A Question for Blue-Aid Drinkers?

[jetblue320]

But Seriously


It's a refreshing change to have JBLU taking the role of "lowering the bar criminals". Thanks guys/gals for taking the heat off of SWA.

Carry on.


Aplus9

You're welcome. I was thinking along those lines just yesterday. I guess before there was jetBlue there was SWA taking a beating here. But then, when ya'll were lowering the bar maybe flightinfo.com wasn't around?

Anyway, here's to ya'!! This one on us. Cheers!

 

[AAflyer]

JB GUYS and GALS,

First, take the name calling with a grain of salt. When people get upset they resort to name calling, it gives them a way to vent or feel better about themselves (actually guilty of it myself in the past). I seem to be a SCAAB to Eagle pilots, and a year ago I was an overpaid arrogant A$$, now I have brought down the industry with our to new sh1t contract. Anyway, onto the subject.

I see your points of view, and even commend you for trying to think out side the box, but there will be ramifications. Some companies do not have the managment teams you have. If your mangt. team says they won't screw with you on this then great (or they might in the future), but pilots at other airlines do not have that luxury(and there are not enough slots for all of us to fly at JB), other companies will use it as leverage. Guranteed!!

I have flown transcons, especially ones with a headwind, JFK-LAX. The hour and a half prior then the 5.5 hour flight,I am tired!!! The thought of flying back to JFK is spooky.Mixing in the adverse weather element, or a emergency in the NY area on the return portion while fatigued is a nightmare.

I think a big concern is not that it couldn't be done, but taking a look at ALL the worst case scenerios (sp) that might happen. It also opens pandora's box. This will occur whether you guys like it or not. While it may be just for you and that specific sequence it will open up many what ifs at other airlines.

For instance, if 2 pilots start flying 10 hour turns, you can bet management types at arilines like AA,UAL,DAL would like 2 pilots to start flying from JFK-CDG, JFK-FCO, JFK-MAD etc. That is something that IS dangerous. I am tired doing it with 3 pilots.

These are my concerns, I just thought some of you would like to take a look at this from the other side.

respectfully,

AA

 

[FlyingFarmer]

Mission Accomplished?!?

Well,

I say Chaps.....

Well, I haven't been on the 'puter in awhile, but looks like I was able to start a lively debate on this issue. Although in retrospect, it seems more like quite the firestorm. I've read alot of these posts from all concerned, and I think the first thing I want to do is apologize for the tone in which this thread was started. As several of you have pointed out in responses, the name calling on my part was pure immaturity. I'd like to ask all of the very professional gentlemen posters on this issue, for forgiveness.
I'm afraid that once again I was perhaps reveling in the relative anonymity of the net, while simply enjoying one of my many contractually guaranteed days off.
I absolutely MUST stop doing this.
I realize that it accomplishes nothing.

I received an email from an old chum, (he's a River Pilot) and he mentioned that in order to ever change the course of any sizable object, it's best to parallel the course, then try to change it's speed or direction of motion.

As angry as I am at this attempt by some clearly uninformed and woefully misguided individuals to create an exemption, I really am going to try keep the name calling in check. Clearly, profanity and vulgarity are the last bastions of a weak mind. So in the coming missive, I'll endeavor to present several statements, sans name calling, or profane statements, in the hopes that I will clearly be able to demonstrate to all that it is my truest desire, to show nothing but those qualities for which pilots throughout the land are known for, and that word is of course, professionalism.

Nay, Nay, never let it be said that my name should ever be drug around the hallowed halls of Yonkers, not having emulated the qualities shown by these same good pilots, known everywhere as wearers of the blue cloth, and drinkers of the blue ale. Heretofore, shown now to the entire world, have at last, on this board, outed themselves regarding this issue to all. I might endeavor to put forth, that there could very well be, quite a few of their good and fellow peers, at aforementioned company, who may happenchance to disagree overly vehemently with these same brave, stalwart, young, forward and company thinking,
.... men. It may indeed, have served a good and elegant purpose, to show to all just who and what these Kryptonian, steely eyed, men of blue truly stand for. As they have put forth time and time again, erstwhile defending, their boldly held ideas, gallantly showing their adherence to a closely mimicked, and openly chanted "new" paradigm, exactly here, in this, this brave new forum of the next millennium, the Internet.

You know, it's just EASIER to curse and call names.



Darn, I think I got carried away.


Anyway, reading the posts by most of the Jet Blue Pilots, the main rub is that they want more days off and more money.
Join the club, as do we all, I just wonder guys, quite simply. might it not be a good idea to try to, instead of changing the FARS, whoops... pardon me.... we must be exact here, instead of trying to go for an "exemption" to the FARS, perhaps the pilot group could ask for pay raises, and increased guaranteed days off? This solution seems absolutely elegant in its simplicity.

Cheerio-

By the By-

Not all Blue boys support this, many are just afraid to be
"outed"-

Isn't that right 320?

 

[Eagleflip]

AAflyer--

Thanks for the cogent post. You bring up great points, issues that we will raise to the Chief Pilot's office before this goes much further (if indeed it has any promise in the first place).

Most of all I appreciate the tone of your response. I grow a bit weary of the name calling and vehement generalizations that many on this board--senior members as well--evidently hold dear.

To those that have debated the issue with facts and logic, thanks. I've noted your concerns.

To the others, well...I suppose name calling is a mark of immaturity and lack of coherent debating skills. Too bad. You could have made your points much easier if you'd only kept a civil tone.

FlyingFarmer--gee, you wax poetic and hmmm. ..JetBlue pilots are now "Kryptonian."

And General Lee--you have so many great posts. Don't get emotional--it spoils your logic...

