Avroman

I am curious just how much forward movement triggers the 5th time. And how does the system know that we simply didn't have an engine running and are getting pulled forward by the tug before disconnect?

prex8390

I’d imagine a couple rotations of the tire or a small change in gps location triggers it.

flydiamond

Duty time and rest...Absolutely no impact.

There is one unintended consequence I can think of and that’s for those pilots you’ve heard about who in the past would work to get to 1000 hours ASAP and then take a paid vacation from flying until they became legal again. That’s less likely to happen now as those 1000 hours are probably closer to 900 under the new method (12 minutes to finish final checklists, program speeds, pushback, disconnect, and get clearance to move on a 2 hour flight...seems about right as an average for the airports we operate to where you can be sitting 10 minutes waiting for pushback clearance).

Along those lines, a pilot now has the potential to block a few hours over 100 each month and therefore can possibly make more money if he or she chooses to work their tail off. Probably not too much more, as flight time in Flica and crew trac in the future is still showing full block time and open time pickups need to pass both look back and look forward tests, but one could probably snag an additional 6 pay hours (150% of a min day). Only after you fly does the flight time update in the systems to the FAR definition.

flydiamond

I thought I heard somewhere it’s backwards movement followed by parking break being set, then released, then forward movement. Seems logical since that’s how a pushback works.

flydiamond

Absolutely, but only for irops and recovery. This will not impact how the schedules are constructed since all of the language in the contract references block hours.

FODhopper

Ooopsie... tire release light illuminated

Avroman

Perhaps, but what can happen is the company building days closer to 9 hours block than what they were willing to previously. This could mean an extra leg built into some days. Where before they wouldn't risk building a day blocked at 8:40, perhaps now they could.

Blueskies21

I don't think the Company can continue to track flight time the old way for some purposes, 100 hrs for high minimums captain and 25 hrs for OE completion for example and under the new way for FAR 117 compliance.

If the Company is choosing to use this method to track flight time (which DOES meet the FAA definition) then they'll have to use it for all regulatory purposes, not just those that might suit their fancy.

Also with regard to my logbook, you're absolutely correct, I COULD go back and change the times to block but I'm not really sure I SHOULD. The reason we all used block before was that it was the best approximation of flight time meeting the FAA definition, now we have access to a time that meets exactly the FAA definition, how I can then say... "I'm not going to use that and I'm going to continue to use the old way"... I understand an argument for consistency but I don't think that really holds water for why I would continue to log it incorrectly when the correct time meeting the FAA definition of flight time is readily available.

flydiamond

Nearly impossible with FDP limits and firebreaks. I’m more concerned about trips being constructed with three legs, 5.0 of block and 12.5 hours of FDP. Speaking of which, I wonder how much the number of FDP extensions has risen since the firebreaks...

Casualinterest

I'm not entirely sure how much clearer they can be on this. I've seen it in at least 3 different communications that flight time for logbook calculation remains unchanged. They also said early on this was all run through the faa.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk