In the UK its 33% discretion before action has to be taken (over the season)
I once did 100% discretion on a DC10 flight to Tenerife with a 1hr turn at TFS (as the aircraft was covering a B757 flight). The main reason was the flight went at 0555z which was a crap reporting time - no chance of a delay to 0600z due slots. At the end of the season Commercial rang me and said they had changed the times for the next summer - much excitement - until they told me it was going at 0550z instead :ugh:

I guess the question is instead of venting on the forum why not just ring someone up and ask?

I suspect Xulu has hit the nail on the head. Does the Commander take the last break?

Fliion,

Right with ya at the FSDO - this sort of policy and decision making should be stamped out although I suspect it will require the might of a government and restrictions on air travel to counteract this potential major safety issue.
Its a risk to crew and passengers lives.

Flying over 900 hours is not a safety issue?
Just did the Taipei flight. 9:47 flight time and TWO pilots in the middle of the night! Does anyone think this is remotely safe? Emirates has been doing this crap for years.

I second that emotion.

What i do not believe is that the FAA, or by that any aviation authority, will do a lot about it. They are all heavily undermined by the local airlines who want nothing more than emulate how the Middle Eastern airlines abuse fdr's and by that safety.

The only defence, and by that a legal one, is to deny going into discretion too early. You can always, and by that i mean always say, that you cannot at the beginning of an operation seriously judge your state of fatigue at its end, thus discretion at the beginning of a US flight must be considered careless and will be considered as that by any judge in case of incidents. This is for a single leg. With a double leg never refuse to go! Just ask them, as a preemptive information, where the relief crew will be sent, in case you will be obliged by law to deny going into discretion due to fatigue. "Will it be Karachi or Muscat?".

Stay within the book and common sense. Any threats following a denial of discretion is a completely different matter then. That's the time aviation authorities must start action, the one of the originating just as much as the one of the arriving country.

And always remember: This is for the cause of safety in aviation and never against any company!

Is there anyway we can find the identity of some of our fellow posters here on pprune? I strongly suspect that some of the Soft C0ck5 on pprune are posting from the management offices.

Cerbus, that contravenes the rules of the forum.

Back to the topic.

Do you guys believe that 201 and others will be op with 2 capt and 1 FO?

Maybe I am missing something, but for that, Capts have to be right hand seat qualified and as far as I know nobody except trainers are.

I made a phone call and was told it won't happen so I removed my post.

Standing by

f.

Don't think the augmenting captain need to be RHS-qualified, at least the way EK is doing it now. The FOs aren't LHS-qualified and that's why the pilot that is PF at any given time should be in the seat that he/she is qualified for. That raises the question though, what if the PF needs to take a "comfort break" during the time let's say a FO is in the LHS? That leaves only the PM now also PF in a seat that he/she is not qualified for.

Obviously it is because you are still alive. Unless your ghost is posting on your behalf.

Just because I survived doesn't mean it is safe. It means I survived through no help from Emirates.
9:47 through the middle of the night and you think that is safe?

9:47 during the night. No different to a night India turn. Not saying it's right just saying we did the same in Europe on the way to TFS or LCA .

Just wow.

The old "nothing happened so it must be safe. Such a refreshingly proactive take on safety.

Can't wait to see how THAT holds up in some courtroom some day. "Well we got away with nonsense for years, so we kinda...thought...y'know..." *voice trails off*

The question was "Does anyone think this is remotely safe?".

Remotely - in the slightest degree. It is because an accident doesn't happen every time this flight operates.

Obviously, organising your time off so you're rested properly before such a duty means you won't be so dangerous when you're operating what is a pretty common duty in other parts of the world.

Yeah talk semantics to me!

Not having an accident on a flight doesn't mean it was safe, it just means you survived. Theres no connection anyway, in the logical sense you suggest - you could have a flight which was conducted very safely which still resulted in an accident...

No its not common and in any case - two wrongs would not make a right

So is this a dangerous flight conducted safely?

You better let the UK charter boys know it's not common.

“There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one’s own safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn’t, but if he was sane he would have to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn’t have to; but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle.

So from these posts one would assume there will be no one going into discretion. Who cares to bet on that.

Correct.
EK OM-D 2.1.3.6

FOs got left seat training when they were initially trained. I was never an FO on the airplane I am flying and I never received right seat training in decompression, emergency descent and TCAS maneuvers. Therefore I am not qualified to sit in the right seat.
I strongly suspect numerous captains have not sat in the right seat in years and is out currency to sit in the right seat without additional right hand seat training.
On another note the FAA is looking into EK application's to fly the A-380 to SFO. The FAA is finally concerned that the flight attendants are only getting 2 1/2 hours of rest on the ULRs which sometimes are 16 hours of flight time.

Not true, as a Captain you are qualified for either seat and only a CPL is anyway required to sit in the other seat. Also because the AFS system is essentially identical from both seats there is no additional training requirement in the cruise. The aircraft is designed to be operated with the PF in their normal operating seat when below cruise altitude. Before you start blaming EK this principle comes from FARs and EASA Regs too.

You'll need a better argument than that, after all most of the time guys whine they don't get enough authority so hopping 4 feet right with a Captain in the other seat shouldn't be too onerous.