Any of you ever wonder why a little airline with only 48 (or so) airplanes raises such hackles in this industry? It's a silly question, but a real one as well.

Nevermind. I don't relish reading more snappy retorts and generalized smears against my fellow JetBlue bros or myself.

I'm a dot on this thread--thanks for playing.

 

[FlyingFarmer]

Aww shucks---

Eagle Flip,

You are a true pro, it would be my wish to have
your patience, and innate ability to communicate
succintly and clearly.

You are an example to follow.
I'd like to further state that it's
refreshing to actualy see the bar
being, instead of lowered, raised.


.........on this forum, that is.


FF

 

[General Lee]

Eagleflip,

Yeah, I know I have gotten alittle emotional on this one, but it is because I can see what will happen next. We have all had our long days---many of mine have been waiting in long takeoff lines at ATL. I just think you guys should think this through alittle bit more. I also liked AAFlyers response---he had a lot of great points. I wish more of your guys at JB would read his response and then think about it.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[trueblue]

Congrats AA Flyer

AA Flyer and Eagleflip...excellent posts. Keep it up. By the way, just because an exemption is "being looked at" and indeed it is supported by SOME of the pilot group at JB, doesn't mean it is supported by the majority. Relax. A few here have brought up very interesting and informative ideas and to them I say thanks. As for the others, please quit grouping JB pilots into a common, mindless group of non-critical thinking mavericks out to screw everyone in the industry for the benefit of ourselves. Like Eagleflip mentioned aboved, we have our problems, and have made some mistakes, as evidenced recently for instance with the privacy issue. We are young and are "still in diapers" and yes, nearly all of us (myself included) are are extremely impressed with the support we've received from management thus far and they have earned our trust. All of that is true, but don't think for a second that we have lost our way, are subject to selfish groupthink, or all support transcon turns. If you are going to debate the issue, fine. But, the labeling and content of 95% of these posts are trash.

 

[typhoonpilot]

Pardon me for jumping into this thread a little late in the game. I was off on a three day trip which quite interestingly included two legs over 8 hours.

Networ-King brought up European Flight and Duty time limitations in a post very early on and nobody really expanded on it. I'd like to do that since that is what I work under ( more or less ) at present. I have also worked under 135, 121, and 121 Supplemental ( Yikes ! ). Before coming over to my present job I hadn't ever seen nor really heard about the European rules. They are quite interesting since they take into account, among other things, number of sectors flown, acclimatisation to time zone, and start time of duty period.

I wish I could cut and paste the whole chart, but can't so here is a representative example:

Acclimatised to Local Time

Local time of Start = 0800-1459

Sectors: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Max duty 14:00 13:15 12:30 11:45 10:15 10:00 9:30


It goes on to say that the maximum number of flying hours which a crewmember of a two crew aircraft may be permitted to undertake during any 24 consecutive hours shall be 10 hours.

The average weekly total of duty hours shall not exceed 50 hours and that is to include all types of duty both flight and ground.

A lot of analysis went into the rules including the chart for not being acclimatised to local time. I can see why Southwest would argue vehemently against these rules since they would really limit their flying to a lot lower level than present.

An even more interesting ( and applicable ) exemption that my company has been granted is: To increase the 10 hour flight time limitation to 12 hours on the non-stop DXB-HKG-DXB route provided no flight or cabin crewmember is assigned to duty on this route:

1) More than once in a 30 day period.

2) When his or her maximum duty time of 15 hours in any period of 24 hours will be exceeded.

3) Without an intervening rest period of at least 11 hours, including a hotel room in the immediate vicinity of Hong Kong airport.

4) Without a 12 hour rest period at the end of the return to home base before being assigned to further duty.


So, as we can see from this, under European style rules a flight time limit of 10 hours is not unrealistic provided that both the duty period and number of sectors are limited. The Hong Kong exemption still doesn't allow for an exceedance of the 10 hour rule without an 11 hour rest period. Based on this I would say it is highly unlikely that the FAA would grant an exemption to jetBlue for multiple 11.5 hour flight time days in any given month.

Typhoonpilot

 

[typhoonpilot]

I also saw some comments in the various responses about people not liking the 30 in 7 rule. I always found this quite restrictive and very commuter unfriendly. As I said above, I worked under 121 supplemental which was 35 in 7. During some of that time I worked a schedule of 5 days on 10 days off. That was the best schedule I ever had and would not have been possible under a 30 in 7 rule.

Again the flight time is not the main issue, it is the duty time that is the issue. Where I work now the daily flight time limit is 10 hours and the next limit up is 100 hours in 28 days. The restriction that comes into play is the duty time limit of 50 hours per week.

I'd have to say the jetBlue guys are on the right track, they are just asking for a little too much.

Typhoonpilot

 

[furloughed dude]

You guys don't get it. Who cares how many hours you fly in a 14 hour duty day? I am more tired doing turns in a DC-9 for 14 hours at NWA than I would be flying transcon turns in an Airbus. I don't find multiple hour sits help keep me fresh. I do better if I keep moving. What do you guys do to rest when you have a 3 hour sit? Call home, check your schedule, etc? It is rare to get any sleep or find a place to sleep. NWA doesn't provide hotel rooms unless you have a 4 hour sit. I think this is a great deal. I hope you guys get it approved.

It's is all about duty time for me. That is how the military does it, they don't care how much time we spend airborne, just how long we work. I don't want to talk too highly of the military's way though, a 26 hour augmented day isn't too fun. But, any way you look at it, working 14 hours sucks, but at least I would like to get paid for it!

Again, I think this is great, and good luck with the approval. Hell you could get your month done with 7 days of work. Fantastic! More time with the family and golf course!

One thing that I advocating is lenthening the duty day. It is plenty long as it is.