Spirit of NKS
03-10-2015 | 12:08 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
From: A320 Left
This is all b/c the F/A manual didn't allow it, and the AFA told the Spirit pilots "if pilots get to occupy the F/A jumpseat, then we should be able to occupy the pilot jumpseat".
Well, that's what I was told. If so, I'm wondering who is the weak sister that let the AFA castrate our PIC authority.
Well, that's what I was told. If so, I'm wondering who is the weak sister that let the AFA castrate our PIC authority.
As an aside, is there any chance we could get the second cockpit jumpseat reinstalled at some point? As this pilot group grows, we are only going to have more commuters.
03-10-2015 | 05:10 PM
Banned
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,347
Likes: 329
As a follow up question, booking the JS with the online method. It showed none listed and 1 available. Now that if it is booked is it true that it's yours unless a Spirit guy gets on at the airport and bumps you? Or does it go by first come, first serve at the airport for OAL regardless of when you booked online?
03-10-2015 | 05:29 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,603
Likes: 0
OAL should go by time of check in but not many agents nor captains know this because we go by time of listing.
03-10-2015 | 05:30 PM
Line Holder
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
As a follow up question, booking the JS with the online method. It showed none listed and 1 available. Now that if it is booked is it true that it's yours unless a Spirit guy gets on at the airport and bumps you? Or does it go by first come, first serve at the airport for OAL regardless of when you booked online?
03-10-2015 | 05:32 PM
Line Holder
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Who knows. If true, the AFA should have pushed to have OAL F/A's allowed to occupy the F/A jumpseat instead of disallowing OAL pilots from occupying the F/A jumpseat. Granting this courtesy could come with more reciprocal agreements for their F/A group.
Not enough room in the life rafts to support the additional jumpseat, so says the riddle guys.... might be true
As an aside, is there any chance we could get the second cockpit jumpseat reinstalled at some point? As this pilot group grows, we are only going to have more commuters.
Not enough room in the life rafts to support the additional jumpseat, so says the riddle guys.... might be true
As an aside, is there any chance we could get the second cockpit jumpseat reinstalled at some point? As this pilot group grows, we are only going to have more commuters.
03-10-2015 | 07:04 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,577
Likes: 0
I was wondering the same thing. Probably the same person that allowed the F/A jumpseat belongs to the Spirit Flight Attendants verbiage in the FOM.
Maybe we should hire AFA to negotiate for us.
Then again, that would cause an endless "me too" loop, so never mind.
03-10-2015 | 09:40 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
From: Underemployed!
It's only partially based in fact, but I don't believe it's the reason for a single jumpseat. It has 4 slide rafts with a 44 people capacity each, and a single remote raft with a 13 people capacity, for a total capacity of 189. Clearly enough room for 178 people, a crew of 6 and 2 jumpseats. However, FAR 25 requires a sufficient overload capacity to accomodate all occupants with the loss of a raft of the highest capacity. With the loss of a single slide raft, and 3 remaining rated for 55 overloaded, and the remote capacity is 20 overloaded, for a total of 185. 178+6 crew is 184, leaving room for 1 jumpseater. But that alone doesn't keep them from installing a second jumpseat, you just couldn't have someone occupy the seat, if full in the back, going beyond 50 miles offshore with the current raft compliment in use.
How do we know that? The 321 has the same 4 slide rafts, and 2 remote rafts capable of 25 each, for a total capacity of 226. Subtract the 218 seats, and a crew of 7, leaves you room for 1 jumpseater, yet it has 2 jumpseats installed. Oddly enough, it's 2 remote rafts are rated for 38 overloaded each, giving the 321 a loss/overload capacity of 241. Simply exchanging the 320's remote raft for one like the 321 carries would solve the problem, if the raft truly was the reason for a single jumpseat. Either way, raft capacity doesn't define seating capacity or configuration, simply how many people you can carry going beyond the 50 nm range from shore. The FAR's overwater required equipment references total occupants, not total seating capacity.
At the end of the day, we work for Spirit, the single jumpseat is a cost savings measure, nothing more.
