from Departure to destination and arrive with more fuel than I left with, is a real mystery !!"
Joining a Mid East Operator, he was astonished with the lack of fuel awareness and was the only one to carry flight plan fuel on a regular basis because the company policy was so generous. He put that down to the price of cheap fuel but the policy existed at 'expensive' uplift points like Europe, too.
My worry is that you guys will be intimidated by this situation & will make a few risky calls in order to stay out of the 30% league. Be very careful out there & , possibly, try a group representation to fleet management in order to express your concerns. Of course it will fall on deaf ears if the same management are bonus orientated. What a dreadful Industry we are now having to suffer.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: HKT
Age: 64
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CFPs
Please don't blame the dispatchers for the lack of common sense, it is not encouraged and even the wording "suggest extra fuel for..."is not allowed by order of TCAS. Instead they just have to plan minimum and write "consider extra fuel for..."
The DDM (if they have enough balls) could authorize extra fuel but why should they stick their head out...so they normally leave it to the better paid PIC...
The DDM (if they have enough balls) could authorize extra fuel but why should they stick their head out...so they normally leave it to the better paid PIC...
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Pub
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't mean to come across virtuous nor do I tow the company line, but having been a skipper for 8 years, I have always taken what I consider that I need, and have never had such a letter. I also fly the smallbus to all the higher risk routes with plenty of weather around, and when I load the extra fuel just write a short couple of words annotation to the PLOG as required. Compared with a couple of years back I think they are being quite generous with fuel now. I do, however, think that whoever is making the decisions on extra fuel hasn't a clue as, on occasions, there is clearly no need and at other times there is. Little consistency in the decision making. I do also think that Met forecasting is wildly inaccurate in these parts. Quite often these days given a couple of tonnes extra to hold in addition to contingency which makes it comfortable and I will happily carry it without recourse. I have a long list of other gripes, but not current fuel policy.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Superb post Pixy, and for my world view, right on the money, however...
As a lowly "unable to form an opinion unless its given to me" F/O here at EK a few things stand out regarding letters, fuel tables etc etc such as this.
First things first, its their train-set, sure you assume responsibility when you accept the aircraft and dispatch etc, but its their train-set, so for me, regardless of professional pride, ego, experience and all those other loaded words, the fact is they own the keys to the things, so I play by their rules.
Secondly, whats wrong with asking for a new flight plan if your not happy? just make sure you can justify your query/request.
If guys are so concerned about getting a letter that questions your decision making, then perhaps that shows a lack of maturity when it comes to being able to accept that everything we do is analyzed from the comfort of Costa and its done of course with the singular benefit of 20:20 hindsight.
Guys like TCAS exist everywhere, they thrive in a rule based environment, they derive satisfaction from observing the normal amongst us squirm and pontificate when we are in essence put on the spot regarding our decision making process and outcome.
The great thing about all this rule based behaviour is that its completely self serving and manageable, i.e. use the rules to your own advantage, not theirs.
I won't expand any further on that purely because why should I help the rule makers make my life harder? but if you don't want to feel under-pressure, think a little more laterally when it comes to how rules are applied.
As an example, I used to fly with a guy in a previous airline who whenever he carried more than plog fuel he made sure to fire off an email to anyone who would listen as to why he did it, sure it pissed a few off, but it created an audit trail, and it showed beyond any reasonable doubt that he had considered his decision rather than say throwing on 4 tonnes "for the wife, kids, girlfriend etc"
Like I said, I'm a lowly F/O, I couldn't possibly imagine how galling it is to have your decisions and even your authority questioned.
As a lowly "unable to form an opinion unless its given to me" F/O here at EK a few things stand out regarding letters, fuel tables etc etc such as this.
First things first, its their train-set, sure you assume responsibility when you accept the aircraft and dispatch etc, but its their train-set, so for me, regardless of professional pride, ego, experience and all those other loaded words, the fact is they own the keys to the things, so I play by their rules.
Secondly, whats wrong with asking for a new flight plan if your not happy? just make sure you can justify your query/request.
If guys are so concerned about getting a letter that questions your decision making, then perhaps that shows a lack of maturity when it comes to being able to accept that everything we do is analyzed from the comfort of Costa and its done of course with the singular benefit of 20:20 hindsight.
Guys like TCAS exist everywhere, they thrive in a rule based environment, they derive satisfaction from observing the normal amongst us squirm and pontificate when we are in essence put on the spot regarding our decision making process and outcome.
The great thing about all this rule based behaviour is that its completely self serving and manageable, i.e. use the rules to your own advantage, not theirs.
