Fdx ~ Cdg-can...
 

I know this post will only pertain to a small group of FDX MD-11 pilots but I still thought it will give some food for thought. In one of the union's latest publications it talked about the optimizer and how the company has been building the lines since last Feb and reducing our hours, etc. etc. This situation is a good example of manning versus safety...

In the past on the CDG-SFS flight there were always 4 crewmembers by necessity due to the 12+ block. Now we have the CDG-CAN flight which is 11+37 block. When we first started flying this route we were still manned with 4 crewmembers which I thought was a great idea but recently things have changed.

I flew this flight last week and we did it in a little over 11 hours but the captain and I were struggling by the end of the flight. Pairings are built differently but this was our 3rd flight in a row with a circadian swap (24 hr l/o) while crossing multiple time zones and this trip departs CDG during a critical launch time, 0430 local. The RFO had DH in so he was fine but if we could have used a fourth.

Point being is I still wrote up a flight safety report suggesting this flights manning issue be re-examined for safety reasons even though the block was less than 12 hours due to critical launch time and if there are any delays then there could be a fatigue issue. I seriously doubt that my FSR will get much attention BUT if the company starts seeing multiple reports with the same tone and concerns then maybe, just MAYBE, the squeaky wheel will get some grease. Plus we all could use the extra credits hours for BLG's but it really is more about SAFETY.

Feel free to comment...oh nevermind, I guess that goes without saying on this board!

Being almost fatigued is like being almost pregnant.

Approaching fatigued, but quite not there, could be a measure of success for management. "Pop the champagne, they were optimized perfectly!"

Ignore knucklehead...thanks for putting in the FSR.

Feel free to comment...oh nevermind, I guess that goes without saying on this board![/QUOTE]

Many years ago I would occasionally fly the 0330 EWR-ANC flight. We ALWAYS had an RFO in those days (perhaps still do) although not legally required. That flight was by far, the most boring of all...very little ATC transmissions, pitch black over central Canada and 6+ hours trying to stay awake. The MD11 ACP flew it several times without an RFO and quickly agreed to our demands for another pilot for safety reasons.

I suspect the company goes strictly by the FARs these days?

Good luck and safe flying on the CDG-CAN flights.

Unfortunately, we brought this upon ourselves. If people wouldn't taxi at max warp, and fly the flight plan, it would still be over 11+35.


We are our own worst enemy!
:mad:

Many years ago I would occasionally fly the 0330 EWR-ANC flight. We ALWAYS had an RFO in those days (perhaps still do) although not legally required. That flight was by far, the most boring of all...very little ATC transmissions, pitch black over central Canada and 6+ hours trying to stay awake. The MD11 ACP flew it several times without an RFO and quickly agreed to our demands for another pilot for safety reasons.

I suspect the company goes strictly by the FARs these days?

Good luck and safe flying on the CDG-CAN flights.[/quote]


And Colgan Air was going by the FAA requirements when it decided not to include a stick pusher demo in its training program. Sometimes we have to go a little above the requirements when common sense dictates. Unfortunately the bean counters seem to be winning the war against common sense in this economic environment. I just hope it doesn't end up costing more in the long run.

The block is 11+37 which IMO is close enough to 12+00 to schedule a fourth "just in case". Include alert call, transport time of +45 (traffic isn't bad in Paris at 2am) and it is a very long day.

I know that there is an RFO from ANC-NRT with a 7+35 block in the winter time with the strong winds and no RFO on the same flight during the summer. Problem is...we don't seems to have a 11+35 rule for the long haul flights?

I'm just trying to encourage people to take the time to fill out a FSR if they see fit for a fatigue/safety issues, it only takes a couple of minutes and is well worth it. If the company doesn't hear about it how are the suppose to know :confused:

Then you show up for ground school and have to listen to a lecture about how important it is to show up for work rested in spite of the FACT that the company sodomizer is beating the hell out of you from the second that you block out on a trip. Sorry for the run-on sentence.

No RFO on the EWR-ANC. They were releasing us last winter at .85 and it was still 7+29. Ugliest flight in the system IMO. I'm doing the CDG-CAN this month. TB

"And Colgan Air was going by the FAA requirements when it decided not to include a stick pusher demo in its training program. "


Isn't that unthinkable and unbelievable? Stall recovery training (to me) is as basic as you can get in training. We used to do 'unusual attitude' training, but flying at 3am was unusual enough. Maybe management will mandate autolands always and permanently.

Watching the purple jets from terra firma is great. 60 never came too soon. Good luck and fly safe.