Do you think the company would open a HNL 777 pilot base? HNL has 777 flights to SFO x3, LAX, DEN, ORD, IAH, GUM, NRT when the demand returns. For a place with that much service, it’s a 6hr dead head to get a pilot out from the west coast. It would help cover all the other Pacific 777 flying with a crew that is 6 hours closer. It would save a ton on hotels in a really expensive area.

I noticed we had a GUM-HNL that was delayed 14 hours today for crew. GUM is a long way from SFO to get a replacement crew out there.

Related question. Can you do GUM-HNL on the 737 Max?

 

No. It’s impossible to make predictions based on a snapshot of today’s world. COVID restrictions in Asia and the loss of Russian overflight are having a huge impact on the long haul schedule. I’d anticipate a reshuffling of 777 utilization as things get back to “normal.”Then again, I’m “frequently wrong, never in doubt.”

 

All those reasons were why we had a 747 base for a long time there. That's a lot more flying than some other small bases. Could happen, but I personally don't think it's in the cards.

The big problem right now is the minimum layover in Guam. Now only about 13 hrs. It's already causing delays. A HNL domicile would help with that.

 

I'd apply if U had an HNL base! But I'd never get past the Hogan, so there's that.

 

Flew one of the last trips that was a 38 hour overnight. Captain and I had a long discussion about how 13 hours was never going to work. Looks like we were right. Typical airline stuff, pennywise, pound foolish.

 

JetDoc and Dave Fitzgerald, I’m not a 777 guy. What’s the issue with a 13 hour layover (besides a slight outbound departure delay if inbound is delayed?

When did it switch from a 38 hour overnight to what it is now?

Do we still fly a GUM-HKG cargo only flight? How is that staffed?

 

Having flown that trip I would be way against that short of a layover with all that flying packed in unaugmented. Reminds me of days at CAL where doing 3 day S America’s sometimes unaugmented was a great idea. Looks fine on paper, but a recipe for serious fatigue.

 

Good questions.
1. Just a few weeks ago.
2. The issue is 2 nearly maximum duty and flying days in a row on the back side of the clock, international flying with a basic crew, now down to min layover. FAR 117 mins, and min rest at the hotel means the slightest delay anywhere will impact the subsequent departures.
3. High chance of fatigue due to the long days. These flights are regularly full, both ways, and a huge money maker to not operate reliably. Lots of military traffic, and military cargo.
4. A large part of the traffic has connections out of HNL, so if the inbound is late, causes even more delays. Classic domino effect.
5. Yes, still flying the inbound to HNL from HKG cargo flights. That HKG turn is long enough it is augmented. Capt and 2 CP's.

The question will be asked if the operational unreliability is worth the reduced crew costs. Historically, the answer has been no, especially when it comes to long term military contracts.

 

If the crew is turning from HNL-GUM, which arrives at 6pm, to GUM-HNL, which departs at 8am, how would a 30 minute inbound delay cause a 14 hour outbound delay for crew rest?

 

Just put crews on FSB in GUM. kidding...