Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

With the 747/380 fleet without expansion prospects, changing from right to left seat would require left seat incumbent to retire?

You don't necessarily need expansion, but you definitely don't want contraction. At a guess, the 380 will be around for at least another few years. The 747 will lose some aircraft fairly soon, but the remaining ERs will probably be around as long as the 380s.

Overall though, if an airline is not expanding, then the need for people in all ranks is static...so yes, someone has to retire to open up a slot. But, one retirement at the top end, opens up many slots. Something like 8 slots for each 380 Captain who retires.

No 380 FO has gone directly to the right seat of the 380. Their command slots, when they appear, have been 737, 330 and 787. A380 and 747 commands, are filled by Captains from the other types. If, later in the year, some 747 Captains become surplus, they will be in a position to displace across the board...but presumably 380 and 787 will be their targets. Of course those they displace will displace in turn.

So would some also retire as 747/380 day FO when clock strikes 12 as changing type, base, pay? may not be as good as staying put?

Many people retire as FOs. Basically, being at the top of a roster, having a decent lifestyle and actually being at home for those important events is more important to some people than having 4 bars. In some cases, they earn more money too.

 

[JessicaTam]

Basically, being at the top of a roster, having a decent lifestyle and actually being at home for those important events is more important to some people than having 4 bars.

Do FOs have more flexibility planning their roster than captains? Or are you referring to the time away from home needed to get from FO to Captain?

 

[jb747]

Do FOs have more flexibility planning their roster than captains? Or are you referring to the time away from home needed to get from FO to Captain?

Your entire life is controlled by the two monthly roster. Whilst there is some level of rotation of the blank lines, the more senior you are, on an individual rank/type, the better the outcome.

Some aircraft are much better than others. For instance, when I got my command, I moved from FO 744 to Captain 767. I was third from the bottom on that roster for the next 5 years or so. That meant that I got whatever was left over, with no choice of the flying. If I had remained on the 744, I'd have been very near the top if its roster, which meant that I would have had my choice of its flying...which was better anyway. A friend of mine, who was near the bottom of the FO list when I moved away, stayed there, and when we did a comparison of our rosters a few years later, he'd been paid very similar money and more importantly, he'd averaged two months more time off per year than I had. The reason was that every time he went flying it was for 12-15 hours, whereas the 767, especially at the bottom, was a fraction of that.

So, for overall lifestyle, the shorter the haul, the worse it gets.

 

[Hvr]

No 380 FO has gone directly to the right seat of the 380.

Doesn't the FO already sit in the right seat?

I thought the Captain sat in the left seat?

 

[jb747]

Doesn't the FO already sit in the right seat?

I thought the Captain sat in the left seat?

Oops. And I hadn't even had any red.

No FO has gone directly to command on the 380. For many years there was a block on 'vertical promotion' on the 747 and 380, meaning that nobody, no matter how senior, could do initial command training on those aircraft. It meant you had to go to 737, 767, 330 to get that initial command. The basic reason was the lack of sectors for continuation on the very large aircraft. The ruling has been relaxed on the 747 and 380, but remains for the 787.

The other issue is that the seniority for a command slot on those aircraft is so high, that any FO who waited would be doing his training in a wheelchair. If you wait that long, you're unlikely to pass anyway.

 

[mjt57]

Oops. And I hadn't even had any red.

Or as you once wrote, "what was I drinking..."

The other issue is that the seniority for a command slot on those aircraft is so high, that any FO who waited would be doing his training in a wheelchair. If you wait that long, you're unlikely to pass anyway.

Good point. Besides, it seems that your system as it stands, works very well, doesn't it? In any case, a pilot who wants to sit that long in the right seat may not be suited to command anyway, would he/she?

Speaking of the 787, given this longer sector, PER-LHR, how many extra crew do they carry?

When we were waiting to board UAL 787 LAX-MEL, the crew (pilots) all assembled at the gate. I counted 5 of them, the captain (who looked like he just got out of the above mentioned wheel chair, and his great grandchildren, the FOs and SOs.

 

[flyer89]

JB,

I heard through the grapevine that a very senior FO on the 744 has recently commenced his command training on the 744. An aberration perhaps but interesting if true.

 

[jb747]

Or as you once wrote, "what was I drinking..."

I expect that in 600 pages or so, that I've said that more than once.

Good point. Besides, it seems that your system as it stands, works very well, doesn't it? In any case, a pilot who wants to sit that long in the right seat may not be suited to command anyway, would he/she?

Whilst we describe it as lifestyle, the reality is that it is time with your wife and kids. Which is more important?

Speaking of the 787, given this longer sector, PER-LHR, how many extra crew do they carry?

Once it settles down, they'll operate with the same crews that we do. Captain, FO, and two SOs.

When we were waiting to board UAL 787 LAX-MEL, the crew (pilots) all assembled at the gate. I counted 5 of them, the captain (who looked like he just got out of the above mentioned wheel chair, and his great grandchildren, the FOs and SOs.

