Barbro wrote:

cougar15 wrote:

QuarkFly wrote:

Hmmm, so somebody will do more than 8-hour duty with only one spare pilot during a 16- hour flight?

Yup, totally in line with what every Euro legacy carrier has been doing for years! 4 was luxury, 3 is economic reality!

Yeah, this has been happening forever for Euro and, I think, US carriers.

What is the difference, why is it outrageous of ME carriers but not the others? Are EK sectors longer than what AA, BA, AF, etc have? At least they’ve got modern equipment (as do most Euro legacies, of course...).

Bad policies and maltreatment of staff is, of course, unforgiveable, and I hope ppl working there will demand their rights or leave. If the stories here truelly are just the tip of the iceberg, as usually happens, I smell more trbl ahead for EK. Pilot market has turned around quick, what used to be a moderate surplus has now become a shortage. And the aviation press has been sounding warning signs to the effect that candidates are not in abundance any more. Surprise, surprise, a profession in aviation is no longer as lucrative as it used to be.

I wonder why....

Everyone thinks I am an EK fanboy, that is not the case!, but a realist I infact feel much more that there is missed opportunity here for the UAE (EY scenario...) as a whole!
Indeed EK is in trouble and they need to find a solution fast, changes in corporate culture I think are long overdue! And I would hope that some of the fresh blood at EK (SMT) will realize this! The Jockeys are being ´driven into the ground´ and that especially applies to the freight boys who look at their roster each month (with a few surprises).So I am highly critical of EK´s current crew(ing) structures, but at the same time and as anyone with a bit of sence will realise, that is not the reason for "100 triples and 380s " being parked at secret Chinese airbases or at DWC , as many a thread on here would suggest! EK will will evolve, review T&Cs and move forward.. they have little choice!

L410Turbolet wrote:

777Jet wrote:

For a country that depends on foreign workers, to do both the skilled work that their nationals can't do and the unskilled work that they don't want to do, they sure treat their workforce interestingly.

As long as there is enough people attracted by "fabulous & tax-free lifestyle" in Dubai and don't want to see the medieval mentality running the system and enough passengers fooled by Skytrax stars, there's no need to change anything.

Well apparently there is not enough people (pilots) attracted to whatever is on offer at the moment to transport all of those "fooled by Skytrax stars" passengers around in that impressive gold plated and well oiled fleet hence this thread...

cougar15 wrote:

QuarkFly wrote:

Hmmm, so somebody will do more than 8-hour duty with only one spare pilot during a 16- hour flight?

Yup, totally in line with what every Euro legacy carrier has been doing for years! 4 was luxury, 3 is economic reality!

KLM still has 4-pilot flights. But nog as many as they used to.

Everything over 12 hours in the US has 4 pilots. A captain and 3 F/O's. European and S. American carriers use this same standard.

Asian carriers typically use 5 pilots for these flights.

Barbro wrote:

Yeah, this has been happening forever for Euro and, I think, US carriers. ..

Definitely not in any country follows FAA guidelines. Europe has little bit relaxed rules, but EU carriers don't have many ULH flights. Also have unions and strict labor laws to protect from abuse.

What we have is a rewritten diluted and misinterpreted European rules to suit family run airlines and ZERO union and law protection.

The amount of rest ULH crew gets in other regimes is mindbogglingly, compared these cruel inhumane rosters.

Varsity1 wrote:

Everything over 12 hours in the US has 4 pilots. A captain and 3 F/O's. European and S. American carriers use this same standard.

Asian carriers typically use 5 pilots for these flights.

Some US airlines use 2 captains and 2 FOs for flights greater than 12 hours.

okie73 wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

Everything over 12 hours in the US has 4 pilots. A captain and 3 F/O's. European and S. American carriers use this same standard....

Some US airlines use 2 captains and 2 FOs for flights greater than 12 hours.

How you dare to come with facts to a topic made to harass and blame a ME airline?

