Transcon Turns
 

Any Information (updates?) out there on the test of Transcontinental turns?

Thanks.

No details, but according to M. Barger they are all but a done deal, apparently the FAA is on board.

I feel sorry for JB pilots that have to rely on ALPA jumpseats to get to work. It's going to get ugly.

I don't agree with EVER turning down a jumpseater for personal or political reasons - but JB guys and gals should expect to get a hard time for going along with a 8/24 waiver. IMO it will be a well deserved hard time - what are you guys thinking? Is a 30/7 waiver next?

No, worse than being denied a jumpseat - a flight's worth of re-education.

If I were you I would be more concerned about how your management is running your airline into the ground. We need to stick together as pilots. The jumpseat is not the vehicle to express your political views. Jetblue has the most liberal jumpseat in the industy and they may not be big enough to hurt anyone today if that jumpseat was lost but in 10 years... Who knows.

The individual pilot should not be punished for a management discission.

Amp
 

I'm thinking 20 days off a month! What's wrong with that?! You guys need to expand your thinking at the legacy carriers. As for jumpseating...well, I don't think it is us that needs the re-education, so I'll keep on welcoming aboard all who need a ride to work or home!

Oh to dream...... a managment that could actually use the contract to run a smooth and efficient operation - instead of a tool to beat-up labor. I think you guys will really need to watch how the scheduling is done to prevent long term fatigue. 20 days off per month could do that, but managemnt using the waiver "because they can" could be a huge downfall in terms of QOL.

Be careful out there.

You hit on the key when you mentioned the 30/7 rule. As long as the weekly and monthly limits remain in effect (and as far as I know JB is not requesting a waiver for these) then the 8 hour waiver can only be used to build more efficient, more productive pairings, such as Long Beach-JFK-FLL for example, not just transcon turns. We can match pairings to aircraft routes better. That will result in more days off. What we are expecting, however, is not 4 or 5 legs as part of a 10 hour block day, but instead a less fatiguing 2 legs, 3 max. I can live with that.

It's not survival of the "best," but rather survival of fittest, and that means those that can adapt. You can't adapt without change. We, as pilots, need to help manage that change, not simply resist it, or we will be left out of the process and have no influence.

The 8 hour waiver is just the beginning. Accepting this as the "norm" will result in future degradation of the current regulations. I believe in Darwinism but do not support changing rules that are contrary to flight safety. Anyone who thinks flying a 10+ hour LA turn safely with a 2 pilot crew is naive.
I know it must be exciting being at JB right now but what will happen 5 or 10 years down the road. Once you lower the bar it is not easy raise it again.

Good Luck.

Calpilot,
I worked my butt off for three different airlines that did just what you say - beat us up with the rules. In all cases the pilots were burn't out.
If anyone at Jetblue needs an example of how the rules will be applied, look no further than our reserve ranks. I've NEVER seen the rules bent as far as they have at Jetblue. So to think that we will ONLY benefit from AMP is, in fact, naive.
I've read on several boards that "pilots have no control over management decisions." Certainly not without representation. But this statement is puzzling none-the-less because we're being told by our management team that this whole project is "pilot driven" and that it was "our" idea. I truly hope we can clear up which it is because either our management team is lying to us our or some of our pilots are lying.
I oppose this project for another reason though. Because our top 200 enjoy enough largesse at the expense of the growing masses. These trips will rise to the very top and the ones that don't will get foisted on some poor reserve.
Jetblue pilots of seniority 400 and higher LISTEN UP!
BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR!
When the scheduling committee gets back surveys that claim that the pilot population values productivity above all else, and when transcon turns get built into our pairings, and when AMP and the 8 hour rule bolster reserve utilization it will take fewer pilots to run the airline.
Again - it will take FEWER pilots to run the airline. That's great for profit sharing but my life seems to revolve more around base pay since I joined Jetblue.
FEWER pilots for a given set of hours means:
1. Smaller bases.
2. Longer upgrades times.
3. Longer times on reserve.
4. Possibly fewer Airbuses for a given business plan.
Again, great for the bottom line but so is 190 pay.
Is it selfish to think this way? Well, I'm just stating the obvious but we all know that pilots think selfishly - although I've seen them do some pretty impressive things when they stick together. I would also ask, is it selfish to chase after trans-con turns when your in the top 200? If it's all in the name of profit sharing I guess anything is OK.
We'll see how this all turns out. Maybe I'm wrong and the ENTIRE industry will benefit from this program. If it becomes another tool for the rich to get richer you know that I won't be caught resting.
One more word on AMP. Does anyone else find it a little anoying and somewhat "big brotherish" that we are going to be advised on how to take care of ourselves at home in order to come to work rested? I'll spend my time with my family the way I want to and I will seek to maximize it at every opportunity. I don't need a lecture on how to do that.
What I have just laid out is something that (at this point) I would never say in a pocket session - so this message board for me has once again proven it's worth.
Fly safe friends.