Just drink, heavily.

 

[jb747]

I heard through the grapevine that a very senior FO on the 744 has recently commenced his command training on the 744. An aberration perhaps but interesting if true.

Well, as I said, it's been unlocked on the 744 and 380. I'll wait for an outcome.

 

[Himeno]

Once it settles down, they'll operate with the same crews that we do. Captain, FO, and two SOs.

Qantas tweeted the names of the flight crew for the first PER-LHR. 2 captains, 1 FO, 1 SO. I guess this is until things "settle down"?

Qantas on Twitter

The Qantas Dreamliner to make the maiden journey from #Perth to #London is VH-ZND with Captain Lisa Norman, Captain Jeff Foote, First Officer Dave Summergreene and Second Officer Troy Lane

 

[I love to travel]

On th inagural QF 777 from Mel to Per it flew at a lower altitude to make up time. How much would this cost an airline?

 

[jb747]

Qantas tweeted the names of the flight crew for the first PER-LHR. 2 captains, 1 FO, 1 SO. I guess this is until things "settle down"?

Lisa is the fleet manager, but as far as I know, she has no European experience. Jeff has recent experience there. I think he's actually the PIC for the flight. Don’t know about FO. SO is new.

Looking ahead a week, the most common crew is actually 3 Captains and an SO. Each crew has a obvious member with recent 747/380 time...i.e. Europe. At the moment, I doubt that the overall crew complement is anywhere near the correct numbers for a normal crew structure.

 

[jb747]

On th inagural QF 777 from Mel to Per it flew at a lower altitude to make up time. How much would this cost an airline?

A rule of thumb which has worked for the types I’ve flown, is that for each thousand feet you are away from the optimum altitude it costs 2% on the fuel burn.

If you are held off optimum by ATC, you may have to sacrifice a bit of speed, in an attempt to limit the damage to your fuel figures. It doesn’t matter all that much on short flights (anything less than about 5 hours), but once into long haul, a 2% penalty would eat all of your variable reserve, and could easily make the difference between going to destination, or elsewhere.

From a tactical point of view, if ATC offer a choice of higher or lower than optimum, it’s generally better to take the higher. Eventually optimum will climb up to the altitude you’re at, whereas lower, the differential gets worse. Out of LA the 380 is generally able to get that little bit higher than either the 787s or the 777s, so you’re normally not blocked by anything, other than another 380. Leaving Perth the 787 won’t have many issues with altitude, but it may have some out of London.

 

[mjt57]

Lisa is the fleet manager.

I just looked up what her job is. A part of the job description says that “some” flight duties are there.
I have to ask; what would drive a pilot to go into management and thus have fewer flying hours? Is it down to the all important family time and regular hours?

 

[jb747]

I just looked up what her job is. A part of the job description says that “some” flight duties are there.
I have to ask; what would drive a pilot to go into management and thus have fewer flying hours? Is it down to the all important family time and regular hours?

If you can't do it well, then become an instructor.

If you can't instruct, become management.

To be honest, I have no idea. I can think of few things that I'd like less. The hours are probably less family friendly than flying.

 

[D747]

A rule of thumb which has worked for the types I’ve flown, is that for each thousand feet you are away from the optimum altitude it costs 2% on the fuel burn.

If you are held off optimum by ATC, you may have to sacrifice a bit of speed, in an attempt to limit the damage to your fuel figures. It doesn’t matter all that much on short flights (anything less than about 5 hours), but once into long haul, a 2% penalty would eat all of your variable reserve, and could easily make the difference between going to destination, or elsewhere.

From a tactical point of view, if ATC offer a choice of higher or lower than optimum, it’s generally better to take the higher. Eventually optimum will climb up to the altitude you’re at, whereas lower, the differential gets worse. Out of LA the 380 is generally able to get that little bit higher than either the 787s or the 777s, so you’re normally not blocked by anything, other than another 380. Leaving Perth the 787 won’t have many issues with altitude, but it may have some out of London.

Can you slow slightly drop back 5nm, and then obtain optimum altitude?

 

[jb747]

Can you slow slightly drop back 5nm, and then obtain optimum altitude?

5nm is the standard used with radar separation. In that case they could simply assign slightly diverging headings, and allow the climb when the standard is reached. The problem is then that you'd have to stay in a radar environment, and they would almost certainly add a speed constraint to ensure the 5 nm isn't breached.

Out over the ocean though the separation standards vary a bit, depending up how you are being tracked. They can be as little as 30 miles, or as large as 15 minutes.

 

[flyer89]

What fleet was Jeff formerly on JB?

 

[JessicaTam]

When there are two (or more) captains on a flight, how is seniority determined for who is ultimately responsible?

 

[jb747]

What fleet was Jeff formerly on JB?

He was a 767 training Captain. When that aircraft was retired, many Capts and FOs lost a bar. Jeff came to the 380 as an FO.

When there are two (or more) captains on a flight, how is seniority determined for who is ultimately responsible?

That is nominated by the company.