ORD 27 hr layover
 

20min longer block than SEA, same time zone as IAH & DFW.

Such generosity in giving a fourth pilot.

f.

I would like to know how they work that out!

ULR Rest
 

Have a look at GCAA Publication CAAP14 ULR, section 7(c). Its on their website, and seems to require a minimum 48 hr layover, so not sure how 27 hr works. Maybe I'm missing something, open to correction.

7B

That's barely enough time to knock out a United Airlines Interview

Don't know about the GCAA, but the FAA have a 40-48 hour rule for US operators of ULRs (16hrs). The problem is that you're allowed to 'buy' your way out of the procedure by paying a financial penalty to roster only 24 hour layovers between ULRs.

At present only Delta Airlines is complying with the 48-hour rule, unless things have changed the last couple of years...

Is it under or over 16 hrs? That May shed some light on which rules to apply.

In reality 22hrs in place of rest with 33ish in the tube...allowing only one long proper sleep in a 55hr period.

$afety starting to sound like lip $ervice around here.

f.

A few people should accidentally drop this info onto a FSDO

Reduced Rest
 

They are really getting cheeky with there Rostering to save money and manpower . Its getting to be a joke .

Not to dampen your enthusiasm Fire Balls, but our Company Chairman is not the DG of the GCAA...

http://www.gcaa.gov.ae/en/Pages/BoardOfDirectors.aspx

http://www.emirates.com/sg/english/a...en_letter.aspx .

Careful FireB , some here are very particular and sensitive demanding 100 % accuracy and seem to miss the point .

IF you feel its a flight safety issue, file a report for deck sake! :ugh:

Is it legal or not? If not notify the FAA . If it is then put it to rest. In other words sh!t or get off the pot. It does not matter what you as pilots think is the right way to operate a ULR. Is it legal or not period .

.... or fly the pairing and if it actually feels like being unsafe -> have the balls to call fatigued and don't fly back!

I guess i'll be well into retirement to see that happening.

Surely this makes no difference, crews will remain on local time of departure for such a short slip.

Following extract is from GCAA CAAP14 - ULR, section 7 -


(c) ULR Flight Rest Period Away from Base

In the ULR Rostered Duty Assignment, the scheduled period free of flying duties away from base shall be at least 48 hours.

Seems pretty clear to me.....

7B

BA had this problem years ago. Although LAX and SFO was classed as a West Coast operation SEA wasn't even though all three are UTC - 8. Is this a debate block time v time change? Management will always say block times count for financial reasons.

And please get it fixed before the 380 has to take it :)

The don

ok ok Don, we all know you drive the 380...

After a month of reports this trip will go 48 hours, did anyone really expect it to launch with any more than 24 hours?

Don't forget the 2+ hours bus ride to the hotel during winter ops :ugh::ugh:

At the risk of ruining my PPrune persona, have the stones to go into print if you feel it requires it. An accurate honest ASR is the only true literary master piece that will be listened to. Having never done this pairing, nor am I likely too (The "home of the brave" being as high on my list as Nigeria), I couldn't care less, but if in YOUR opinion its unsafe, then do yourself a favour….

And how many ASRs are put in on three man BOS by my Boeing brethren?

At least the 380 guys are giving a go of it on 201.

f.

Similar to the GIG - EZE - GIG turn, the ASRs went in and it was changed quickly. If they are just trying their luck, the only thing to change it will be reasoned and factual ASRs showing a safety implication.

Use it or lose it!

It's just a sign of things to come.
The latest training news letter talks of 3hr recurrent sims instead of the usual 4, with no break in the middle.
I thought we were supposed to leading the way with our training methods, this just strikes of pandering to the accountants yet again.

For your info the 3 hr sim is becoming a fact in the UK/EU well before the UAE. I would hope when most EK pilots go do a flight they deal with the facts. They seem to want to just stir things here on pprune.

This thing about ORD layover has been beat to death before and again EK pilots not understanding the rules ie ULR is 16 hr(GCAA). For me it means one less day away from family, bring it on!

Fatbus , so your saying that because GCAA definition of a ULR flight is 16 hrs and EK define a ULR flight as 14 hrs that what ......normal FTLs apply ?