This my second try at my first post because the first disappeared.
If it double posts, I apologize.
My message was that I believed the transcon AMP science is valid. Sadly, I don't trust JB scheduling to properly administer it. They follow "guidlines" when it's convenient. When they get in a jam, all that goes out the window and we have many guys here that are too "mission-oriented" to call BS.
As usual, this will benefit a small number of very senior pilots. The rest of us will be negatively or neutrally impacted. Not counting the "re-education" during our commutes, of course.

The problem is there is no science behind the 8 hour rule. We are running a test program that will yield empirical evidence as to the the physiological effects of the 8 hour waiver. Until then, we are all naive because we just don't know the effect on flight safety, but we will.

Those of you that have worked at 3 or 4 airlines have a right to be skeptical, even cynical. But a word of caution...your skepticism can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy of "us vs. them," and you will end up with the exact situation you had at your previous airlines. Is that what you want? Do you think the result will be any different? Do you want to be looking for work in another five years?

Realistic, how do you figure the 8 hour waiver will result in fewer pilots? We will still have a set number of hours divided by a number of pilots flying 80-85 hours per month. Monthly divisors will be about the same, so there should be no incentive to reduce the number of pilots, unless we up the 100 hour rule, extremely unlikely. The effect on reserves remains to be seen. The seniority rule is a valid issue, and I strongly suggest you take up some of your concerns in a pocket session. Why not? However, I suspect senior pilots will end up with productivity of about 8-9 hours a day, with junior about 6 hours, an improvement for everyone, if you ask me. Time will tell.

This forum is a great exchange of ideas and thoughts, and I welcome the comments from outside JB as well. Thanks.

If you have ever been on reserve at JetBlue, you would know that our crew scheduling is famous for bending rules when it benifits them. I think that the top 200 will make out very well but the "bad" transcon turns will go to Jr. guys on reserve.

blueside

And the reserves will get those "bad" transcons untill they approach
guarantee and then they will be "parked" for the remainder of their 18-19 duty days a month. There is absolutely no incentive for transcon turns if you're on reserve.

Meworry,
I think you're assuming that the monthly line averages would remain the same and that days off would be the only thing to increase. In an airline of our size a movement in monthly line averages for the top third to say 90 hours would result in fewer line holders for a given number of pilots. I say the top third because one would assume that at some seniority level, trans-con turns would run out.
No one would deny that a pilot who could concievably fly 90-95 hours with 20 days off would push very hard to move those averages up and a company faced with staffing problems would be inclined to oblige. Once the cat was out of the bag, it would be very hard to put it back in - and - you suddenly put the breaks on upgrades. That kind of flexibility would allow you to run LGB with 40 crews instead of 50.
Great way to fix a staffing shortage - bad way to fix the grumbling about pay disparity.
How about a trade? We rationalize premium pay into a fixed hourly rate in return for trans-con turns. The masses get a raise and the super senior get a sweet schedule.
Win - win.

