FDX Disputed Pairings, Part 2
03-09-2007, 11:20 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: MD-11 Captain
Posts: 4,304
Originally Posted by FlyByNite
Jetjok
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: 727 s/o, formally MD-11 Capt
Posts: 544
Don't you mean formerly?
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: 727 s/o, formally MD-11 Capt
Posts: 544
Don't you mean formerly?
I must have done that after 7 P.M., just before bedtime.
03-10-2007, 05:11 AM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: Triple Capt
Posts: 608
BTTT......
The April SIG letter has a fine example of a disputed pairing and why they shouldn't be flown and the results of such efforts and discussions with the company. Yes, I'm talking about the SFS-HKG-ALA pairing.
First off, it's just stoopid: 0130L alert in SFS, to HKG for a 2 hr drool, then 5 hrs to ALA with metric altimetry, QFE, terrible language, etc.... Don't get me wrong, I like ALA just like the next single (or married) guy but this pairing was definitely onerous and thanks to the SIG it's been identified as such and now built with a soft parameter. I can see guys falling over themselves to pick these up in open time. "An ALA pairing, in open time, YGTBSM!"
I just bring this up to point out the GREAT work our SIG does on a monthly basis to scrub the lines. Granted, "freight has to move" and I understand that's how we put beans on the table and beer in the fridge but pairings like these need to be quashed from the get-go if for no other reason than they're just stoopid.
Whoever built that pairing was definitely NOT a crewmember.
The April SIG letter has a fine example of a disputed pairing and why they shouldn't be flown and the results of such efforts and discussions with the company. Yes, I'm talking about the SFS-HKG-ALA pairing.
First off, it's just stoopid: 0130L alert in SFS, to HKG for a 2 hr drool, then 5 hrs to ALA with metric altimetry, QFE, terrible language, etc.... Don't get me wrong, I like ALA just like the next single (or married) guy but this pairing was definitely onerous and thanks to the SIG it's been identified as such and now built with a soft parameter. I can see guys falling over themselves to pick these up in open time. "An ALA pairing, in open time, YGTBSM!"
I just bring this up to point out the GREAT work our SIG does on a monthly basis to scrub the lines. Granted, "freight has to move" and I understand that's how we put beans on the table and beer in the fridge but pairings like these need to be quashed from the get-go if for no other reason than they're just stoopid.
Whoever built that pairing was definitely NOT a crewmember.
03-10-2007, 11:32 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Posts: 398
Sorry all, but I don't have high hopes that the ALA pairing will go untaken.... the company did it knowing guys will fly it, even though it sucks and is disputed. Anything for some people to get the ALA.... or VCP for that matter. If you need it that bad.... try your left hand. Like being with someone new.
03-10-2007, 08:48 PM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: B-777 Captain
Posts: 943
If you need it that bad.... try your left hand. Like being with someone new.[/QUOTE]
I was going to say right hand. Oh, never mind I get it. ..................
I was going to say right hand. Oh, never mind I get it. ..................
Last edited by JetJocF14; 03-11-2007 at 05:15 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
MD11Fr8Dog
Cargo
272
03-06-2007 12:51 PM