Honest question. One of the benefits of working for one of the ME3 for an Expat is the lure of tax-free wages. However I’m guessing that once a majority of the pilots retire they would move back to their country of origin. What are the tax implications for countries such as the US, Canada, Australia, NZ, UK or the EU for getting your retirement savings back into the
country? I guess my question is, is the no-tax benefit only for earned wages however all repatriated monies will be severely taxed negating the original benefit?

This is a serious safety concern. Considering time zones differences, transport to and from the airport as well is actual ability to rest once in the hotel, pilots are deprived of their quality rest.

Like a preventive medicine is cheaper vs. reactive, so are other things. Crews are tired and they can (most likely already have done) some stupid errors. It is matter of time, before there is a series of unfortunate events that turn onto a disaster.

I hope that this is only of temporary nature, but Indpn't keep my hopes high.

jetskipper wrote:

Honest question. One of the benefits of working for one of the ME3 for an Expat is the lure of tax-free wages. However I’m guessing that once a majority of the pilots retire they would move back to their country of origin. What are the tax implications for countries such as the US, Canada, Australia, NZ, UK or the EU for getting your retirement savings back into the
country? I guess my question is, is the no-tax benefit only for earned wages however all repatriated monies will be severely taxed negating the original benefit?

If you are a U.S. citizen or resident alien, the rules for filing income, estate, and gift tax returns and paying estimated tax are generally the same whether you are in the United States or abroad. Your worldwide income is subject to U.S. income tax, regardless of where you reside.
https://www.irs.gov/individuals/interna ... ens-abroad

Why doesn’t EK focus on hiring local Emeraties, rather than depending on foreign pilots and scouring the planet for flying talent? How difficult would it be for EK to set up a massive local training center capable of training hundreds of pilots on an annual basis?

PDPsol wrote:

Why doesn’t EK focus on hiring local Emeraties, rather than depending on foreign pilots and scouring the planet for flying talent? How difficult would it be for EK to set up a massive local training center capable of training hundreds of pilots on an annual basis?

It has always been cheaper to poach type rated crew than train them from beginning. But EK ran out of all tricks, brand name, perceived higher pay/perks, lifestyle no longer working. Also airlines at the other end tightened their contracts to make it difficult to just leave and join EK. Indian carriers now prefer women pilots.

EK has a huge training academy, not many training planes though. EK is also part owner of CAE India. It is not just pilots, they are losing lot of training staff, cabin crew and engineering staff.

At one point they were sending crew to UK for training at a heavy cost.

PDPsol wrote:

Why doesn’t EK focus on hiring local Emeraties, rather than depending on foreign pilots and scouring the planet for flying talent? How difficult would it be for EK to set up a massive local training center capable of training hundreds of pilots on an annual basis?

Not nearly enough! Locals are being sucked up into other domestic sectors that are more lucrative then flying. Let’s face it, far better paying jobs that don’t require you to work so hard, destroy your social/family life & spend excessive amount time from home.

To make matters worse, EK has historically punished the non-flying pilot for the actions of the two pilots flying with something bad happens. Even when that pilot is in the crew rest bunk. So not only are the pilots going to fly more tired, but they will bare the additional burden of potentially getting in trouble when the other two tired pilots do something wrong.

I find this development very worrying.

PDPsol wrote:

Why doesn’t EK focus on hiring local Emeraties, rather than depending on foreign pilots and scouring the planet for flying talent? How difficult would it be for EK to set up a massive local training center capable of training hundreds of pilots on an annual basis?

You mean getting arabs to work difficult jobs? Good luck.

dtw2hyd wrote:

Don't worry worldranger, 170 cadets putting hours on SR22s like crazy. They will be ready in no time to put every bird in the air.

Not enough!!!! Many people are going back to the US - Canada - Europe, where now there a big job offer and pilot shortage.

This is getting pretty interesting...

g77

ghost77 wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

Don't worry worldranger, 170 cadets putting hours on SR22s like crazy. They will be ready in no time to put every bird in the air.

