U2: Number of flight deck staff easyjet
 

Hi there,
does anynone know how many pilots U2 has?
I heard about 1,200 can this be true? think that's quite a lot for it's size. Or is this with easyjet Switzerland?

Closer to 2400!!

There is at least 550 pilots at easy gatwick alone.

interesting...do you mean Easyjet Pilots...or pilots flying easyjet aircraft....Big difference

hi simon, pilots flying u2 aircraft. as far as i know they had crew shortage and had to lease in pilots, but most of them now should be on the u2 payroll, shouldn't they?

so this is easyjet at all bases? they had around 7400 staff accoring to the annual report in 2010, how many f/a are there included. i am sure they have a very small number of overhead...

Bah! Beat me to it!! :D

silence akrapovic

He is your patrol leader.......

200 aircraft x 6 crews x 2 pilots = 2400
X 5 crews = 2000

The hearings going but nothing wrong with the math! :ok:

Hahahaha you owe me a new keyboard earlgrey!

200 aircraft x 6 crews x 2 pilots = 2400
X 5 crews = 2000

Hmmm...2400 x5 = 2000, remind me not to let you do the T/O performance!!! :O

er, 3 bars, you missed a bit...

5 crews = 2000
6 crews = 2400
:}

Can someone please explain what U2 means?

The airline is easyJet. ICAO shorten this to EZY, IATA shorten it to U2. These are know as airline designators. Not sure why U2, but it's just a way of shortening the airline code. Like airports - London Gatwick is EGKK in ICAO but LGW in IATA.

....and smart arse spotters on here like to use the term U2 to show how much cleverer than the rest of us mere mortals on here are.

Used the bloody airline name in all threads on all airlines, it makes it so much more entertaining for the reader.

Same could be said for airports too......:ugh:

It'a daft isn't it? I thought he was talking about U2's pilots! They're rich enough to have a personal fleet of them! Why use ridiculous abbreviations like that in an industry riven by acronyms as it is! (IMHO!). Being clever? I'v e only been a professional pilot for over 40 years in the UK and I didn't know what it was. I'm beginning to wish I didn't now.

No, it's earlier than that.

I've got a dreadful roster; U2?

Sheesh! I've only been at it 30 so what chance do I have?

IATA, that's somethig to do with travel agents isn't it? What are their acronyms doing on a pilots website? As you say, spotters being clever I suppose.

+ the EZS ones.

Yeah, I was still wondering why the rock band (U2) would have so many pilots, and why they would take the ones from EasyJet.....MUUUHAHAAAAA!

Ah well, I've been only in this industry some 17 years (not too much in Europe), must have missed something. :}

Please could someone kindly explain why the calculation above has 'x 5 crews' 'x 6 crews' in it? I assume this is do with the fact you have pilots on rest periods while others are on duty (I'm aware of rosters etc.), but why is it '5' and '6'? Thanks!

A low cost operator may utilize an aircraft for up to 20 hours per day at peak periods, this involves 2 or 3 crew operating the same aircraft in a 24h period. One crew will be on annual leave or sick, another 1 or 2 crew will have their rest period. Maybe one crew will be on recurrent training or auxilliary duty. So depending on aircraft usage, you might need 6 crew per aircraft. you get 2 pilots per aircraft operating at anyone time, you can make yourself the rest of the calculation. :)

correct me if I'm wrong...but i think EZY have around 5.4-5.6 crews per airframe

it's true, i'm half the man I used to be!

Despite the foolishness of the original question from someone who clearly knows nothing about the industry, there are some interesting issues. I have worked for easyJet for many years, and at first I did not know who U2 was! Anyway, having established that I actually work for them, the crewing levels are quite interesting. I think FLEXPWR is not totally correct on the issue of crew utilisation, in that we generally speaking we try to avoid using more than 2 crews per day on the utilisation cycle of the aircraft - it is incredibly inefficient. A crew costs about £250,000 a year all in and that is a big resource to have too many of. The problem is that, as we have discovered last year, you cannot afford to get those numbers wrong. You are indeed better to have a few too many than a few too little - a very difficult balancing act that has massive repercussions if you get it wrong. The equation is further complicated by the various contracts in place at different bases - big bonuses for those that get it right and a boot out the door for those that do not!

Notwithstanding the rather 'unriveting' nature of this thread, how can so much be written about so little?
And as for 3 Bars 'letting' me do the performance...... Hmmmm I don't think so!
Merry Christmas all!

Well since you ask, the OP (original poster) caused enormous consternation amongst everyone here by the above question! I thought 'I know they're big and HR (humungously rich), and that bloke does insist on wearing those ridiculous glasses (even meeting the Pope) everywhere that makes him look like a tit, but for a pop group to have 1200 pilots when he's always telling me to dip my hand in my pocket because they're dying in Africa of whatever's going does seem a tad excessive'. I then thought 'don't you just love it when a zillionaire twerp of a tax exile puts a guilt trip on ME for looking after Africa?' and how unfair life in general was. Then it comes out we're talking about EJ (Easyjet) and you start thinking 'I've been following aviation closely since 1967 and that one passed me by! U2=Easyjet? BT (bulls cojones)!'

Is there any other industry so beset with TLAs (three letter acronyms- or more)? I could fill pages with them! And they do waste time because it would be quicker to read it in full than go through this absurd 'now WTH (what the h) does that mean- as a true aviation person I should know that, so lets work it out- every time! GMD (get my drift?)?

Notso; yes, there is at least one field that out-acronyms aviation. The Aid "industry", but then it is fueled by Governments and the UN(the worst offender) and brewed up by bearded academics who spew it out because it makes them feel important and useful.