Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is It True That The Concorde Had 737 & 757 Crew?  
User currently offline747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3507 posts, RR: 2
Posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 13774 times:

I was reading a post on the Concorde cabin crew, and it was stated that the BA cabin crew would come off their 737 and 757. Now I would think that the cabin crew from a 747 or 777 would have the seniority to work on the Concorde. Is the reason BA use 737 and 757 crew, is due to the shorter working hour on the Concorde, witch is around the same time a 737 or 757 F/A would work. To sum it up is it true that the Concorde had a 737 and 757 cabin crew and if yes why?

25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 1, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 13749 times:

Yes, I do remember reading that Concorde crews were a dedicated group from BA's European division, not from longhaul operations.........now if I could only remember the logic??

User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8193 posts, RR: 24
Reply 2, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 13749 times:

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 1):
now if I could only remember the logic??

Well, it is only a 3 hr. flight. Much more suitable to domestic cabin crews than int'l ones. Plus it only held 100 pax, so that's more suited to a smaller domestic-sized crew, too. It's less of a jump for them, I'd say.



This Website Censors Me
User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 3, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 13720 times:

Quoting N766UA (Reply 2):

Well, it is only a 3 hr. flight. Much more suitable to domestic cabin crews than int'l ones. Plus it only held 100 pax, so that's more suited to a smaller domestic-sized crew, too. It's less of a jump for them, I'd say.

Of course what you say makes sense, but there was a very specific reason aside from your points that resulted in the operation of the Concorde flights be the European crews.....I am working on it.


User currently offlineEGTESkyGod From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1712 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 13511 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'd not heard this before but I suppose it makes sense really.


I came, I saw, I Concorde! RIP Michael Jackson
User currently offlineA340600 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2003, 4105 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 13456 times:

BA crew were drawn at random to work on concorde and there was a maximum time before you moved back onto the sub-sonic fleet. It was considered the ultimate dream of BA cabin crew,

Sam



Despite the name I am a Boeing man through and through!
User currently offlineBAStew From Australia, joined Sep 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 13368 times:

Yes, transfers between fleets (eg from LHR short-haul to LHR long-haul) is generally done strictly by seniority. There are no interviews or exams to take before changing fleets, your sickness or punctuality is not taken into account (as is with internal transfers at bmi!). When your number comes up you are offered the transfer, pure and simple.

Concorde was the one exception. You had to apply and attend an interview.


User currently offlineCarduelis From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2001, 1585 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 13268 times:

To relate to the thread title - yes, a couple of days after my last Concorde flight in 1986, I actually met two of the cabin crew on a London to Manchester 737 flight! They also recognised me, as the Concorde flight had been a day return LHR JFK LHR to celebrate my 50th anniversary of my birthday, and needless to say, quite an occasion!


Per Ardua ad Astra! ........ Honi Soit Qui Mal y Pense!
User currently offlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6141 posts, RR: 30
Reply 8, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12117 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I belive that in the case of Air France they would rotate. They would have a dedicated Cabin Crew staff for Concorde, but these crews would fly on Concorde for a month, then on European short hauls the next, then back in the Concorde for another month etc.


MGGS
User currently offlineFlySSC From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 7403 posts, RR: 57
Reply 9, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 11831 times:

Quoting AR385 (Reply 8):
I belive that in the case of Air France they would rotate. They would have a dedicated Cabin Crew staff for Concorde, but these crews would fly on Concorde for a month, then on European short hauls the next, then back in the Concorde for another month etc.

 no 

Air France Concorde Cabin Crew were Long Haul crews, belonging to the AME ("Americas") Division.

We were usually flying alternately 2 months in a row on Concorde only, then one or two months on the "regular" Long Haul network.
When flying Concorde, we used to have 5 flights* CDG-JFK-CDG a month (or 11 flights on 2 months) + One or Two "reserves" at CDG only for the Concorde flight, and sometimes 1 or 2 Charter "Loops" CDG-CDG. That was a typical monthly planning. It could be a little different of course when we were operating special flights, charters etc ...