Not enough!!!! Many people are going back to the US - Canada - Europe, where now there a big job offer and pilot shortage.

This is getting pretty interesting...

g77

He (or she) was being sarcastic. And not just about the numbers.

FlyHappy wrote:

He (or she) was being sarcastic. And not just about the numbers.

Get it! Sorry! LOL!

g77

FlyHappy wrote:

ghost77 wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

Don't worry worldranger, 170 cadets putting hours on SR22s like crazy. They will be ready in no time to put every bird in the air.

Not enough!!!! Many people are going back to the US - Canada - Europe, where now there a big job offer and pilot shortage.

This is getting pretty interesting...

g77

He (or she) was being sarcastic. And not just about the numbers.

Slide 1 of SR22 to A380 conversion training: “No BRS on A380. But god is with you“.


At that point, most of them quit.


More seriously though, EK has a huge pilot pool at its disposal in Flydubai. The T&C's are worse there so all pilots must be very eager to move to EK.
It seems smarter to slow deliveries of Flydubai airplanes, worst case even ground a part of the fleet.
I wonder how Flydubai is able to retain its pilots and grow when EK is struggling this bad.

emiratesdriver wrote:

I will also add that many of the options spoken about on this thread regarding basings, commuting rosters and reverse rostering have been presented to upper management over the years, they have been shown to be more sustainable and either 0 cost or cheaper, in every instance they have been rejected out of hand due to the prevailing culture and mindset of present management.
The mantra of control, paranoia and dogma is strong within the ME culture, it now appears that in EKs' case it is preferable to deal with the lack of pilots by reducing safety margins and pushing pilots harder rather than accepting that mistakes have been made and making earnest and transparent efforts to rectify the situation.
The bigger picture here is the continued policy of localisation where UAE nationals are being placed in positions of responsibility with little or no experience, poor work ethics and of course an unaccountable mindest where mistakes and oversights are ignored, covered up or deflected to another non-national employee.
All of this continues to erode the experience of being an EK employee, pilots in particular have made significant concessions along the way, this week 12 of them decided that enough is enough and have issued resignations.

It is good to hear from someone knowledgeable about the situation there.

I have a question: I talked a while back with an EK Captain (from Oz) who was staying at one of our properties; he said most of the Second Officers there were political hires, and totally unqualified to fly the aircraft. He expressed serious reservations about what might happen if they were actually called upon to take control.

Is that your experience, too, or was this just one person's view?

alfa164 wrote:

emiratesdriver wrote:

I will also add that many of the options spoken about on this thread regarding basings, commuting rosters and reverse rostering have been presented to upper management over the years, they have been shown to be more sustainable and either 0 cost or cheaper, in every instance they have been rejected out of hand due to the prevailing culture and mindset of present management.
The mantra of control, paranoia and dogma is strong within the ME culture, it now appears that in EKs' case it is preferable to deal with the lack of pilots by reducing safety margins and pushing pilots harder rather than accepting that mistakes have been made and making earnest and transparent efforts to rectify the situation.
The bigger picture here is the continued policy of localisation where UAE nationals are being placed in positions of responsibility with little or no experience, poor work ethics and of course an unaccountable mindest where mistakes and oversights are ignored, covered up or deflected to another non-national employee.
All of this continues to erode the experience of being an EK employee, pilots in particular have made significant concessions along the way, this week 12 of them decided that enough is enough and have issued resignations.

It is good to hear from someone knowledgeable about the situation there.

I have a question: I talked a while back with an EK Captain (from Oz) who was staying at one of our properties; he said most of the Second Officers there were political hires, and totally unqualified to fly the aircraft. He expressed serious reservations about what might happen if they were actually called upon to take control.

Is that your experience, too, or was this just one person's view?

I have to say that is absolutely not my experience with locals.

I’ve been doing this a long time.