WTF you talking about . Take a page out of your own advice and read the facts as written in the GCAA CARs.
Its the reason why we all feel so frigging stuffed on lay overs because the company roster us over multiple time zones then give us a rest period which is scientifically acknowledged as the worse possible rest, which is why its written in the regulations, and also the OMA CH 7

CAR–OPS 1.1105 General principles
Factors to be considered when planning duty periods shall include;
(a) The allocation of work patterns, which avoid such undesirable practices as;
(3) the scheduling of rest periods between 18 and 30 hours especially after long flights crossing multiple time zones.

This is data based primarily on day / night rotations - might be little out of date nowdays with so much work going into FRM

Wise words

Fatty

What a load of bollox.

Complaining about 22 hrs in a place of rest with 33 in the aicraft is stirring it up is it?

In that case you no doubt support reducing SEA also...because with no ASRs on ORD. That's next.

Believe me the reason ORD is 27 hrs is not so that you can get extra days with your family.

Naive post from a normally reasonable poster.

Very few people here think we are under worked ... But the notion of less time down route gives more time at home..

Pure comedy.

f.

Why is that 5203 was and is the preferred flt. Bid by many in their top bid month.not everyone wants an extra day in the US if you are not from there. Yes it will provide more time in DXB it's the difference between 12 days off and 15.

There's an easy way to spend more time in DXB: Bid for it, bid for TA's ffa!!!

There are people who actually like to travel and see places, who like to fly professionally well rested with some good memories, loving their job. I believe we provide a better and safer job that way!

I bet if you'd check the first application of some home base lovers, you'd discover some lines like:
... just to see the same guys bid for ULRs only to hit enough hours, hit the hotel bed with a yoghurt and an orange juice for the night, not to be seen and heard until yelling at the FAs for the crew sandwiches, blankets and cushions once on board, calculating to the millisecond when they can hit the sack.

I love ULRs with 48h+, i hate the ones with less than 31h.
I truly believe that less is unsafe, basta!

EK ULR is not GCAA CAAP 14
 

Unfortunately, as was mentioned in one of the ASR's a few weeks ago, EK doesn't need to follow GCAA CAAP 14 rules n their ULR. The EK ULR's are published as a VARIATION in the EK OM-A, which is approved by the GCAA.

PS: The ASR was regarding cabin crew on A380 not having the required minimum rest on a ULR as per the GCAA CAAP.

MR8 The company response to that ASR was incorrect.
Show me the reference to the variation...there is none.
CH 7 OMA is long over due for a re write, and I would suspect this has been ongoing for some time however yet to see the light of day.

GCAA CAR regulation 1.1040b requires any variation to CARs to be listed at the front of the OMA , its located at the start of the OMA.
Otherwise an approval must be issued by the GCAA, these letters are not a blanket approval and there is a process that should be followed.

Given the numerous non compliance issues with our OMA section 7 ULR and the GCAA CARs, I doubt very much that approval was given as it would have required virtually ignoring all of CAR 1.1130 (FTLs ULR) and not one but many separate approval letters from the GCAA.
Instead it was much easier for the company to write at the start of the OMA Annex 7 C ULR Operational Plan "This document is raised in compliance with the UAE GCAA Regulations "

At that time the definition of Extended Long Range Operations was not in the CARs or our OMA as was the addition of FRMS policy which is now in place ( CARs). FRMS definition has also changed.
You will gradually hear the company referring to ELR rather than ULR and will be a way they can become compliant.