* 1 flight =
Day 1 : CDG.11:00AM ---> JFK.08:45AM AF002
Day 2 : JFK.08:45AM ---> CDG.05:45 PM AF001


User currently offlineAirWillie6475 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 2448 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 11752 times:

In guess this thread is about FAs but I can add something about pilots. This topic was discussed in an airline magazine here in the states. Believe it or not the Concord was a JUNIOR aircraft, meaning not many pilots wanted to fly it. It paid very little flight time and a lot of effort goes into the flights. Most pilots stuck to the other aircraft in the fleet. Concord pilots were usually the diehard aviation junkies who didn't really care about pay or schedules. I had no idea, I thought concord pilots were very senior pilots with decades of experience.

[Edited 2006-09-17 09:53:37]

[Edited 2006-09-17 09:56:55]

User currently offlineRB211LTN From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 133 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 11713 times:

I'm former BA crew so I can give you the authoritative answer. Short haul crew were all checked on the 757 and 767 plus either the A320 or the 737, making a total of 3 aircraft (the maximum allowed by the CAA). Concorde crew were checked on the 757 and 767 in addition to Concorde. They flew on Concorde once or twice a month and did the rest of their trips on the 757 and 767. Whereas we used to get loads of overnight stops, they had none because it was decreed that their trips to JFK, BGI and other charter destinations were so lucrative that they had to forego the right to European overnights. The allowances on short haul were generous and we earned far more than the Concorde crew. In addition, Concorde is hot, noisy and hard work from a crew perspective. It was a high price to pay for the glamour of suspersonic flight.


The customer is always right.....unless he is a passenger!
User currently offlineEGTESkyGod From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1712 posts, RR: 12
Reply 12, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 11516 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AirWillie6475 (Reply 10):
Believe it or not the Concord was a JUNIOR aircraft, meaning not many pilots wanted to fly it. It paid very little flight time and a lot of effort goes into the flights. Most pilots stuck to the other aircraft in the fleet. Concord pilots were usually the diehard aviation junkies who didn't really care about pay or schedules. I had no idea, I thought concord pilots were very senior pilots with decades of experience.

Are you serious?! No offence, but I do not believe that for a second. One of our instructors used to work for BA, and he said he knew pilots on 747s, VC10s, and all sorts of other aircraft and they would have given anything to fly Concorde (Notice the "E" and the lack of the word "the" by the way). Concorde pilots were very well paid, not sure of exact figures, but they were well paid.

I also know someone from my old job who flies 747s for BA, and when she was still flying, he said he'd give anything to fly Concorde. He knew one of the Concorde pilots, and he was flying Concorde into Exeter in 1999, and he arranged for her to fly over his (and my) home town, coincedentally during my first match as cricket captain, and also coincedently it was Concorde G-BOAC.



I came, I saw, I Concorde! RIP Michael Jackson
User currently offlineJat74l From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 618 posts, RR: 14
Reply 13, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 10894 times:

Concorde Chief Pilot Capt Mike Bannister's correct title was actually Chief Pilot - BA Shorthaul Fleet.

Regards

John



I like trains just as much as planes but trains don't like the Atlantic!
User currently offlineBabybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10301 times:

I remember seeing a programme on tv where a Concorde co-pilot said that he couldn't become a Concorde captain straight-off but had to be a 757 or 767 captain first and then apply to become a Concorde captain.

I remember it as it seemed odd to have so much experience of an advanced aircraft only to gain experience on a slower, less technical one.

I also read that Concorde captains didn't make as much money as other captains. It was seen as an honour to fly it, they weren't flying that long per sector, and their per diems were smaller.


User currently offlineLee From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 148 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 9140 times:

Did the higher levels of radiation affect how many concorde flights crew could do ?

User currently offlineMCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8664 posts, RR: 15
Reply 16, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 8751 times:

Quoting Jat74l (Reply 13):
Concorde Chief Pilot Capt Mike Bannister's correct title was actually Chief Pilot - BA Shorthaul Fleet.

Agreed, I remember seing that on a discovery channel special.