The vast majority of EK FOs are proficient, professional and trained to a minimum safety standard - and that goes for all nationalities. The younger recruits lack a bit of life experience and seasoning but it comes in time.

Jayafe wrote:

okie73 wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

Everything over 12 hours in the US has 4 pilots. A captain and 3 F/O's. European and S. American carriers use this same standard....

Some US airlines use 2 captains and 2 FOs for flights greater than 12 hours.

How you dare to come with facts to a topic made to harass and blame a ME airline?

Two captains and two first officers still make a four pilot crew on a 12+ hour flight. But I guess fanboyism makes blind, eh?

worldranger wrote:

EK will now reduce their 4 pilot ULR ops to 3 man, due pilot shortage.

I needed one more piece of evidence to be convinced by a regular poster EmiratesDriver & now I’m a believer

EK are now dancing with fire and are willing, to in many pilots view, trade safety for profit.

Not good...and in my view a huge hole in the Cheese block.

Virtually every pilot I’ve chatted to has now become quite concerned at the latest developments.

33 aircraft parked @ DWC & counting , multiple media reports of shortage, FLL & MCO frequency increases cancelled.

Watch this space and let’s hope it’s not a headline.

This is getting silly! a snapshot from the freight perspective. Just for the sake of the discussion. Lets take either a 747-8F (ACMI) or a 747-400 ERF from EU to SIN.
12.5/13 hrs operating for EU operators, perhaps even leased from a US operator...……..
None of these flights ever had more than 3 tech crew on them. The second (officer) would go for a little 4 hour snooze just after takeoff (having been on duty for the astonishing time of 2 hours since clocking in) , and in this modus the rest of the crew take turns. That second officer is a cruise relief pilot with a very manageable workload , after sleeping for 4 hours, 6 hours after starting his tour of duty. 3 crew, that's it, be it for a EU carrier or an ACMI US carrier operating on behalf of...…

Works fine and everybody arrives well rested in SIN to enjoy their Chilli Crab!
What´s the issue here, it has been going one since the days the ERF appeared on the scene? EK was in a position to allow the luxury of a 4th tech crew member, times change and they are now doing what many of their peers have been doing for years. Do you think in the above example any of the tech crew are overworked? Doubt it....

Waterbomber wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

ghost77 wrote:

Not enough!!!! Many people are going back to the US - Canada - Europe, where now there a big job offer and pilot shortage.

This is getting pretty interesting...

g77

He (or she) was being sarcastic. And not just about the numbers.

Slide 1 of SR22 to A380 conversion training: “No BRS on A380. But god is with you“.


At that point, most of them quit.


More seriously though, EK has a huge pilot pool at its disposal in Flydubai. The T&C's are worse there so all pilots must be very eager to move to EK.
It seems smarter to slow deliveries of Flydubai airplanes, worst case even ground a part of the fleet.
I wonder how Flydubai is able to retain its pilots and grow when EK is struggling this bad.

Easy, less money but better qol.

jetskipper wrote:

Honest question. One of the benefits of working for one of the ME3 for an Expat is the lure of tax-free wages. However I’m guessing that once a majority of the pilots retire they would move back to their country of origin. What are the tax implications for countries such as the US, Canada, Australia, NZ, UK or the EU for getting your retirement savings back into the
country? I guess my question is, is the no-tax benefit only for earned wages however all repatriated monies will be severely taxed negating the original benefit?

Australians living outside of Australia are generally only required to lodge an Australian Tax return if they are still earning income within Australia (a common situation would be if the family home was being rented out, investments, etc). Non-residents generally don't have to declare non-Australian income. However the courts here have ruled that you can be deemed a resident for tax purposes under certain situations, namely if your famlily is still residing in Australia while you're off working overseas, and returning home on a regular basis.....


If EK were to set up a MEL or SYD base, they would have to compensate for the fact that local tax would have to be paid...


A relevant case - interesting reading, which is unusual for case law....