I won't expand any further on that purely because why should I help the rule makers make my life harder? but if you don't want to feel under-pressure, think a little more laterally when it comes to how rules are applied.
As an example, I used to fly with a guy in a previous airline who whenever he carried more than plog fuel he made sure to fire off an email to anyone who would listen as to why he did it, sure it pissed a few off, but it created an audit trail, and it showed beyond any reasonable doubt that he had considered his decision rather than say throwing on 4 tonnes "for the wife, kids, girlfriend etc"
Like I said, I'm a lowly F/O, I couldn't possibly imagine how galling it is to have your decisions and even your authority questioned.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Superb post Pixy.
Imagine the credibility and impact if we could all contain our comments to relevant issues, written coherently and without the thread being diluted by bickering and childish comments.
I have no problem with the fuel policy but like Pixy, I do object to the data being collected especially as we have never been told this was going to happen or how the system works. If it is being stored as part of your personal profile then this begs the question of what else is being recorded without our knowledge. Shouldn't we then have the right to see this on our own HR profile like productivity, sick days, etc. ?
Seems to be legally questionable, but I'm not a lawyer. What else are they keeping records on? Our DNA?
I personally have never recieved a letter and would be seriously offended if I did. Like everyone else I take fuel if I need it and won't if I don't
If they want control on this then take the decision away from us entirely but at the same time take on the responsibility. I will land if I think I need to or not go at all if I can't persuade them to put more on.
They probably want this decision. This is the way of doing it while still being able to blame someone else if it doesnt work out well.
Imagine the credibility and impact if we could all contain our comments to relevant issues, written coherently and without the thread being diluted by bickering and childish comments.
I have no problem with the fuel policy but like Pixy, I do object to the data being collected especially as we have never been told this was going to happen or how the system works. If it is being stored as part of your personal profile then this begs the question of what else is being recorded without our knowledge. Shouldn't we then have the right to see this on our own HR profile like productivity, sick days, etc. ?
Seems to be legally questionable, but I'm not a lawyer. What else are they keeping records on? Our DNA?
I personally have never recieved a letter and would be seriously offended if I did. Like everyone else I take fuel if I need it and won't if I don't
If they want control on this then take the decision away from us entirely but at the same time take on the responsibility. I will land if I think I need to or not go at all if I can't persuade them to put more on.
They probably want this decision. This is the way of doing it while still being able to blame someone else if it doesnt work out well.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How The Selfish Avoid Responsibility
How The Selfish Avoid Responsibility
Relieved of the demands of integrity and sincerity the selfish excel in manipulating those they encounter by using techniques they have been practicing since early childhood. For it was by fooling parental authority that they learnt how to indulge their wants while avoiding penalty for their crimes.
Quote.
Relieved of the demands of integrity and sincerity the selfish excel in manipulating those they encounter by using techniques they have been practicing since early childhood. For it was by fooling parental authority that they learnt how to indulge their wants while avoiding penalty for their crimes.
Quote.
Please don't blame the dispatchers for the lack of common sense, it is not encouraged and even the wording "suggest extra fuel for..."is not allowed by order of TCAS. Instead they just have to plan minimum and write "consider extra fuel for..."
Dispatchers are putting extra fuel on regularly, often much more than seem reasonable.
Good for them. What i don't get is why their judgement is supposed to be so much more reliable than mine...
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: HKT
Age: 64
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ wizzzzzzz
Apart from your annoying habit of using every post for a personal attack you probably also don't bother to read the comments on the CFP. Dispatchers would normally write something in case they calculated extra fuel.
Any extra fuel that they put on is either authorized by the DDM or ordered by the VP-NCs (the artists formerly known as SMNCs) for "operational reasons".
Anyway, I posted this only to keep you guys from criticizing the dispatchers, they are preparing an increasing amount of flight plans without authority and the proper time to make these decisions for you...and some PICs complain about too much fuel, others complain about no extra fuel, so why should they bother anyway.
Any extra fuel that they put on is either authorized by the DDM or ordered by the VP-NCs (the artists formerly known as SMNCs) for "operational reasons".
Anyway, I posted this only to keep you guys from criticizing the dispatchers, they are preparing an increasing amount of flight plans without authority and the proper time to make these decisions for you...and some PICs complain about too much fuel, others complain about no extra fuel, so why should they bother anyway.
Schib,
How is pointing out things have changed since you left annoying? YOU have the annoying habit of talking authoritatvley about a Company you no longer work for and have a chip on your shoulder about.
Here were your words:-
This has changed significantly recently, and we are OFTEN given extra fuel.