Btw, I did hear of a flight where a captain called dispatch to reroute them inland to accomodate a second jumpseater on a full 321 flight from LGA to FLL. Not sure if it's true, but if so, great thinking on the captain's part to help a guy get where he needed to go. That's truly a "no pilot left behind" mentality we should all hope to offer!
03-10-2015 | 10:19 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 815
Likes: 0
From: Low paid Airbus gear slinger
This is a rumor I hear often regarding the single jumpseat on the 320 that really needs to be put to bed!
It's only partially based in fact, but I don't believe it's the reason for a single jumpseat. It has 4 slide rafts with a 44 people capacity each, and a single remote raft with a 13 people capacity, for a total capacity of 189. Clearly enough room for 178 people, a crew of 6 and 2 jumpseats. However, FAR 25 requires a sufficient overload capacity to accomodate all occupants with the loss of a raft of the highest capacity. With the loss of a single slide raft, and 3 remaining rated for 55 overloaded, and the remote capacity is 20 overloaded, for a total of 185. 178+6 crew is 184, leaving room for 1 jumpseater. But that alone doesn't keep them from installing a second jumpseat, you just couldn't have someone occupy the seat, if full in the back, going beyond 50 miles offshore with the current raft compliment in use.
How do we know that? The 321 has the same 4 slide rafts, and 2 remote rafts capable of 25 each, for a total capacity of 226. Subtract the 218 seats, and a crew of 7, leaves you room for 1 jumpseater, yet it has 2 jumpseats installed. Oddly enough, it's 2 remote rafts are rated for 38 overloaded each, giving the 321 a loss/overload capacity of 241. Simply exchanging the 320's remote raft for one like the 321 carries would solve the problem, if the raft truly was the reason for a single jumpseat. Either way, raft capacity doesn't define seating capacity or configuration, simply how many people you can carry going beyond the 50 nm range from shore. The FAR's overwater required equipment references total occupants, not total seating capacity.
At the end of the day, we work for Spirit, the single jumpseat is a cost savings measure, nothing more.
Btw, I did hear of a flight where a captain called dispatch to reroute them inland to accomodate a second jumpseater on a full 321 flight from LGA to FLL. Not sure if it's true, but if so, great thinking on the captain's part to help a guy get where he needed to go. That's truly a "no pilot left behind" mentality we should all hope to offer!
It's only partially based in fact, but I don't believe it's the reason for a single jumpseat. It has 4 slide rafts with a 44 people capacity each, and a single remote raft with a 13 people capacity, for a total capacity of 189. Clearly enough room for 178 people, a crew of 6 and 2 jumpseats. However, FAR 25 requires a sufficient overload capacity to accomodate all occupants with the loss of a raft of the highest capacity. With the loss of a single slide raft, and 3 remaining rated for 55 overloaded, and the remote capacity is 20 overloaded, for a total of 185. 178+6 crew is 184, leaving room for 1 jumpseater. But that alone doesn't keep them from installing a second jumpseat, you just couldn't have someone occupy the seat, if full in the back, going beyond 50 miles offshore with the current raft compliment in use.
How do we know that? The 321 has the same 4 slide rafts, and 2 remote rafts capable of 25 each, for a total capacity of 226. Subtract the 218 seats, and a crew of 7, leaves you room for 1 jumpseater, yet it has 2 jumpseats installed. Oddly enough, it's 2 remote rafts are rated for 38 overloaded each, giving the 321 a loss/overload capacity of 241. Simply exchanging the 320's remote raft for one like the 321 carries would solve the problem, if the raft truly was the reason for a single jumpseat. Either way, raft capacity doesn't define seating capacity or configuration, simply how many people you can carry going beyond the 50 nm range from shore. The FAR's overwater required equipment references total occupants, not total seating capacity.
At the end of the day, we work for Spirit, the single jumpseat is a cost savings measure, nothing more.
Btw, I did hear of a flight where a captain called dispatch to reroute them inland to accomodate a second jumpseater on a full 321 flight from LGA to FLL. Not sure if it's true, but if so, great thinking on the captain's part to help a guy get where he needed to go. That's truly a "no pilot left behind" mentality we should all hope to offer!