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinod ... %201007%22)

You don’t need to have basings to have a commuting roster.

DXB based, consecutive days off to travel to a place of your choice. Your tax residency is your business to handle.

cougar15 wrote:

...This is getting silly! a snapshot from the freight perspective. Just for the sake of the discussion. ....

Comparing humans to cargo is a silly, irrelevant argument and just a distraction technique. Not suitable for a facts based forum.

jetskipper wrote:

Honest question. One of the benefits of working for one of the ME3 for an Expat is the lure of tax-free wages. However I’m guessing that once a majority of the pilots retire they would move back to their country of origin. What are the tax implications for countries such as the US, Canada, Australia, NZ, UK or the EU for getting your retirement savings back into the
country? I guess my question is, is the no-tax benefit only for earned wages however all repatriated monies will be severely taxed negating the original benefit?

If you are a citizen of the United States, it does not matter if you are a tax resident in the UAE (or anywhere in the World). You are still obliged to pay your income taxes to the IRS (as well as to your local tax office).

Most other nations, have taxation treaty in order to prevent double-taxation (for example EU nations have such treaty with the UAE). Therefore, if you are a tax resident of the UAE, you are obliged to pay income tax here (UAE). Since there is no income tax, your income is tax free. In order to be tax resident of a nation, you must meet certain criteria (such as living there for more than 183 days, or have substantial economic benefit there; such as you family ties, owning of property, etc.).

However, living in Dubai is not cheap. I would say Dubai is 30% - 40% more expensive than Slovakia/Austria/Czech Republic. There is VAT (5%) in effect that makes lives more complicated for lower income personnel. Finally, although, there are no taxes (sans VAT), there are indirect taxes in form of many fees. My personal favorite, is the Innovation Fee and Knowledge Fee. Despite all of this, Dubai is interesting place and I do enjoy my stay here (for the time being).

cougar15 wrote:

This is getting silly! a snapshot from the freight perspective. Just for the sake of the discussion. Lets take either a 747-8F (ACMI) or a 747-400 ERF from EU to SIN.
12.5/13 hrs operating for EU operators, perhaps even leased from a US operator...……..

Hard to say and judge, as I am only outsider. I know that people enjoy complaining more than anything, but just because this is acceptable practice for Freight Dogs world, that does not mean it is alright. Reading the PPRuNe forum, many pilots are not happy. They are quite frustrated with the situation. But if there are worrying signs such as that anonymous reporting is not so anonymous, I think it is only good to question this new policy.
IMHO, this is about prevention of disaster. Counting the costs at every level gets you no-where. If 4 crew members on trips longer than 12 hours is a safer option, then this should not be an issue. Is it doable with 3 pilots only? Sure. Yet at what cost. It is only matter of time, not if but when, tired crew will make a preventable mistake that will costs lives (from 3 up to hundreds).

Bending and relaxing the rules only opens up the Pandora Box. There are plenty of good examples in the World of Finance.

So is anyone going through the latest accidents on long haul flights and showing where 3 versus 4 crew played a factor in the accident?

Good question

goboeing wrote:

worldranger wrote:

33 aircraft parked @ DWC & counting

33?!

Someone posted the planned parking numbers and I see on my screenshot that May was supposed to be 20 airplanes.

If it's really 33 and counting, the poop has hit the fan big time.

Not sure it's high as 33. It's certainly more than 15. I drive past the 3 lots of parked up aircraft every day. I can count them tomorrow. Mainly 777, some have been long term. Until yesterday we also had 2 x A380. One has left or been parked around the back - it was doing circuits on Thursday.

Do they still take deliveries of new frames or have they quietly stopped?

Two captains and two first officers still make a four pilot crew on a 12+ hour flight. But I guess fanboyism makes blind, eh?

Um, I think he was being sarcastic. Nothing blind about it at all.

P1aneMad wrote:

Do they still take deliveries of new frames or have they quietly stopped?

