AirTanker First Officers

[Courtney Mil]

Originally Posted by beardy

Thomas Cook internal politics are no concern of yours.

I think that's way out of line and I don't think you are in any position to try to dictate to members here what their interests should be or what they can discuss here. Just saying.

Play nicely now.

Courtney

[beardy]

I don't agree Courtney. TCX recruitment, secondment, etc. has no place in this discussion and has no bearing on Beagle's fixation with PFI. It is between TCX pilots and management.

[BEagle]

I agree, Courtney old chap. This is a rumour network after all's said and done - and the first-hand info. I had substantiated my comment that no-one is particularly interested in flying for the 'moist-lease' deal Thomas Cook seemingly has with ATr.

If the deal was contingent on there being sufficient pilots volunteering to be seconded to ATr and it turns out that actually no-one does so, then it will be interesting to note the effect on the 3PR needed to support the PFI nonsense.

Sort of like ensuring you have the assets before you make the commitment?

Yes, the Aussies were right about the meaning of PFI!

[Sandy Parts]

however - it will have a bearing on the title of this thread. Therefore we are free to discuss it at will (especially as this is a Rumour forum). As a taxpayer - how the PFI funded AirTanker operate affects me directly. If they are recruiting other airlines spare capacity, I hope the taxpayer will get value for money.

[Courtney Mil]

Originally Posted by beardy

TCX recruitment, secondment, etc. has no place in this discussion and has no bearing on Beagle's fixation with PFI. It is between TCX pilots and management.

It is not for any of us to tell folk what they can and cannot discuss or consider. I don't think any of us understand your hostility towards anyone mentioning TCX, but sounds like personal problem to me. But now you've attempted to place it off limits, I'm suddenly quite interested in their "internal politics." I shall enquire of my friends. Perhaps you might like to expand on your reasons.

Rest assured that BEags will conduct his discussion as he sees fit. As shall we all, without any personal abuse.

[Onceapilot]

Sandy mate! As taxpayers, every single working person in the country should be up in arms. The FSTA saga is like, Eddie Stobbart is given the exclusive contract to drive all the troops around the country in hired Rolls-Royces!

OAP

[beardy]

For whoever may be interested:

Within hours of the pilots of TCX being asked to express, through a non-binding bid, an interest in a secondment to ATr, 13 did so. Some have withdrawn that interest, others have not expressed interest at the request of BALPA. The company management have not consulted BALPA, as they are obliged to. It is BALPA's hope that a scarcity of interest will encourage consultation. BEAGLE your friend will be able to confirm those numbers from the company standing bid.

The only Ts & Cs details we have at the moment are that seconded pilots will be paid by TCX, but will operate ATr's AOC. There are no details on disturbance allowance, HOTAC nor on the return to TCX after a 3 year secondment, in short there are no real details of what the secondment will entail. This is what will turn interest into bids.

We have Captains who are demoted and displaced from their normal operating base, we have displaced Captains and First Officers. These are, for the most part, the pilots who have expressed an interest.

At a guess I think that there may be enough to fill all 10 slots, but it is a guess.

Most of us would rather see the work stay in-house, and it may well yet.

The internal machinations really are just that, internal.

Courtney, my hostility comes from a wilful misrepresentation of my company and the attitude of the pilots in it and also the integrity of Aibus design to support Beagle's personal vendetta against ATr and PFI.

And then of course there was this infamous quote from him concerning the ATr A330 excursion:

Well, given the rumours that the autopilot wouldn't disconnect, I would strongly suspect a problem in the left hand sidestick system. But surely there's redundancy built in to the sidestick design? Or is that supposed to be achieved by having 2 sidesticks?

As for blaming the crew, if anyone was stupid enough to try that they'd soon wish they hadn't.....

The autopilot was already disconnected and the event was pilot induced, but don't let that stop him knocking ATr and Airbus.

Addendum:

TCX recruitment, secondment, etc. has no place in this discussion and has no bearing on Beagle's fixation with PFI

The emphasis should be on THIS discussion, feel free to discuss it elsewhere if that's what floats your boat.

[CoffmanStarter]

Presumably Tornado support over Sinjar will be Voyagers first operational AAR tasking ?

BBC Video ...