I'm all for rationalizing pay...that would be a pay raise for us reserve lineholders. I'm not sure that the 8 hour waiver would result in a smaller base at LGB, probably the opposite. It would then make more sense to base more crews at LGB to cover more transcons, which is most of the LGB flying. Also, remember that this covers more than transcon turns. Lots of other combos that can result in more than 8 hours, so I think the benefit will accrue to a larger group than just the top third.

'Course, I could be wrong...

We're probably both wrong. I have a feeling though, that if we stuck trans-con turns into the optimizer - we would be capable of doing some different things in terms of staffing. LGB hasn't benefited yet from more trans-cons or additional bases or even the American slots, but I suppose it could happen. I have no doubt that they will benefit some pilots at LGB.
We are frequently reminded that: "we are an East Coast airline."
I hope the boys in Kew are saying this in the same tone that I heard it, when they talk to prospective new hires. It's fairly common to see some "unrealistic" expectations out there.
In my case the unfulfilled hype has been predictable.
I hope (like you do) that we can break the cycle that we've seen played out at every major airline in America. But, the total-compensation disparity between the top and bottom of the seniority list (as compared to every other major airline) will become more apparent to more pilots as the months pass and THIS will be the main reason that we probably won't escape this cycle.
Even if we don't - we still have the best product in the industry and a very good group of experienced pilots who are painfully aware of what can happen if you don't execute efficiently.

First, a disclaimer... I am not a jetBlue pilot, but the way this industry is going, it behooves us all to keep tabs on what is happening at the survivors.

A question. Are these tests being conducted yet? I had dinner with a guy who was doing a DH JFK-OAK, layover, DH back. This sounded to me as if he was acting as the safety pilot for the tests, but I didn't know for sure if you all had started flying them yet.

Next, I'll be honest. I am concerned somewhat about the safety of such a schedule. If you have a reserve pilot who lives a couple hours outside of New York, and he gets called for one of these turns, he will probably need to be on the road by 5am. So let's assume a 4:30am wakeup, and a 7am launch. Assuming an hour ground time, the landing back at JFK is going to be around 7pm. Two hour drive home... That's a LONG day. A few times at my airline (brand X), I have done a DH out to fly back transcon, and my experience has been that I am absolutely worthless during the final phases of the second leg. Add any sort of weather delays, mechanical problems etc., and it is going to be a LONG night. I'm assuming that the prevailing thought is that if you get to OAK and you are fatigued, that you would not fly back. That's fine, but you could easily feel fine in OAK, and 5 hours later be functioning at a VERY reduced level of awareness. It only takes one accident to make the whole project not worth it.

Believe me I understand the desire for more efficient schedules... we all want more time at home. Let me also say to those of you that commute: You are ALWAYS welcome on my jumpseat. Although I have never had the opportunity to ride on your airline, I am well aware that you have the best jumpseat policy in the business. I'm sure that there will be those who try to use the jumpseat as a tool to "punish" your efforts; I find this deplorable. We are all just trying to get to work...

See you on the line.

mm320Cap,

Thanks, appreciate the thought on jumpseating.

Yes, some tests have been done. I know the exact turn you mentioned was flown on Mother's day. I got called on a day off to be the safety pilot (turned it down...Mother's Day?!). Have not heard any results yet, but probably will not hear anything until all tests are done and evaluated.

Your points are well taken. I hope (and believe) that JB has the fortitude to try something based on an honest evaluation that it will work well for all involved. I expect something that will change over time as we gain experience and feedback from the pilots, if it is approved at all.

That is a danger and a challenge. With competing intrests can you really find an honest evaluation ?

Management will like the reduced manpower the waiver will create - works well for them.

Line holders will like having 18 days off per month and have the ability to rest in preparation for reduced rest pairings - works well for them too.

Reserves will pay with reduced margins of safety by not being able to properly rest for such pairings. Of course one or even two of these trips would be OK for most of us. The real danger comes from the prolonged and cumulative sleep debt of several months of reduced rest flying. That's where the JB reserve pilots will get hammered - and the entire operation see's a reduction in the margin of safety. Is it an accident waiting to happen? Who knows. Does it reduce the margin of safety? For reserve pilots - I think so.