Yes I do- "For holding due peak arrival" is a favourite- 1:30 BEFORE the 1am peak!
I'm NOT critisizing the dispatchers, and any time they want to give me extra fuel, that's fine. But so is any time I want to give me extra fuel.
How is pointing out things have changed since you left annoying? YOU have the annoying habit of talking authoritatvley about a Company you no longer work for and have a chip on your shoulder about.
Here were your words:-
Instead they just have to plan minimum and write "consider extra fuel for..."
you probably also don't bother to read the comments on the CFP. Dispatchers would normally write something in case they calculated extra fuel.
I'm NOT critisizing the dispatchers, and any time they want to give me extra fuel, that's fine. But so is any time I want to give me extra fuel.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: u.a.e
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
company policy is minimum fuel if i remember correctly
why do we put on extra? because we want to land at our destination if the forecast is not that good or we suspect (and know) traffic is a problem.
that does not seem to be the companies view when sending out fuel-letters (yes i got one too)
just load minimum in the future and divert if you run out (don't commit to destination just because oma says so, have a really good reason to commit)
there is another one:
try not to use discretion and park an aircraft because in your opinion it is not safe to operate beyond your duty limit, that should be fun! (actually no it isn´t, i have done that too)
intimidation full scale, to bad really, it could be a great company to work for, so sad
why do we put on extra? because we want to land at our destination if the forecast is not that good or we suspect (and know) traffic is a problem.
that does not seem to be the companies view when sending out fuel-letters (yes i got one too)
just load minimum in the future and divert if you run out (don't commit to destination just because oma says so, have a really good reason to commit)
there is another one:
try not to use discretion and park an aircraft because in your opinion it is not safe to operate beyond your duty limit, that should be fun! (actually no it isn´t, i have done that too)
intimidation full scale, to bad really, it could be a great company to work for, so sad
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: HKT
Age: 64
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wizzybaby, I might not be working there anymore but I am still more in touch with EK dispatch than you have ever been. Just your comment about the extra fuel for peak arrival, that is NOT decided by dispatch but ordered by the VP-NC, shows you have no effing clue about the decision making at the OCC.
So you think TCAS now authorizes the individual dispatcher to add extra fuel? Fat chance dude...that decreases his own fat bonus!
Btw. that was one of the reasons I quit this clown show, so why should I have a chip on my shoulder about it?
Maybe YOU should stop talking authoritatively about something you really know sh!t about...
So you think TCAS now authorizes the individual dispatcher to add extra fuel? Fat chance dude...that decreases his own fat bonus!
Btw. that was one of the reasons I quit this clown show, so why should I have a chip on my shoulder about it?
Maybe YOU should stop talking authoritatively about something you really know sh!t about...
Schib,
If that's the case, I appologise and stand corrected.
Your initial post seemed to indicate you thought no extra fuel was being added, which was true when you were here, but isn't now.
I still, however, don't see your point. What difference does it make who orders the extra fuel as long as it makes it to the plan? The point of the thread is that Pilots are being admonished for taking extra fuel, when we are having extra fuel added by others with seemingly no accountability.
And do you really contend you have no hard feelings towards an airline you refer to as a "Clown outfit"?
If that's the case, I appologise and stand corrected.
Your initial post seemed to indicate you thought no extra fuel was being added, which was true when you were here, but isn't now.
I still, however, don't see your point. What difference does it make who orders the extra fuel as long as it makes it to the plan? The point of the thread is that Pilots are being admonished for taking extra fuel, when we are having extra fuel added by others with seemingly no accountability.
And do you really contend you have no hard feelings towards an airline you refer to as a "Clown outfit"?
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: HKT
Age: 64
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wiz, thanks for your understanding
It is really a difference who makes the decision about extra fuel. It was the job of qualified dispatchers who work together with the PICs for a proper fuel planning. Now there are lots of "clowns" like AAR and TCAS who meddle with that and both dispatchers and pilots are now not working on a reasonable solution but on a compromise between sense and company pressure...a pretty sad situation and something I couldn't stand...I rather feel sorry for the guys involved than having hard feelings...anyway, that is the general trend in aviation nowadays...
It is really a difference who makes the decision about extra fuel. It was the job of qualified dispatchers who work together with the PICs for a proper fuel planning. Now there are lots of "clowns" like AAR and TCAS who meddle with that and both dispatchers and pilots are now not working on a reasonable solution but on a compromise between sense and company pressure...a pretty sad situation and something I couldn't stand...I rather feel sorry for the guys involved than having hard feelings...anyway, that is the general trend in aviation nowadays...