MCOflyer



Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9523 posts, RR: 42
Reply 17, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7856 times:

Quoting Lee (Reply 15):
Did the higher levels of radiation affect how many concorde flights crew could do ?

Higher levels of radiation but less exposure time. I believe it just about evened out in comparison with a 747 crew on the same route.


User currently offlineBellerophon From United Kingdom, joined May 2002, 583 posts, RR: 59
Reply 18, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 7131 times:

EGTESkyGod

When you asked AirWillie6475:

...Are you serious?!...

I believe he is.


...No offence, but I do not believe that for a second...

Your privilege, but he is correct.


...One of our instructors used to work for BA, and he said he knew pilots on 747s, VC10s, and all sorts of other aircraft and they would have given anything to fly Concorde...

I'm sure he did know such pilots, there were many of them. However they were not in the majority. Most pilots with sufficient seniority for Concorde did not bid for her. The year I got my course, around 600 more senior pilots declined to bid.


...Concorde pilots were very well paid...

Not by comparison to B747 and B777 pilots of similar length of service.  crying 


...not sure of exact figures...

I am!  Wink


Babybus

...it seemed odd to have so much experience of an advanced aircraft only to gain experience on a slower, less technical one...

A lot of people confuse aircraft technical experience with command experience. Whilst good technical knowledge and experience of your particular aircraft is always valuable, it is not a substitute for command experience.

Command experience - deciding what to do and when to do it - is a different commodity altogether. BA knew that two technically experienced people (F/O & F/E) would be on board; they wanted to ensure that an experienced Commander was also on board.

To this end, the BA policy was that they would not allow a F/O, no matter how experienced on the fleet, to take a First command on Concorde, rightly so in my view.

However, remember that many of the Concorde F/Os were eligible for a Concorde command because they had already been Captains on the B737, B757 or A320 fleets before bidding for Concorde as a co-pilot.


AirWillie6475

...Concord pilots were usually the “diehard aviation junkies”...

I think you meant to say “dedicated airline professionals” ... Big grin


Best regards to all

Bellerophon


User currently offlineSpeedmarque From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 684 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 7002 times:

I am BA shorthaul crew and used to fly with the concorde crew on the 757/767. It was funny seeing them with hats on (other crew did not wear hats unless on a promotion team event) and silver concorde name badges one day and then flying with the same person to MAN a couple of days later without their hat and now wearing a blue badge like the rest of us.

There were "lifers" who were on concorde for........life, and other crew who attended an interview and if successful went on the concorde for two years at a time.

If concorde crew were doing standby at the Compass Centre and were not used for a concorde flight, they would change their namebadges and ditch the hat to do a "normal" service.

Although glamourous the crew would always complain about noise, cramped galleys, hard work and HEAT as the a/c doors got very hot and along with the ovens being on made it unbearable.


User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9523 posts, RR: 42
Reply 20, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6482 times:

Quoting Bellerophon (Reply 18):
...No offence, but I do not believe that for a second...

Your privilege, but he is correct.

Well, I didn't know that, either. But I assume no pilots ended up on Concorde because there was nothing else available... or can the same also be said for the other types?

Good to see you're still around - I wondered if you'd given up on us.  Smile


User currently offlineFbgdavidson From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2004, 3701 posts, RR: 28
Reply 21, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5439 times:

Quoting EGTESkyGod (Reply 12):
Are you serious?! No offence, but I do not believe that for a second.

A friend of the family was on Concorde fleet for some time, he retired in 2000 and probably falls into the "diehard aviation junkie" category that some people have mentioned....he was on 747 fleet before going onto Concorde and after leaving BA he went back to flying 747s for cargo airlines  Wow! He was recently headhunted and is now flying the Qatar Amiri 747 SP.

Bellerephon may even know the chap I am talking about. He was something of a character  biggrin 

It is indeed true the experienced 747 captains earn more £££ than the Concorde guys, to be expected when you are doing a two, maybe three overnight trips to JFK per month...



"My first job was selling doors, door to door, that's a tough job innit" - Bill Bailey
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13170 posts, RR: 77
Reply 22, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5223 times:

There was more than one character in the Flight Crew Dept!

Radiation-Concorde did have, due to the higher altitudes, detecting gear fitted.
Displayed in the flight deck, a measuring device with a readout in the form of a , IIRC, 7 or 8 character number.
Before and after flight figures were noted in the tech log, usually, of this number, only the last one or two showed change.

Radiation could trigger amber or red on the detector, Bellerphon will know of the procedures that would happen in this event.
(I hope I'm getting this right, I'm not reffering to manuals, they are not instantly to hand, I cannot be arsed to go and get them, and it's all 3 years ago at best now).
As far as I know, solar/cosmic radiation-what it supposed to be detecting, never did trigger it.
Even in Solar max years like 1978 or 1989.

It was triggered by ground sources however, which all aircraft flew through.

As stated, experience showed that the much reduced flight time of Concorde, was not really much different to lower levels and lower altitudes for longer.


User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4392 posts, RR: 76
Reply 23, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4979 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AirWillie6475 (Reply 10):
Believe it or not the Concord was a JUNIOR aircraft, meaning not many pilots wanted to fly it. It paid very little flight time and a lot of effort goes into the flights. Most pilots stuck to the other aircraft in the fleet. Concord pilots were usually the diehard aviation junkies who didn't really care about pay or schedules. I had no idea, I thought concord pilots were very senior pilots with decades of experience

As far as AF is concerned, that's totally incorrect.
AF pilot salaries are based on productivity, and the criteria for productivity are 1/the aircraft commercial speed, and , 2/the MTOW.
The formula is quite complicated and I'm not at liberty to divulge it here.
Taking that system into account, Concorde was the most senior aircraft on the fleet,more than the 744. To be a captain on that fleet, one had to be both old and very young (because of the bonding time system, a minimum of five years before retirement).
A lot of f/os gave up their command seniority to fly it.



Contrail designer
User currently offlineEGTESkyGod From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1712 posts, RR: 12
Reply 24, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 4835 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Bellerophon (Reply 18):
EGTESkyGod

When you asked AirWillie6475:

...Are you serious?!...

I believe he is.


...No offence, but I do not believe that for a second...

Your privilege, but he is correct.


...One of our instructors used to work for BA, and he said he knew pilots on 747s, VC10s, and all sorts of other aircraft and they would have given anything to fly Concorde...

I'm sure he did know such pilots, there were many of them. However they were not in the majority. Most pilots with sufficient seniority for Concorde did not bid for her. The year I got my course, around 600 more senior pilots declined to bid.

Coming from a former Concorde Pilot, I stand corrected.



I came, I saw, I Concorde! RIP Michael Jackson
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26376 posts, RR: 76
Reply 25, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4686 times:

Quoting A340600 (Reply 5):
It was considered the ultimate dream of BA cabin crew,

I heard that it was only a short-lived dream because the lack of hours meant lower pay.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Is This True About The Concorde? posted Sat Sep 30 2000 03:34:27 by Derek H
Is It True That Qantas Lease An A340-200? posted Sat Sep 9 2000 15:37:20 by B777-200LR
Is It True About Your Connections? posted Wed Oct 25 2006 20:45:36 by Runway777
Smintair: Is It True Or Is It A Joke? posted Thu Sep 7 2006 16:26:04 by F.pier
Cfyz - YYZ Radio - Is It Still On The Net? posted Fri Jul 21 2006 19:36:25 by YOW
YYZ Plane Slides Off Runway? Is It True? posted Mon May 22 2006 00:29:58 by YYZA330
If The Concorde Had Been A Success... posted Thu Mar 9 2006 04:49:47 by AndesSMF
Rumor About IND Is It True? posted Sun Feb 26 2006 12:15:56 by Fedexexpress
Missile Assault At DHL Aircraft - Is It True? posted Mon Dec 5 2005 13:21:06 by Smeagol
CX Y Class, Is It Really That Good? posted Fri Jul 15 2005 17:15:00 by Targowski