CI400
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would need to check the 30hr assumption, but if that is true then every pilot can fly either a ULR return, 2 European flights Or 4 local India or 10 otherwise flights nearby in the Gulf.
With a train set this big and the fuel cost so low, CI 400 is not the issue. Having pilots at the helm is perhaps the real problem and by creating 30hrs x 3500 = 105,000 would make a BIG difference to the business plan (and just pizz off the Americans more
). 105,000 hours is more than an average airliners useable life, this plan might have some truth in the practice (rumour).
J
With a train set this big and the fuel cost so low, CI 400 is not the issue. Having pilots at the helm is perhaps the real problem and by creating 30hrs x 3500 = 105,000 would make a BIG difference to the business plan (and just pizz off the Americans more
). 105,000 hours is more than an average airliners useable life, this plan might have some truth in the practice (rumour).J
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would love to have a CI of 400. If you get tight on fuel, you at least can go to 0 and save some real fuel. Where I work we are so close to 0 already that going to 0 saves less than 100 kg and that is on a fairly long flight.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
900 hrs with parking brake released will always be 900 hrs, no matter if CI0 or CI400+.
The unpaid part of the job is on the ground when the parking break is on, so no short cuts etc will have you working less days for the same reward. Get the 900 in the bank and for the rest of the time wonder why the others fly faster, shorter routes and leave the parking brake on when on stand for 20 mins due ATC.
J
The unpaid part of the job is on the ground when the parking break is on, so no short cuts etc will have you working less days for the same reward. Get the 900 in the bank and for the rest of the time wonder why the others fly faster, shorter routes and leave the parking brake on when on stand for 20 mins due ATC.
J
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the sidewalk
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thing is, 92 hours in a 31 day month pays for your basic salary, right? So the matter of how many miles you cover in those 92 hours matters, right? Speed counts.
You'll spend 20-45 minutes in the Desdi/Bubin hold no matter what, right? So speed matters, because whether you spend those after you've been in cruise for 20-25 minutes less counts.
We're short on crews, so having crews time out 30-40 hours less counts, because they can fly them another 30-40 hours.
Also, I think factoring will go away for sure soon and I think this panic move shows that they're desperate to make up for the resulting crew shortage.
You'll spend 20-45 minutes in the Desdi/Bubin hold no matter what, right? So speed matters, because whether you spend those after you've been in cruise for 20-25 minutes less counts.
We're short on crews, so having crews time out 30-40 hours less counts, because they can fly them another 30-40 hours.
Also, I think factoring will go away for sure soon and I think this panic move shows that they're desperate to make up for the resulting crew shortage.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now that the NOTAM has been out for a few days, has anyone actually flown anywhere close to OFP speeds associated with CI400? B777/A380.
Considering its close to .860 on the B777, turbulence and ATC will surely be slowing things down constantly. Looking at the airborne times for some Europe-DXB flights (FRA/AMS etc.) I don't see any difference over the past few days.
On the other hand, there are plenty of operators using CI80-150 on the B777 now that the fuel price has come down. Surely even EK knows that CI400 just isnt going to happen when everyone else is cruising around at significantly slower speeds
Considering its close to .860 on the B777, turbulence and ATC will surely be slowing things down constantly. Looking at the airborne times for some Europe-DXB flights (FRA/AMS etc.) I don't see any difference over the past few days.
On the other hand, there are plenty of operators using CI80-150 on the B777 now that the fuel price has come down. Surely even EK knows that CI400 just isnt going to happen when everyone else is cruising around at significantly slower speeds
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now that the NOTAM has been out for a few days, has anyone actually flown anywhere close to OFP speeds associated with CI400? B777/A380.
Considering its close to .860 on the B777, turbulence and ATC will surely be slowing things down constantly. Looking at the airborne times for some Europe-DXB flights (FRA/AMS etc.) I don't see any difference over the past few days.
On the other hand, there are plenty of operators using CI80-150 on the B777 now that the fuel price has come down. Surely even EK knows that CI400 just isnt going to happen when everyone else is cruising around at significantly slower speeds
Considering its close to .860 on the B777, turbulence and ATC will surely be slowing things down constantly. Looking at the airborne times for some Europe-DXB flights (FRA/AMS etc.) I don't see any difference over the past few days.
On the other hand, there are plenty of operators using CI80-150 on the B777 now that the fuel price has come down. Surely even EK knows that CI400 just isnt going to happen when everyone else is cruising around at significantly slower speeds
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Expat land
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CI 400 is somewhere in the region M0.85 to M0.86, the same as a B747 or A380 cruises at.
Has been .853 most flights near optimum.
It won't break the jet or kill your pax.
It might be smoother at M0.82 if you're in some turb, guess that's up to you.
Apart from tending to reduce descent speed from 325kt (bit close to the pole when in VNAV PTH for this chicken) I don't have a problem with it. If they get another flight per year out of me, who cares? Still same workload for me. Otherwise, I get home 10 mins earlier every sector!
Seems stupid though, those 10 mins (or 20 for two pilots) are costing about 2000 kg of fuel, or around $100 per minute.
Expensive pilots, I'd almost do >92 hours for $6000 an hour!!
Has been .853 most flights near optimum.
It won't break the jet or kill your pax.
It might be smoother at M0.82 if you're in some turb, guess that's up to you.
Apart from tending to reduce descent speed from 325kt (bit close to the pole when in VNAV PTH for this chicken) I don't have a problem with it. If they get another flight per year out of me, who cares? Still same workload for me. Otherwise, I get home 10 mins earlier every sector!
Seems stupid though, those 10 mins (or 20 for two pilots) are costing about 2000 kg of fuel, or around $100 per minute.
Expensive pilots, I'd almost do >92 hours for $6000 an hour!!
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Land of Milk and Honey
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Avid
Not particularly intelligent thinking, in my opinion.
1) If they get one more trip from you per year, they will not pay you more. This means that per sector you are earning less and by extension, you do not feel that your services are worth what you are being paid now. Do you feel that you are being overpaid now? I do not. I feel like I am earning the absolute minimum that I am willing to work here for (of course that is perfect for EK, it's what they want). That includes the major inconvenience of having to live in Dubai, a long way from home, both physically and culturally - as for most of us.
2) You may not be quite as happy to plough through that fuel if the outcome is that next year PS comes around and the excuse for getting zilch (there will be a few to choose from, of course) is that fuel costs have skyrocketed. Only pilots and some (hopefully most) engineers will understand exactly why and we're not a majority...
My theory is to fly my 900 hours in the absolute minimum days possible. We all saw the WSJ article, the truths in it mean that I have no reason to give these people any more than my absolute minimum - they give me nothing more than theirs.
Not particularly intelligent thinking, in my opinion.
1) If they get one more trip from you per year, they will not pay you more. This means that per sector you are earning less and by extension, you do not feel that your services are worth what you are being paid now. Do you feel that you are being overpaid now? I do not. I feel like I am earning the absolute minimum that I am willing to work here for (of course that is perfect for EK, it's what they want). That includes the major inconvenience of having to live in Dubai, a long way from home, both physically and culturally - as for most of us.
2) You may not be quite as happy to plough through that fuel if the outcome is that next year PS comes around and the excuse for getting zilch (there will be a few to choose from, of course) is that fuel costs have skyrocketed. Only pilots and some (hopefully most) engineers will understand exactly why and we're not a majority...
My theory is to fly my 900 hours in the absolute minimum days possible. We all saw the WSJ article, the truths in it mean that I have no reason to give these people any more than my absolute minimum - they give me nothing more than theirs.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight times have become much more manageable with regards to the scheduled block. There will be a lot less what I call "charity time" for the company as flying up to the sceduled block becomes less likely.
And for those who are going to back their argument up by saying they will readjust the block times and then reduce the CI later on, you're far from any logic - that will only put them amongst the worst 'on time performing' airlines.
OTP will never be less than or equal priority to you
And for those who are going to back their argument up by saying they will readjust the block times and then reduce the CI later on, you're far from any logic - that will only put them amongst the worst 'on time performing' airlines.
OTP will never be less than or equal priority to you
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: .
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A number of possibilities:
1. They keep the CI400 to allow a more accurate reporting time to reflect reality. The CI400 stays until fully EASA compliant, including FTLs, which I understand are less restrictive for most reporting time windows. Then reduce CI, and keep the more realistic reporting time and original schedule.
2. Keep CI400 until we recruit a LOT more pilots, and we find more augmenting, then CI reduces.
3. Keep CI400 while fuel prices are low, squeeze current crews for hours, reassess in a year or two.
4. Emirates want to improve their punctuality record. It's finally been revealed that a dispatcher's "5 mins for bags Captain" is actually on the dog-year scale.
I'm between 1 and 4.
1. They keep the CI400 to allow a more accurate reporting time to reflect reality. The CI400 stays until fully EASA compliant, including FTLs, which I understand are less restrictive for most reporting time windows. Then reduce CI, and keep the more realistic reporting time and original schedule.
2. Keep CI400 until we recruit a LOT more pilots, and we find more augmenting, then CI reduces.
3. Keep CI400 while fuel prices are low, squeeze current crews for hours, reassess in a year or two.
4. Emirates want to improve their punctuality record. It's finally been revealed that a dispatcher's "5 mins for bags Captain" is actually on the dog-year scale.
I'm between 1 and 4.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: MIDDLE EAST
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
170to5
"That includes the major inconvenience of living in Dubai, a long way from home, both physically and culturally..."
Sorry to spoil the party, but weren't you informed before you joined EK that this job was based in Dubai and was not a commuting contract?
Complaining about increasing working hours, lack of leave and other detrimental changes to our lifestyle is one thing. Complaining about something you were well aware of before you joined is quite another.
Harry
"That includes the major inconvenience of living in Dubai, a long way from home, both physically and culturally..."
Sorry to spoil the party, but weren't you informed before you joined EK that this job was based in Dubai and was not a commuting contract?
Complaining about increasing working hours, lack of leave and other detrimental changes to our lifestyle is one thing. Complaining about something you were well aware of before you joined is quite another.
Harry
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Land of Milk and Honey
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
170to5
"That includes the major inconvenience of living in Dubai, a long way from home, both physically and culturally..."
Sorry to spoil the party, but weren't you informed before you joined EK that this job was based in Dubai and was not a commuting contract?
Complaining about increasing working hours, lack of leave and other detrimental changes to our lifestyle is one thing. Complaining about something you were well aware of before you joined is quite another.
Harry
"That includes the major inconvenience of living in Dubai, a long way from home, both physically and culturally..."
Sorry to spoil the party, but weren't you informed before you joined EK that this job was based in Dubai and was not a commuting contract?
Complaining about increasing working hours, lack of leave and other detrimental changes to our lifestyle is one thing. Complaining about something you were well aware of before you joined is quite another.
Harry
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tundra
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
170to5 "That includes the major inconvenience of living in Dubai, a long way from home, both physically and culturally..." Sorry to spoil the party, but weren't you informed before you joined EK that this job was based in Dubai and was not a commuting contract? Complaining about increasing working hours, lack of leave and other detrimental changes to our lifestyle is one thing. Complaining about something you were well aware of before you joined is quite another. Harry
I suspect he is expressing the idea that moving to Dubai to live was an acceptable decision based on the contractual obligations promised. Living here becomes much less acceptable, however, when the increasing working hours and lack of leave increases the isolation from home.
Many years ago when common sense made a regular appearance you were paid for an expatriate job a little more in order to compensate for being away from the motherland be that UK, US, Aus etc. The idealised version of that would be the famed Cathay 'A' scale of yore. This concept appears to have disappeared latterly. I might add that the EK pilot package does not compare favourably with legacy carriers in the 'developed' world. Although EK pays accommodation etc that is easily offset e.g. in the UK by the cost of income tax, NI and pension contribution.
short flights long nights
Sorry Harry, I will call you on this one, ( I normally agree with your posts). The contract I signed and the rosters it allowed me when I joined 9 years ago, did no way resemble what I had when I left. That is the problem, the continuing degrading of T and C. Harry, if your are happy to accept that, well done, others are not.
As you know, I was not one.
As you know, I was not one.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could all those articles I've been reading in Flight International over the past 10 years about pilot shortage be finally coming true?!
There's no such thing as a bottomless pit and EK are starting to find that out. Stick around guys, we deserve to see the outcome
There's no such thing as a bottomless pit and EK are starting to find that out. Stick around guys, we deserve to see the outcome