Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Terms and Endearment
Reload this Page >

Anyone heard of hiring pilots for BAe146/RJ?

Wikiposts
Search
Terms and Endearment The forum the bean counters hoped would never happen. Your news on pay, rostering, allowances, extras and negotiations where you work - scheduled, charter or contract.

Anyone heard of hiring pilots for BAe146/RJ?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 3rd Jun 2009, 11:15
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
They were talking to Aer Arann about possibly coming under their AOC, but I can't really see it happening because Aer Arann don't have the type on their AOC and if they went to all the trouble of getting the 146 added to their AOC, they wouldn't need Nex for anything.

Nex currently consists of a portakabin in Waterford and a few computers. The aircraft is in the UK somewhere on a storage maintenance program. There are no crews and no engineers. Most of the pilots seem to have gone to Efly so they won't be available to Nex.

And, as you say, it is really way too late now for a summer charter operation.

The Nex principals have deep pockets and so may hang on and try and make something work, but without an AOC, crews, engineers and only one (limited) 146, they have their work cut out.

It would be nice to see them back in the air, though.
remoak is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2009, 15:02
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Aer Arann are looking for a BAe146 engineer on their jobs page.Interesting
Jetfella is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2009, 02:31
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: US
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Aer Arann are looking for a BAe146 engineer on their jobs page
All I see is the following: There are currently no vacancies
spagiola is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2009, 03:47
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That's because applications for the post closed yesterday. It was there, I saw the ad too.

It is interesting, but I still can't see why they would want to do it (ie put the 146 on their AOC and then get Nex to operate for them). Doesn't really make any sense. Although in Ireland, lots of stuff that doesn't make sense happens anyway...

Also worth noting that the ad wasn't for a 146 engineer, it was for a manager who ideally has both 146 and ATR experience... ie the 146 bit wasn't a requirement.
remoak is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2009, 10:16
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just to clarify,

the ad was for a Technical services "engineer",

the ideal candidate would have:

Bae146/ATR experience.

And why would Aer Arann put the aircraft on their AOC?,the annual fee for one,using another carriers AOC doesn't come cheap.

Plus the percentage percapita accruing from any charter,schedule.wetlease.

and in these difficult times,would be a good bonus,

heres to green chutes(or is it shutes?)
Jetfella is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2009, 10:30
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ireland
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
How long will the 146's with cityjet be kept in service. Any word on replacing them anytime soon?
daraireland is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2009, 11:03
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And why would Aer Arann put the aircraft on their AOC?
They wouldn't put the "aircraft" on their AOC, but they would have to put the TYPE on their AOC in order to operate it (or allow Nex to operate it). To do that, they have to put in place a training capablity and associated quality system, engineering capability and associated quality system, and have key 146-qualified staff in place to oversee standards for aircrew, cabin crew and engineers. They could POSSIBLY farm out the AOC stuff to someone else, but the fact is that there aren't many people still operating it in the First World. Cityjet wouldn't do it (because their owners won't let them), and that really only leaves only one possibility - and that airline has dealt with Nex before - and it ended in tears.

If they did put the type on their AOC, they wouldn't need Nex - all Nex have is one doggy old 146 with a lightweight (and limiting) undercarriage. There are plenty of 146's out there for lease or sale at very cheap prices.

Plus the percentage percapita accruing from any charter,schedule.wetlease.

and in these difficult times,would be a good bonus
They did that last year with Nex, and the return for the less-than-full flights wouldn't even come close to covering the cost of setting up the 146 on their AOC, even spread over a few years. Aer Arann didn't even bother trying to do it again this summer, so they can't have been too impressed with last year's performance.

How long will the 146's with cityjet be kept in service
AFAIK they are all either parked up or sold.

One thing is for sure, there is no word on the streets that Nex are looking for crews, so nothing can be happening anytime soon. The 146 pilot community is pretty small these days and word usually gets around pretty fast, particularly if the agencies are involved.
remoak is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2009, 11:45
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: US
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is it conceivable that Nex is paying RE to put the 146 on their AOC? Might be cheaper than Nex getting their own AOC.
spagiola is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2009, 11:54
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Only marginally. Aer Arann would want to cover all their costs and also charge a premium for the use of their AOC. If Nex was paying for all that, they might as well do it themselves. Setting up an AOC is likely to cost well over a million Euros (conservatively), I'm pretty sure that if Nex had that sort of money, they would have had an AOC back in 2007.
remoak is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2009, 12:37
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Samsonite Avenue
Posts: 1,538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
An ex collegue of mine is involved in adding the BAe 146 to Aer Arran's AOC. That is second hand information but I am led to believe that they are at least giving it a shot.
Mister Geezer is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2009, 13:18
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Remoak,

whats that about the undercarriage?,I understood 146 to be particularly
robust in the dunlops department.

Citytjet have only one 146 in storage,their entire fleet is Avro RJ.

The pas job looks likely to be Nex,who already have 2 Capts and 2 F/os resident in Ireland,would they need more with one aircraft?

Aer Arann obviously have something afoot.

Did Efly ever get going anyone?I hear they are also looking for an AOC.
Jetfella is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2009, 13:52
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The PAS ad is probably Efly, they have been looking for TRE/TRIs for a while.

Efly is on track, just dotting the I's and crossing the T's from what I hear.

Not sure which Irish-resident pilots are with Nex, last I heard there were none, and at least three of their ex-pilots have signed up with Efly.

