I tend to agree with this. The landings were never really an issue because there was usually plenty of guys who wanted to go for bounces, and/or Captains were pretty good about getting everyone the landings they needed. Not knowing your break wasn't fun, though going to Europe you could always get first break if you wanted it lol.

 

I agree. And that’s why I’m glad I don’t wear a double-breasted blazer. If I’m flying then I want the last break. Easy peasy. If I’m bunkie then I know I’m on first break. It’s pretty simple to plan accordingly.

 

This isn't an issue at UA with scheduled flying and IRO lines. With so much focus on fatigue and rest, I am surprised other airlines make the flying/IRO position decision at the preflight briefing.

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but Other than what 117 dictates about PF and PM breaks, there’s nothing would stop a Captain as PM from saying they want to take the first break correct? Picking a bunkie position doesn’t guarantee you first break .

 

see my post above, but scheduled Flying vs IRO lines doesn’t guarantee which break you get. It might be common practice but it’s not spelled out in the FOM who gets what break other than meeting the 117/FRMS break requirements. I have however heard of professional bunkies getting upset when they don’t get first break.

 

You're correct. In my experience, by far the most common is for the IRO(s) taking first break. I've never had a trip that wasn't.

Not the end of the world, and not about being a professional bunkie, but it does kinda suck when you're looking at 15 hours, planned your rest for first break and now you're up front for the first half. Certainly the CA's prerogative, but 2 seconds of courteousy to contact your crew doesn't seem like too steep a hill to me...

 

In a four man crew it pretty much guarantees second break if you’re the flying guy.

 

im not a WB guy, so answer me this.

if you’re first break, that means you don’t do the takeoff and landing stuff. And all you do it sit there for the middle part of the flight. Is that about right? Sounds amazing coming from a NBCA flying 2-3 legs a day with 9.8 hour duty days.

 

Yup. Everyone has different opinions, but here's mine. You don't know what you don't know. The NB grind didn't seem like a grind (except for rare occasions where the schedule just blows up, reassignment, IROPS, etc). But now the thought of going back, takes A LOT of consideration. I don't think there are many jobs, aviation or not, with this work to pay ratio. You hear it talked about in the NB world, but it is a totally different airline.

Having said all that... it can be freaking BORING and a little soul crushing IMO being perma bunky. I'm a pilot, I enjoy flying, and I want to fly and be proficient, not feel like a FNG every time I'm in the cockpit. There's also the rest issue, how you handle circadian shifts, etc, but everyone knows that. Without super seniority in the NB left seat (and, to a lesser extent, some seniority in the right of the WB) there isn't much of a middle ground. Either the grind or feel like you're barely employed here.

Highly base, somewhat seniority, and situationally dependent, a sweet spot for now is reserve, not being used, and picking up the occasional two-day transcon for landings. One 4/5 hour leg a day with a 24-hour layover. Rough work...

 

Unpopular opinion, but if we (or the company) really wanted experience in the left seat, no FO on any fleet should come anywhere close to CA compensation, NB or WB. But they just decided to let new hires do it, so here we are with a 737/320 regional operation and 30-year WB FOs.