If that captain story is true, buy that man a beer. Two beers.
No pilot left behind
BTW - when we getting more 321s?
03-11-2015 | 04:55 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
03-11-2015 | 07:33 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,577
Likes: 0
This is a rumor I hear often regarding the single jumpseat on the 320 that really needs to be put to bed!
It's only partially based in fact, but I don't believe it's the reason for a single jumpseat. It has 4 slide rafts with a 44 people capacity each, and a single remote raft with a 13 people capacity, for a total capacity of 189. Clearly enough room for 178 people, a crew of 6 and 2 jumpseats. However, FAR 25 requires a sufficient overload capacity to accomodate all occupants with the loss of a raft of the highest capacity. With the loss of a single slide raft, and 3 remaining rated for 55 overloaded, and the remote capacity is 20 overloaded, for a total of 185. 178+6 crew is 184, leaving room for 1 jumpseater. But that alone doesn't keep them from installing a second jumpseat, you just couldn't have someone occupy the seat, if full in the back, going beyond 50 miles offshore with the current raft compliment in use.
How do we know that? The 321 has the same 4 slide rafts, and 2 remote rafts capable of 25 each, for a total capacity of 226. Subtract the 218 seats, and a crew of 7, leaves you room for 1 jumpseater, yet it has 2 jumpseats installed. Oddly enough, it's 2 remote rafts are rated for 38 overloaded each, giving the 321 a loss/overload capacity of 241. Simply exchanging the 320's remote raft for one like the 321 carries would solve the problem, if the raft truly was the reason for a single jumpseat. Either way, raft capacity doesn't define seating capacity or configuration, simply how many people you can carry going beyond the 50 nm range from shore. The FAR's overwater required equipment references total occupants, not total seating capacity.
At the end of the day, we work for Spirit, the single jumpseat is a cost savings measure, nothing more.
Btw, I did hear of a flight where a captain called dispatch to reroute them inland to accomodate a second jumpseater on a full 321 flight from LGA to FLL. Not sure if it's true, but if so, great thinking on the captain's part to help a guy get where he needed to go. That's truly a "no pilot left behind" mentality we should all hope to offer!
It's only partially based in fact, but I don't believe it's the reason for a single jumpseat. It has 4 slide rafts with a 44 people capacity each, and a single remote raft with a 13 people capacity, for a total capacity of 189. Clearly enough room for 178 people, a crew of 6 and 2 jumpseats. However, FAR 25 requires a sufficient overload capacity to accomodate all occupants with the loss of a raft of the highest capacity. With the loss of a single slide raft, and 3 remaining rated for 55 overloaded, and the remote capacity is 20 overloaded, for a total of 185. 178+6 crew is 184, leaving room for 1 jumpseater. But that alone doesn't keep them from installing a second jumpseat, you just couldn't have someone occupy the seat, if full in the back, going beyond 50 miles offshore with the current raft compliment in use.
How do we know that? The 321 has the same 4 slide rafts, and 2 remote rafts capable of 25 each, for a total capacity of 226. Subtract the 218 seats, and a crew of 7, leaves you room for 1 jumpseater, yet it has 2 jumpseats installed. Oddly enough, it's 2 remote rafts are rated for 38 overloaded each, giving the 321 a loss/overload capacity of 241. Simply exchanging the 320's remote raft for one like the 321 carries would solve the problem, if the raft truly was the reason for a single jumpseat. Either way, raft capacity doesn't define seating capacity or configuration, simply how many people you can carry going beyond the 50 nm range from shore. The FAR's overwater required equipment references total occupants, not total seating capacity.
At the end of the day, we work for Spirit, the single jumpseat is a cost savings measure, nothing more.
Btw, I did hear of a flight where a captain called dispatch to reroute them inland to accomodate a second jumpseater on a full 321 flight from LGA to FLL. Not sure if it's true, but if so, great thinking on the captain's part to help a guy get where he needed to go. That's truly a "no pilot left behind" mentality we should all hope to offer!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
