Originally Posted by
Sunvox
Absolutely not.
We all have a number in our head that we like to fly. For some of us it's max we can and for others it's the least we can. Pilot utilization is all about work rules and has nothing to do with what you can fly. At least that's my opinion, but you see there it is. I understand that what you are arguing has never been carefully studied either by management or ALPA, but it sure makes headlines when you tell everyone on the forum that such a move would be "manpower negative". Just because they change the rules doesn't mean I or any other pilot will fly more hours.
Originally Posted by
Probe
I could see it is slightly manpower negatives, but only slightly. A huge positive for pilots is that are current and qualed on two aircraft types. Easier to get a contract job if the economy takes another dump.
I know the systems are vastly different but in the case of these two aircraft I would say it doesn't matter. Boeing doesn't really require you know squat to be rated on the 777 and I would bet the 787 is the same or easier. so you don't have to know nada about two airplanes vice one. I believe Boeing has approval for a common type with 2-5 days differences training. Can't remember if it was 2 or 5.
757/767 was much more difficult IMHO. They land much different, especially banging the tale on the 763 vs pounding the nose gear into the ground on the 752. And don't get me started on smoke and avionics cooling. I think I had it all memorised correctly for all variants, once, for 5 minutes. Luckily that was the one time I was asked about it on my first type rating oral. LOL. I have done the course three times during my yo yo up and down UALs financial debacles.
Neither of these two statements recognize that if these are allowed to be combined you lose one entire category of reserves. That is much more than just "slightly manpower negative." It also has nothing to do with how much flying an individual pilot wants to fly!
Besides the safety argumement for not allowing these two to be combined, it is hugely manpower negative. Put aside the efficiency argument Horrido already made, if you lose and entire category of reserves, you lose big. For every 787 Reserve Captain that doesn't need to be staffed becasue there is a 777 reserve captain to cover for him, that is one less widebody captain position. Which means that guy will be a narrow body captain. And for every narrow body captain that doesn't get the upgrade, there is a widebody First Officer that gets stuck in his right seat. The trickle down effect is huge.
Does no one remember the 737-200 737-300 postion that the UAL pilots made a stand on and won? They refused to allow them to be one category because of the safety implications.
Anyone that is advocating combining these two is a management proxy and carries no respect!