Three areas they will never stop spending money on. 1)Taking new plane deliveries, 2) PR spending. 3) Adding new senior management positions and few thousand employees to justify each position. Cuts always have to come from somewhere else.

andrej wrote:

jetskipper wrote:

Honest question. One of the benefits of working for one of the ME3 for an Expat is the lure of tax-free wages. However I’m guessing that once a majority of the pilots retire they would move back to their country of origin. What are the tax implications for countries such as the US, Canada, Australia, NZ, UK or the EU for getting your retirement savings back into the
country? I guess my question is, is the no-tax benefit only for earned wages however all repatriated monies will be severely taxed negating the original benefit?

If you are a citizen of the United States, it does not matter if you are a tax resident in the UAE (or anywhere in the World). You are still obliged to pay your income taxes to the IRS (as well as to your local tax office).

Not totally true, you are obligated to file a tax return but you may not owe any $$.

A US citizen who is a permanent resident of another country or is out of the United States for 330 days of the year gets an exclusion for about $100,000 of his income and if he pays taxes in the country where he's employed he can also get a credit for a portion of those taxes on his US tax return. Since he's filing a proper tax return "repatriating" his money is of no concern.

cougar15 wrote:

Barbro wrote:

cougar15 wrote:

Yup, totally in line with what every Euro legacy carrier has been doing for years! 4 was luxury, 3 is economic reality!

Yeah, this has been happening forever for Euro and, I think, US carriers.

What is the difference, why is it outrageous of ME carriers but not the others? Are EK sectors longer than what AA, BA, AF, etc have? At least they’ve got modern equipment (as do most Euro legacies, of course...).

Bad policies and maltreatment of staff is, of course, unforgiveable, and I hope ppl working there will demand their rights or leave. If the stories here truelly are just the tip of the iceberg, as usually happens, I smell more trbl ahead for EK. Pilot market has turned around quick, what used to be a moderate surplus has now become a shortage. And the aviation press has been sounding warning signs to the effect that candidates are not in abundance any more. Surprise, surprise, a profession in aviation is no longer as lucrative as it used to be.

I wonder why....

Everyone thinks I am an EK fanboy, that is not the case!, but a realist I infact feel much more that there is missed opportunity here for the UAE (EY scenario...) as a whole!
Indeed EK is in trouble and they need to find a solution fast, changes in corporate culture I think are long overdue! And I would hope that some of the fresh blood at EK (SMT) will realize this! The Jockeys are being ´driven into the ground´ and that especially applies to the freight boys who look at their roster each month (with a few surprises).So I am highly critical of EK´s current crew(ing) structures, but at the same time and as anyone with a bit of sence will realise, that is not the reason for "100 triples and 380s " being parked at secret Chinese airbases or at DWC , as many a thread on here would suggest! EK will will evolve, review T&Cs and move forward.. they have little choice!

You’re a fanboy of the friggin exclamation point that’s for sure.

Take it easy ffs

dtw2hyd wrote:

cougar15 wrote:

...This is getting silly! a snapshot from the freight perspective. Just for the sake of the discussion. ....

Comparing humans to cargo is a silly, irrelevant argument and just a distraction technique. Not suitable for a facts based forum.

How is flying a freighter different than the same plane in a passenger configuration?

TVNWZ wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

cougar15 wrote:

...This is getting silly! a snapshot from the freight perspective. Just for the sake of the discussion. ....

Comparing humans to cargo is a silly, irrelevant argument and just a distraction technique. Not suitable for a facts based forum.

How is flying a freighter different than the same plane in a passenger configuration?

It is in some aspects. But not of any that are relevant to this topic, pilot fatigue. In that respect, they are the same.

TVNWZ wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

cougar15 wrote:

...This is getting silly! a snapshot from the freight perspective. Just for the sake of the discussion. ....

Comparing humans to cargo is a silly, irrelevant argument and just a distraction technique. Not suitable for a facts based forum.

How is flying a freighter different than the same plane in a passenger configuration?