CAR-OPS 1 Subpart Q
CAR-OPS 1.1110 Terminologies
Long Range Operation:
Any operation that involves a sector with planned flight time between 7 and 14 hours, and conducted under the prescriptive limits of the applicable regulation
Extended Long Range Operations
Any augmented (two set of flight crew) operation that involves a sector with planned flight time between 14:01 hours and 16:00 hours, and conducted under a specific variation approved by GCAA on the basis of a risk assessment provided by the operator, that provide a level of safety equivalent to, or better than, that achieved through the prescriptive fatigue management regulations.
FRMS
A data-driven means of continuously monitoring and managing fatigue-related safety risks, based upon scientific principles and knowledge as well as operational experience that aims to ensure relevant personnel are performing at adequate levels of alertness
FRMS Policy
A required component of an FRMS. THE FRMS Policy must: identify the elements of the FRMS and its scope; reflect the shared responsibility of all stakeholders in the FRMS; state the safety objectives of the FRMS; be signed by the accountable executive of the organisation; be communicated throughout the organisation; declares management commitment to effective safety reporting, to providing adequate resourcing for the FRMS, and to continuous improvement of the FRMS; identify clear lines of accountability for the functioning of the FRMS; and require periodic reviews of the FRMS.

Bird, you can quote, post, copy/paste or whatever all the rules, regulations, laws you want. But it's like the speed limit "laws" here. If the authorities do not enforce them, it's.......whatever. Without enforcement, rules and regs and laws are meaningless. Just print on paper.


Your heart is in the right place, mate, but it is futile to expect results. But do appreciate you posting what is supposed to be.

But the Company themselves said it should be 48h
 

I guess everybody in the Bouncy Castle "conveniently forgot" that the explanation of the Houston layover change to 48h was because of the "flight time plus TIME ZONE CHANGE" involved in the IAH operation. This was written in a letter to the pilots distributed shortly after the change was made, to save face no doubt. Sadly I did not save a copy of this mail, but I'd love to dig to up.

When LAX, SFO and SEA were published they did stay true to their words, but alas I guess they hope time has erased all memory of that promise.

For now we have a flight LONGER than SEA, and in the SAME TIMEZONE as IAH, and yet they failed to publish it as a 48h layover.

I don't know about the other pilots who seem to like the 24h given, but it upsets me just based on principal, as well as the increased fatigue of this hard to work flight.

Is it not for issues such as this that the Confidential Safety Reporting scheme is designed? Speaking with the guy who runs it, there are very few if any which relate to these pairings. It takes just as long to complain on here as it would do to fill out a report so it is very much in our own hands to some extent. Can you imagine for just one moment what effect it might have if 300 reports relating to our safety culture suddenly end up on the same desk within a week or so?

As many have said before, regardless of what you think the Company may or may not do with reports, without them only one thing is guaranteed..........

Now, where do they keep them cause they ain't on the plane that's for sure! :confused:

Harry

ASR explanation
 

Yup as you say Tango , no speeding tickets are being issued, and no sign of any police in sight, or any one being "flashed or pulled over"

We are being screwed by the very department tasked with over seeing safety.
Its fine to say submit ASRs, however the regulations require the FRMS guys to jump through hoops as well (to which safety is part of the FRMS)
Why are they not making noise, or doing what is required in the regulations, its not as if they do not already have past data on similar routes.
You do realize who is in charge of the FRMS committee.....
Additional Info
The point is that filing ASRs is like shutting the gate after the horse has bolted when the gate should not be open in the first place. There is a due process , clearly spelt out in the regs which involves the FRMS committee (whom safety are part of)justifying to the Authority how and why it can operate on a new route , it has not been followed. Instead we have to wait till the horse has bolted round up and enough ASRs filed before a reluctant decision is made.

Note the requirements for "risk assessment" and "data".......ASRs are a very important component of this.

ASRs go to the very top and if there is an issue it will be changed. That's apparently what happened last time we did the 3 pilot trips. If you are fatigued file!

Building on the vein of using reports to achieve results...a quick read of new FCN seems to suggest OAL travel now in J firm. Relief for the CUR-AMS trip and no doubt other sectors impending with the developing freighter markets.

Good news as i understand many CSRs submitted on this pairing...and underscoring importance of writing ASR & fatigue report if warranted.

f.

What is not said in that email, re. OALs, that you end up in Biz. Well, what if an airline does not have a business class but only coach and first....what then? Did I miss something? Sorry sir, we no have business class.......

There's just no pleasing people at times. TU, you're beginning to sound like some of our typical passengers. Whatever you give them, they just want more.

Cross that bridge if and when you get to it, just be thankful that we are where we are with this, ok!

Harry