Originally Posted by
Hedley
Perhaps drama was the wrong word. How about hassle? On the WB, there are just 2 legs per trip, 2 briefings, things seem to run more reliably, and fewer days on the road. On the NB you have to deal with 2-3 (sometimes more) legs per day, crew changes, briefings, better chance of delays bouncing through the hubs for 3-4 days........ Being on a WB is definitely a slower pace, more relaxed, and far more productive. For only $40k difference in pay, I’ll take my time in the bunk, pass on all of the extra work, and end up home an extra 50-60 days per year. Again, it’s great to have a choice as to what kind of flying that you want to do.
I’ve done both, and IMO the variable that is so difficult to quantify if the toll that a steady diet of WB flying takes on one’s body. Constant circadian rhythm disruptions aren’t healthy. I think how well one can rest in a bunk, adapt on a layover, and get reaclimated are factors involved in choosing the type of flying one does. Throw in long layovers where it can be easy to overeat and drink if you’re not careful, and it’s a recipe for poor health. I envy guys who can do it without feeling whipped at the end of a trip half way around the world.