Cargo can be replaced, human lives cannot be replaced, in case the unthinkable happens.

What I'm not seeing in this post is a comparison to other carriers. If and how many crew similar sector lengths with 3 crew. Is it the industry norm or are EK part of a small group that do it?

dtw2hyd wrote:

cougar15 wrote:

...This is getting silly! a snapshot from the freight perspective. Just for the sake of the discussion. ....

Comparing humans to cargo is a silly, irrelevant argument and just a distraction technique. Not suitable for a facts based forum.

So you feel a cargo flight should be operated less safe than and to different regulations to pax flight? Now that is a good one!
Fedex will surely have a job for you, if you can work out how to put 200 hour 182 jockeys in their cockpits!

TVNWZ wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

cougar15 wrote:

...This is getting silly! a snapshot from the freight perspective. Just for the sake of the discussion. ....

Comparing humans to cargo is a silly, irrelevant argument and just a distraction technique. Not suitable for a facts based forum.

How is flying a freighter different than the same plane in a passenger configuration?

The rosters are the diffrence. Redeye from DXB to the east with min. rest and then JFK. Also the amount of hours flying a year. A roster with 100 hours a month is somehow standard on the tractor. Sure you can do this a couple of times, but there is a reason why CX went back to 4 crews.

dtw2hyd wrote:

TVNWZ wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

Comparing humans to cargo is a silly, irrelevant argument and just a distraction technique. Not suitable for a facts based forum.

How is flying a freighter different than the same plane in a passenger configuration?

Cargo can be replaced, human lives cannot be replaced, in case the unthinkable happens.

Wow. So cargo pilot lives are more expendable. Wow.

TVNWZ wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

TVNWZ wrote:

How is flying a freighter different than the same plane in a passenger configuration?

Cargo can be replaced, human lives cannot be replaced, in case the unthinkable happens.

Wow. So cargo pilot lives are more expendable. Wow.

you're being unnecessarily argumentative. you well know that he or she means that the freight cargo in back is less valuable than human cargo in back. The pilots lives are equally valuable.
but with only 3 pilots, trained professionals, in a dire situation - they may choose a different course of action hauling cargo than if hauling 300 pax. something as extreme as a water ditching, while never, ever desirable, is certainly something that might be considered with cargo, and utterly rejected with pax. don't get fixated on that extreme example (don't bring up Hudson/Sully), I'm sure there are more subtle scenarios, where different considerations may play into a situation - such as whether to make a specific diversion or not. Freight != pax in that case as well.

So, yes - I say there's a potential for different actions and outcomes between freight and pax operations in emergencies.

FlyHappy wrote:

TVNWZ wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

Cargo can be replaced, human lives cannot be replaced, in case the unthinkable happens.

Wow. So cargo pilot lives are more expendable. Wow.

you're being unnecessarily argumentative. you well know that he or she means that the freight cargo in back is less valuable than human cargo in back. The pilots lives are equally valuable.
but with only 3 pilots, trained professionals, in a dire situation - they may choose a different course of action hauling cargo than if hauling 300 pax. something as extreme as a water ditching, while never, ever desirable, is certainly something that might be considered with cargo, and utterly rejected with pax. don't get fixated on that extreme example (don't bring up Hudson/Sully), I'm sure there are more subtle scenarios, where different considerations may play into a situation - such as whether to make a specific diversion or not. Freight != pax in that case as well.

So, yes - I say there's a potential for different actions and outcomes between freight and pax operations in emergencies.

The poster making the original cargo comment was grasping at straws to go after the ME3, as usual. Its his/her MO. Next we'll hear that Sir Tim Clark assassinated JFK or something and half of a.net is being paid to cover it up yada yada.

I dont think the above is unnecessarily argumentative. The original point was silly. Tons of cargo aircraft operate safely above us every day. The concern of those pilots is their own safety, not just the cargo so if what they were doing was so horribly unsafe, it wouldn't still be going on.

