iceman49

You are completely right, not even sure if it will make it before years end.

Justdoinmyjob

Just pull a "Roscoe," ( I believe that's who it was,) who diverted for fatigue. The company was furious, but he prevailed in the end, and the company backed down.

Nosmo King

Yeah it's a slightly different situation. Roscoe was justified because the crew rest facility they had was totally inadequate. The dispute on the A330 will be that we are one pilot short of a legal crew due to the company claim of a block time less than 12 hours. This will also be the case on SLC - NRT in winter. Should be an interesting Christmas since SLC-NRT starts 01Jun, the company will run out of wiggle room on 01Dec.

Justdoinmyjob

Well, if you are illegal to start the trip, then don't. Easier to say than do, I know.

Nosmo King

Despite assurances from others on this forum, I have heard there is a BAD tentative agreement on the A330 rest facility for block times over 12 hours.

Supposedly it will be a lie flat seat in business class with a footrest and a curtain. The seat in front of it will be restricted recline.

I can't believe that the CROT would sign off on this after the original debacle on the L15.

iceman49

Believe it was turned down.

Nosmo King

I was told it was tentatively agreed to by ALPA and management.

The alternatives were double bunk in existing room - not acceptable to pilots or management.

Commandeer bunk number 4 from the purser in the LMCDR - didn't want to **** off FA's

Bulk compartment rest area - Was very nice facility, but if not installed during initial hull construction, was required to be removed every 5000 hours for inspections. 5K hours for removal was unacceptable to management.

Additional crew rest room in biz class - too much lost revenue due to losing 2 seats.

So the "concession" was horizontal seat with curtain in biz class and restricted recline seat in row directly in front.

Just repeating what I was told by NATCO 330 guys. The quote was "It's not very good."

sailingfun

Nosmo, You have posted on this tread and the other thread that Delta is illegally flying the LAX-NRT flight yet your produce no evidence of that other then your personal feeling the flight should be over 12:00. Here is my post on the other thread.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The simple fact of the LAX-NRT service is that it is not illegal. It is not even close to illegal so far. I have checked the times since this was posted. The flight averages about 11:30. Not one single day that I have checked has it gone over 12:00. It is being flight planned at normal speeds also. You can wish the flight was over 12:00 but it is not. It may be in the winter. If so it will be dealt with by ALPA. For now its legal in all regards from both a FAA and contractual perspective.

Nosmo King

First, it is NOT just about LAX-NRT. For the record 12 of the first 13 LAX-NRT legs were over 12 hours on the A330. That data is from our DAL-N ALPA scheduling committee. I can give you the name of one FO that did the leg 3 times in the first 2 weeks and had 2 of the 3 block times WELL OVER 12 hours. The winds in late April changed enough so that it was under 12 hours block time, but the company has already agreed that in winter it will be OVER 12 hours thats why they started looking at 4 pilot rest alternatives.

Second, it IS about getting a good crew rest facility for FOUR pilot crews on the A330. LAX-NRT went back to a 747-400 so if you are checking recent block times with summer winds, yes it is under 12 hours. With winter winds it will be over 12 hours for boh LAX-NRT and SLC-NRT should they choose to use an A330 on either leg. The 3 pilot facilities are wonderful.

Now they have apparently wrangled a concession out of ALPA for that extra pilot rest area.

Third, it IS about getting a DECENT rest area PRIOR TO those legs being flown over 12 hours block time. The DAL-N rules for establishing augmentation block times are different than DAL-S as a result of a grievance and an FAA ruling because of that grievance. I don't believe DAL-N transitions to the DAL-S method of determining augmentation block times until after SOC. I am not talking about the FAR, I am talking about the methodology used to determine what months the block times can be considered to exceed 12 hours based on actual data. The longest scenario DAL-N can use is a 12 month period of data collection and any month with 50%+1 of the legs over 12 hours can never be flown again without double crew. I believe DAL-N was given a least two other methodologies as options by the FAA.

What you are telling me is that the DAL-S method is to wait for something bad to happen, even though you knew it was coming, and then scramble to fix it? Typical Reactive negotiating instead of PROactive negotiating.

Sailing, perhaps you should call your scheduling committee and have them contact the DAL-N scheduling committee and ask them about the first 2 weeks of LAX-NRT A330 flying and ask about block times for SLC-NRT in the winter. Maybe you will get a different answer than I did and I can call my guy up and tell him he is a liar... or maybe he isn't lying and your information is wrong. I certainly disagree with your method of not fixing leaks until after the fact rather than trying to prevent leaks that are obviously going to occur in the near future.

I guess we don't need to negotiate a 4 pilot rest facility on a 787 until they actually fly it over 12 hours.

FWIW I heard 5 or 6 airplanes will be getting the crappy seat for the 4th pilot.

sailingfun

I got the times for LAX-NRT from the actual blocks times. I have looked at 20 plus flights since you posted this. Not one single flight has exceeded 12 hours. Most were at least 30 minutes under 12 hours. Not one other airlines blocks this flight over 12 hours or double crews it. I don't know what else I can say. If it starts to exceed 12 hours then DALPA will take action as they have on every other route where these type issues come up. The company has not fudged the numbers on any route I am aware of. Taxi times have been a issue that has forced some changes. I know a dispatcher who works on new routes. They don't cheat and use real flight planning and historical wind data. The LAX-NRT flight as it stands now is 100 percent legal from both a contractual and FAR standpoint. Its now a 400 anyway.