Worth a disclaimer here - I'm not a JB pilot so take the above with a grain of salt.

Good luck with the program

Watch,

If this works out, there will be no reduction of pilots. Remember, we will still be flying the same number of hours, just in a smaller number of days. The company average will still be around 85 hours. This will mean the number of line holders will be the same.

The 18-22! days per month will be great if it all works out.

I don't think there will be a reduced margin of safety due to sleep debt. I expect there will be some minimum number of hours of rest between turns. I would expect something like 10-12 hours minimum. That gives good rest. Remember the "work day" will be the same or shorter than some of our long 4 leg/8 hour days running up and down the east coast with the great "productivity sits" in the middle.

As for reserves, remember with a reduced number of pilots flying per day, the number of reserves needed to replace this reduced number of line holders per day will should be reduced somewhat. What that means to me is that we can use these extra pilots to increase the total number of reserves and implement some improvements to the reserve system (long callout, late report, early release, etc). More reserves will allow this to actually happen and thus make reserve less painful, and maybe even desired by those who live in NYC or where based. All of this will reduce the demand on the reserves thus eliminating their fatique also. Remember, that reserves have limited windows where they can fill a "transcon turn" so they will only be options for such during their first few hours of a reserve period. After that, they would be illegal to fly a turn. So I don't think the reserves will be at risk.

Anyway, I guess we will all have to wait and see.

Just my opinion......

FNG

Like many, I tend to be a cynic these days... :)

With the reserve rest "look back" rule and some in house oversight, it "could" work with acceptable margins of safety.

That's a good point about shorter duty days with no sits at out stations, hadn't thought of that. At carrier "x", there was a rule that the duty day was a function of home domicile start time. If you released brakes at 0300 (for example) body clock time, then the duty was reduced. I recall that duty day was reduced 6 minutes for each minute prior to 0600 body clock time that the brakes were released.

That might be a good tool with the 8 hour waiver to ensure the waiver is an efficiency tool, and not a manpower tool. For every minute of 8 hours of flight time - max duty day is also reduced.

NASA Ames has lots ands lots of scientific data on sleep debt that they share for free. Might be a good resource: http://human-factors.arc.nasa.gov/zteam/

Cheers

As soon as a seat needs to be filled, it will be. A transcon turn that finishes at the end of a sixteen hour duty day will not be a leap forward for safety.

My other concern is how long it will take before the elimination of the 8 hours of flight per duty period changes from a "waiver" to a memory. In that case, imagine this.

SFO-NRT is now a 2 pilot flight.
ORD-LHR is now a 2 pilot flight.
LAX-AUK is now a 2 pilot flight.

Yikes.

From a guy who now flys NRT-HNL with 2 pilots on the back side of the clock...it's downright scarey.

I Think I am missing something. Why get a waiver for the 8 hour rule, when we can’t get schedules with an avg. daily block (ADB) of 7 hours now? HM……….

I think it’s better to give 800 pilots a 1hr ADB increase than give the top 200 3 or 4 hours. Wouldn’t this keep Safety our # 1 value, create more RSRV’s, give us more days off, save the company money, keep the whole pilot group happy instead of the top 200, and give Loyd the scheduler less ammo to screw with us?

Maybe I don’t have the BIG PICTURE.

Good points Kermit
aletness management? they should call it premium pay plus - early retirement

So, we will have 5 hour 2 day trips and 10 hour 1 day trips.

Another division!

What is less safe? A morning JFK-LGB with a day sleep followed by a red eye LGB-JFK or a morning BUF-JFK-LGB-JFK. I say the former is much less safe having done them both.

I assume you weren't working a 121 flight at the time you did the latter!