BBC News - BBC on board RAF reconnaissance mission in Iraq

[BEagle]

Could well be, CS - and without any bucket-and-spade airline drivers or PFI mercenaries on the flight deck either...

Just the RAF doing what it does best - responding with consummate professionalism!

[CoffmanStarter]

Thanks BEagle ... That AAR "Desk" looks interesting

[3engnever]

If someone could tell me how the 3PR contract with Thomas Cook or any other operator would effect the taxpayer I would be interested to hear?

[BEagle]

CS - that 'AAR desk' is absurdly overcomplicated, thanks to the Spanish engineers.

And it still doesn't include an AAR Mission System which actually works.

But, bolleaux of PFI notwithstanding, at least the Voyager is now in operational service along with other Airbus tankers which have been so for several years now.

Unlike ol' Bubba's KC-46A 'Pig's arse' Frankentanker which hasn't even flown yet!

[brakedwell]

Do I sense bias from the non Boeing expert

[BEagle]

Bias? Moi?? Only against the absurd KC-46A programme! I'm sure ol' Bubba Boeing's people tubes are fine and dandy, if (7-late-7 aside), rather last century

The Pig'sArse isn't now due to fly until Q1 2015.... There are now doubts in Congress as to whether it will still meet its OT&E deadline. And as for the cost overrun....

Whereas the A310MRTT, CC-150T, A330MRTT, KC-30A and Voyager are now all in operational service - although some key requirements (such as the mission planning/management system) for the A330 family have yet to be delivered.

Even so, rather better than ol' Bubba's paper plane!

USA - you should have stuck with the vastly superior KC-45A, which you selected over 6 years ago now!

[ShotOne]

"How the contract with Thomas Cook would affect the taxpayer..." Simples, 3eng, it brings in a load of money to the treasury for an expensive asset during for periods in which it isn't being used.

"Thomas Cook pilots wouldn't touch it with a barge pole...?" You've asked them all have you, beagle? BALPA have a thoroughly sensible policy of discouraging pilots from volunteering to do extra services for nowt. Nothing to do wth rights and wrongs of PFI, just plain common sense. It's very likely they'll get the numbers needed, just not for nothing!

[BEagle]

BALPA have a thoroughly sensible policy of discouraging pilots from volunteering to do extra services for nowt. Nothing to do wth rights and wrongs of PFI, just plain common sense. It's very likely they'll get the numbers needed, just not for nothing!

A commendable BALPA stance, I would agree.

But if you don't have you assets in place, how can you build your business case?

And just how would this 'load of money' benefit the Treasury?

[3engnever]

Shot one, are you sure about that? How do the finances work for the 3PR fleet? What are the breakdowns in 3PR between ATR and the MoD?

[Xercules]

3PR

MoD will already have had its benefit from AirTanker's 3PR. One of the necessary features of a PFI is that the contractor takes a "demand risk". This means that the pricing of the Contract is based on an assumption that the Contractor will make some of its income outside the contract with MoD. That theoretically comes from 3rd Party use of the asset. It could partly come, in this case, from MoD's use of the assets beyond the contract or from, in this case apparently, Thomas Cook' use. Unless the Contract stipulates a sharing mechanism, revenue from Thomas Cook would be all AirTankers. Unless the Treasury rules have changed markedly since I was last involved with PFIs, a sharing mechanism would seem to flout the rules of a PFI. The concept is meant to be that the expectation of 3PR lowers the price to the Government organisation.

You can believe that or not!

[ShotOne]

Third party use of these aircraft has, from the very start, been a key part of this deal 3eng. I confess I didn't think it would be attractive to commercial operators so am pleased to have been proved wrong on this. Clearly some, like beagle, have always been implacably against the entire concept to the extent there's little point attempting a reasoned debate. I'm not sure though, why he feels it necessary to be so derisive about those he dubs "mercenaries" who are actually now doing the job. Did you fly for free, beagle?

[BEagle]

Yes, I'm certainly against PFIs and the use of FTRS mercenaries for military tasks, when there are youngsters still trying to start out on their RAF careers.

But I'm happy to discuss it on here if you wish.

3PR was always an expectation, although in the FSTA concept phase most of us considered that the likelihood of significant 3PR was rather unlikely.