Antarius wrote:

The poster making the original cargo comment was grasping at straws to go after the ME3, as usual. Its his/her MO. Next we'll hear that Sir Tim Clark assassinated JFK or something and half of a.net is being paid to cover it up yada yada.

I dont think the above is unnecessarily argumentative. The original point was silly. Tons of cargo aircraft operate safely above us every day. The concern of those pilots is their own safety, not just the cargo so if what they were doing was so horribly unsafe, it wouldn't still be going on.

you too, are side-tracked.
What is unnecessary is the mock outrage that "cargo pilots lives are less valuable". No reasonable person concludes that was anyones stated position.
What your (or my) opinion is on the ME3, 3 pilot LH operations, is irrelevant to that.

My position is that a flight with pilots and cargo only, is a flight that may afford to do something/not do something without regard for "helpless" human lives in the back. To that end, I think I'm on firm factual footing. Still, that is irrelevant to the needless technique of undercutting someones argument that they don't value a pilots life. That's uncalled for.

Antarius wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

TVNWZ wrote:

Wow. So cargo pilot lives are more expendable. Wow.

you're being unnecessarily argumentative. you well know that he or she means that the freight cargo in back is less valuable than human cargo in back. The pilots lives are equally valuable.
but with only 3 pilots, trained professionals, in a dire situation - they may choose a different course of action hauling cargo than if hauling 300 pax. something as extreme as a water ditching, while never, ever desirable, is certainly something that might be considered with cargo, and utterly rejected with pax. don't get fixated on that extreme example (don't bring up Hudson/Sully), I'm sure there are more subtle scenarios, where different considerations may play into a situation - such as whether to make a specific diversion or not. Freight != pax in that case as well.

So, yes - I say there's a potential for different actions and outcomes between freight and pax operations in emergencies.

The poster making the original cargo comment was grasping at straws to go after the ME3, as usual. Its his/her MO. Next we'll hear that Sir Tim Clark assassinated JFK or something and half of a.net is being paid to cover it up yada yada.

I dont think the above is unnecessarily argumentative. The original point was silly. Tons of cargo aircraft operate safely above us every day. The concern of those pilots is their own safety, not just the cargo so if what they were doing was so horribly unsafe, it wouldn't still be going on.

I feel sorry for having opened this can of worms now! Do you think the pilots of 5X(UPS) 006 would have acted any differently if the Jumbo was full of pax? They would not. look at SR111! Having spent 75% of my time/working life in Airfreight, I found DTW2HYD´s comment highly insulting. Of course an Aircraft full of human life has more value than one filled with Lio Batteries.

But both operate by the same, stringent safety standards! We are discussing crewing on ULH´s. What is wrong with 3 crew on a 13 hr sector? These are 2 crew aircraft. Everyone gets to snooze for 4 hrs en route, everyone arrives happy & safe at the destination. having worked less that 8 hours since clocking on, with 2 guys at the pointy end at all times! Again, what is the issue?

3 crew on such sectors has been a common thing since the early 2000´s with multiple carriers, both European and US based.
But as this is another ´bash EK´ thread, it is suddenly an issue. Well, rest assured, that neither Qatar´s, nore EK´s Mid east - New Zealand flights have only 3 tech crew on them. Apart from QF into LHR (x PER) and a lit of LAO/AU, who really operates such Flights? Those that do have 4 crew.

Economic reality, regardless of the admitted and well defined (global) pilot shortage, means a 10-14 hour sector needs no more that 3 tech crew!

But for what is perceived here as ´ULH´, 12-13, 14 hrs... oh well, each Jockey had to work for 4 or 5 hours (add 2 hrs before departure) ...... what are we discussing?

I wish I could get away with only 7 hrs a day in ´my office´!

I already understand some flights like EK368/369 (DXB-CGK), EK778/779 (DXB-CPT), EK717 (DXB-NBO) and several other flights were cancelled due to shortages.