I'm not arguing the science isn't there. I'm saying JB scheduling can't handle it. Let's use a more benign pairing. BUF-JFK-SLC-JFK. MX, wx, whatever, the flight is delayed on the ground in SLC. Do you think the crew should continue up to the FAR limit of a 16 hour duty day? I don't. I'm sure the "guidlines" that acompany this won't either. Do you think JB is going to Lear Jet a crew into SLC to keep within those company "guidlines"? Right. The magic P-R mantra will be invoked (profit-sharing).
And the trip will continue...

Maybe we should give the top 200 guys double pay instead of time and a half on those transcon turns. After that we can all chip in and buy them tickets to get to work so they don't have to jumpseat like the rest of us. I have heard that JetBlue mgmt has spent upwards of $1,000,000 to conduct the research to get the top 200 a better QOL. Money well spent.

Don't forget:
auxiliary fuel tanks
dual HUDS
manufacturer's training
managers, directors, and miscellaneous hangers-on out the ying yang
snow globes
and
leather jackets...
AMP is just a few million dollars, why should we worry about spending money when we have our costs under control?
Hell, we're the lowest cost carrier in the industry! We SHOULD be spending money!

I'm going to make a prediction and this forum allows me to save it for posterity.
Transcon turns will be GREAT for a few and they will SUCK for a few.
The rest of us will either see no improvement or, our mid-seniority lines could be robbed of productive flying....hard to say.
One thing is for sure...we won't need as many pilots in a given base to fly a given set of hours.
For posterity.

Normally I agree 100% with everything you say, but for once I do disagree with you.

I will admit that is very possible that it could come out just the way you say, but is also just as possbile and I feel more likey to work out that everyone see a productivity increase. It may be 2-4 hours per day for the senior guys, but I predict that it will still filter down to the middle and junior bidders. The junion bidder will most likely only get 30 minutes per day increase but that is still a step in the right direction. Hey, SJU will be come a middle bidder trip with all of the transcon turns going senior. Remember most of our trips are transcons now, so doing as many as turns (with in the critera of max 2 flights, and operate 7am-9pm. Yes, there will still be redeyes and we will have to see what happens with them.

As for less pilots, sort of. Remember everyone will still have the 30/7 and 100/month restrictions. It will allow you to get 90-95 per month if you want to, but that means commuting up to JFK for a single 1 or 2 day trips. Remember four commutes means less time off. (I prefer 3 commutes per month) and I am for quality of life. But if we all fly our 80-85 hours per month the number of line holders will remain the same, so no decrease in line holders. Now if JB wanted to control the number of pilots who go above 85 hours, all they have to do is reduce the min/target/max divider and give out most of the opentime to the senior reserves so no one can pick it up.

Now, where there could be a reductions is the required number of reserves needed. Since there will be less pairings per day to cover, there could be a reduction in the required number of reserves. Thus JB could use those reserves to allow more PTO/UTO/Triptarding as we are suppose to get, or you reduce pilot hiring to get us back down riding the edge of manning like w are now. I hope the do what I am say, but they could do the reduce hiring slightly.

On a side note, if the transcon turns do happen, then I don't think it will affect the E190. Since is supppose to be a 2 leg day, and since the 190 will mainly be moving up and down the east coast they won't see it any time soon.

Any way, I hope it happens, but we will all have to wait and see. :)

Just my opinion.....

FNG

In talking to those in the test, the primary goal is two legs, with the ability to go above 8 hours, but remain within the normal scheduled 14 duty day and remaining on a eastcoast night sleep cycle (or west coast for LGB guys) and no redeye turns as that is out of our normal sleep cycle. There may be some type or rest restrictions after such a trips but unknow at this time. Thus the BUF-JFK-LGB-JFK or the BUF-JFK-SLC-JFK is out because that is has 3 legs in it. I see some definte transcon turns JFK-LAS-JFK or JFK-LGB-JFK et al, but also allows some really creative parings like this

Day 1 JFK-MCO-JFK-TPA RON (7.5 hours)
Day 2 TPA-JFK-LGB RON (9.0 hours)
Day 3 LGB-JFK-Buf-JFK end (7.5 hours)

That gives 24 hours in 3 days for an average of 8 hour per day.