Some -200 series 146s had -100 series landing gear fitted, which limits the MTOW and MLW. You can tell by looking at the main U/C upper web, the normal -200 and -300 item is solid, but the earlier -100 series has big lightening holes in it. It can get particularly interesting when doing long sectors in the 146, as the MLW can be less than what you end up with on arrival, particularly if you have more than minimum fuel on board due to wx considerations. You then end up having to either burn fuel or get "creative" with the fuel log. This is mainly a problem if your destination alternate isn't close by. Flybe had this problem, the one aircraft they had with the lightweight gear couldn't be used for some charters because if you arrived at destination with minimum fuel and a full pax load, you were well over your MLW.
remoak is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2009, 16:45
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Efly recruited a TRI/E two months ago, but who knows maybe they need more! All FO's are Italian and they have promised commands to three or four TR and experienced captains. None of the captains taken on are ex-Nex, I believe they are all ex-Flightline.

Nex have a number of qualified pilots who are available at short notice, however last I heard they were only crewing to a minimum level and as far as I know no one has been offered a contract yet, so they may well get other jobs in the meantime.

Sometimes it makes no difference having a higher MTOW/MLW 146 when the performance considerations result in restrictive RLW/RTOW's. I believe this is the case at WAT and GWY, where GTBIC was operating last summer.
airfixed is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2009, 20:04
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well all I can say is that I personally know three of the F/Os employed by Efly, and they are all ex-Nex. I also personally know the TRE/TRI they employed and he isn't Italian either. So I'm not sure where your info is coming from, but it isn't correct.

One of the captains that has been offered a contract is ex-Nex, again a personal friend.

The problem with the gear is lower MTOW/MLW, not higher, and if you look at the performance figures for WAT you will find that the limiting 30 flap MTOW/MLW is almost always structural (ie restricted by the gear). That is why Nex had to limit their pax loads last year.

Last edited by remoak; 4th Jun 2009 at 20:15.
remoak is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2009, 22:27
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I know of only 2 ex-Nex FO's possibly joining Efly. However as I said before I believe all the captains are ex Flightline the TRI/E being an exception.

If published or calculated performance (take off or landing) results in a more restrictive weight, then it makes no difference whatsoever if you have a beefed up gear that will allow a higher structural weight - you will always need to observe the relevant regulated weight. This can be a problem on runways such as WAT and GWY.
airfixed is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2009, 22:39
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wynnwith were recruiting for efly,but the elephant in the room is that they still have the aircraft for sale on speednews.

On another thread,both aircraft seem to be still in exeter.No AOC,aircraft still for sale,doesnt sound promising,
Jetfella is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2009, 03:07
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
airfixed

Perhaps a few numbers will help you get it.

These are the actual numbers from an old loadsheet that I kept for training purposes, feel free to verify them. Destination wasn't a Nex destination, but the distance involved was about 40nm less than the distance from Malaga to Waterford. Figures are for TBIC though, in a previous life. There was no takeoff or landing performance restriction. If you look at a 146 performance book that incudes WAT, you will see that there is no landing restriction for a normal landing on a dry runway.

Traffic load was 45 M 42 F 3 C 6 I, bags 1557, total traffic load 8295kg. That's only 90 seated pax out of 100 seats.

Dry Operating Mass 24500
Total Traffic Load 8295
Zero Fuel Weight 32795 (max 33339)
Takeoff Fuel 7800 (max 9300)
Takeoff Mass 40595 (max 40596 with lightweight gear) OK by 1 kg
Trip Fuel 5425
Landing Mass 35170 (max 35153 with lightweight gear) NOT OK

So you can see that on that day, we were overweight for landing by 17kg but not restricted for takeoff. You always make fuel on these plogs, so we actually ended up around 300kg overweight for landing (which meant some quality time in the hold). With the diversion we had - only around 100nm away - the window between minimum diversion fuel and MLW was only about 50kg.

Them's the facts, the 146 with the lightweight gear is a real problem on long sectors. You have to wonder who was advising Nex when they bought it, there were plenty of other machines around with the beefier gear at the time, and they were very cheap.

On the subject of Efly, their website says that the first aircraft, 9H-ELE, was delivered and then transferred to Malta for their AOC proving flight on the 13th of May. Are they lying?
remoak is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2009, 08:43
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No problem with your figures and I agree that you will nearly always make fuel leading to the need to burn fuel at destination to get the landing weight down. However on restricted runways if the RLW/RTOW is lower than actual/calculated/maximum LW/TOW then it doesn't matter what gear you have you wil be limited to that weight.

Last summer Nex operated a leasd 146 with the beefed up gear (EICNQ) which it tended to operate on the longer routes. For the times when the wind was in the right direction and the temperature wasn't too high it made a big difference - but unfortunately those days were few and far between!
airfixed is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2009, 11:48
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Samsonite Avenue
Posts: 1,538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
On the subject of Efly, their website says that the first aircraft, 9H-ELE, was delivered and then transferred to Malta for their AOC proving flight on the 13th of May. Are they lying?
Well it appears that Wynnwith seem to be given some guys the run around and the last I heard is that those who were going are either delayed or are not going at all.
Mister Geezer is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2009, 17:23
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Age: 83
Posts: 3,788
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Curiously enough, I was called by Wynnwythwhateveritis yesterday and I was asked, very nicely, if I would be interested in being a TRI/TRE for them.

I have never had anything to do with this organisation but I told them that I would be absolutely delighted to help them if they could just get over the small problem of me being 68 years of age!

It is always good to be on the ball!
JW411 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.