For LGB it could be:

Day 1 LGB-JFK-MCO RON (7.5 hours)
Day 2 MCO-JFK-OAK RON (9.0 hours)
Day 3 OAK-JFK-LGB end (11.5 hours)

That gives 28 hours in 3 days. Man, I would love to get a schedule like that! They are all built with less than 8 hours per day with 3+ legs or if over 8 hours, then 2 legs max.

Now, yes the senior guys may get a schedule like this (depending on rest requirements)

Day 1 JFK-OAK-JFK (11+30 hours)
Day 2 JFk-OAK-JFK (11+30 hours)
Day 3 JFK-FLL-JFK (5+40 hours)

or

Day 1 JFK-OAK-JFK (11+30 hours)
Day 2 JFk-FLL-JFK late in the day for extra rest after Transcon turn (5+40)
Day 3 JFK-OAK-JFK (11+30) hours

for a total of 28+40 in three days. Working a total of 86 hours in 9 days. As a senior bidder that is what they would get. But if senior guys get 85 in 9 days, hopefull, the junior guys will be able to get 85 ours in 12 days! That would be real progress!

Now who knows what will happen, but I think it will work out. (keeping my fingers crossed).

Just my opinion....

FNG :)

The latter was done during the scientific study.

We (Other Airlines) will be watching this with great interest.

I spent some time on our ALPA safety committee and did some research into fatigue and attended a NASA sponsored seminar. The success of this waiver will depend on the rest in between duty periods and the rotation of schedules. Flag rules address some of this type of flying. FAR 121.481 says that you will get 18 hours of rest if you have flown more than 8 hours in any 24 hour period. That is a good guideline. Anything less than 18 hours would not give your body a chance to recover and give you time to commute home (driving or flying), eat, rest and attend to anything you may need to do at home.

Also, I don't know what limts you have on back side of the clock flying. If you try to do an OAK turn or SEA turn starting at 8 pm (EST) and returning at 8 am you will run into serious fatigue issues. We have an 11 hour duty limit for back side of the clock flying. We also have a rule that if you fly through your circadian low (3 to 5 am home base time) you cannot operate another leg after you land. The only exception is for wx diversions and you can still cancel for fatgue if you need to. I've done a couple of those diversions and we were wasted after the flight.

Fatigue is an insideous thing. You generally cannot tell your personal level of fatigue. It's kind of like drinking, the effects sneak up on you and you need an outside observer to determine your level of effectiveness.

Hopefully JetBlue is doing this study on a scientific basis and has independent observers to quantify the results. Just because the faa signs the waiver doesn't mean that it is safe, just politically correct.

Realistic,

Please explain how we won't need as many pilots in a base with tcon turns. A pilot doing transcon turns will work 7-9 days a month for about 88 hours. Hours are the factor here not how fast you get them. The amount of hours will remain the same so the number of pilots required to fly those hours will remain the same.
If that is not true please help me understand.
Thanks

Explain how you're so sure average monthly credit won't go up - even it if it is driven up by the top 200? Why not get paid even more for the same days off if you can work it? It's always cheaper for the company to pay one person premium pay than it is to keep another full time body on the property.

As an example:
Say 10 LGB pilots get 8 TCON turns a month for 88 hours with 22 days off, or for that matter, 8 TCON turns are introduced for the whole base. We drive the line holder average way up and force another couple guys out on reserve - because lord knows our block hours won't go up.
So now we run the base with fewer pilots for a given set of hours - anyone that gets fed up and bids out will never make it back.
Those of you reading this that are already 320 line holders could care less but remember that from August forward the number of people who DO care gets larger and larger.

Actually we do care what happens to our brethren regardless of seniority. They can't drive max schedule over 90 hours for more than a month or two because of the 1000 hour rule so I still don't get what your point is. Our reserve system does need to be revamped but I don't think TCON turns is going to lengthen anyone's time on reserve.