Why do you fly?

[shafs64]

because I want to be very poor and die with no money.

 

 

[facthunter]

You could achieve that by being a farmer.

 

Ive just thought of a good reason to fly. Because today you can and Julius Ceasar couldn't. Nev

 

 

[Phil Perry]

Down at my local Chinese restaurant,. . . . . an unimaginable old Chinese man once told me that one of the Chinese emperors was presented with a man who had made a glider which he actually flew from a large hill. . . .the emperor interviwed the clever man, and said that this was a really clever thing to do and the man was complimented on his engineering ability. At the end of the royal interview, the emperor called his guards and told them to cut off the man's head.

 

The man was dumbfounded,. . .he said to the emperor, . . ."But your Imperial Highness,. . . . I thought you said that this was a GOOD thing . . .? " the emperor replied,. . . ."Yes . . it is extremely clever, but one day, I can imagine people using your invention to drop rocks on my palace from a great height. . .and that is NOT going to happen" .

 

**Acredited to. . . . the late Mr. John Whalley, of Luprena Street, Mansfield, Brisbane, Independent Historian, specialising in Chinese history . . . . 1973.

 

 

[dutchroll]

This is another great video !!! I could only dream of doing this now at my age, I envy you young guys that have the opportunity to take this career path..David

 

Lol. Here's a synopsis of what is not shown in this somewhat idealistic video:

00:30 - After departure you fly through the rain shower only to be hit by moderate turbulence. It stays with you on your short hop for half an hour. Meals don't get served. Tea and coffee service is cancelled. Passengers start complaining. One is getting really irritated. Might need to call security on arrival.

 

00:50 - Dense traffic in the area. You need to change level but can't get a word in edgeways. Everyone is stepping on the transmissions. On your 7th attempt you finally get through.

 

01:20 - Tower trying to cram too many aircraft in the sequence. You go-around due to runway occupied. It's a mess. Busy airport and you get vectored on a very wide circuit. Now you're running low on fuel because the company always only wants you to take the bare minimum. Can't afford to go-around again. They better not stuff this one up.

 

01:36 - Turn into the gate. Red light on the aerobridge. You have to stop. No-one there to operate the bridge. Too short-staffed and they're all busy on other aerobridges. It will be a 10 minute wait standing off the gate. In the meantime you're blocking the taxiway and everyone else starts queuing up behind you. They all start calling up the company Ops freq complaining. "When is that aircraft going to get on the gate? We're already late! What do you mean a 10 minute wait? A scheduled service and you didn't know it was coming? How can you be short staffed?"

 

01:40 - Get to your hotel room. It's not made up. Blankets & sheets strewn everywhere. Back in the elevator. Back down to the lobby. Walk over to reception with steam coming out of your ears. It's been a long day, they've known you were coming in at this exact time for days, and and you really didn't need this crap. (Happened to me just the other day!)

 

01:45 - Coffee machine in the room doesn't work and spits some disgusting garbage into your mug. Phone call to housekeeping.

 

01:50 - Breakfast arrives 40 minutes late, and it's cold. Room service girl apologises because "it's just so unusually busy at the moment".

 

02:08 - You're on a short slip. You go to the beach to relax for the first time in ages. It starts bucketing down rain.

 

02:10 - I cannot believe we're drinking this beer. It's crap!

 

02:15 - Enjoying the local sights. Kid comes up and tries to pickpocket you.

 

02:50 - Video of the B747 which is blocking the altitude you want. At this rate you won't have enough fuel to get to destination if he doesn't get the heck out of the way! You slow down to get separation so they'll let you climb. Now you're going to be late.

 

03:05 - What the Eiffel tower would look like if it wasn't completely obscured by cloud.

 

03:46 - What a rolled up ball of foil would look like being blown around by your air vent, except that your air vent has been unserviceable for the last 7 days on an MEL due to maintenance having no time to rectify it.

 

05:00 - You put the gear down way early because ATC have cut you in short on a vector and held you up way too high, so without it there's no way in hell you'll get back on the approach path!

 

05:30 - They've parked you on a remote bay and you'll need stairs. Except there aren't any available for another 15 minutes. Short staffed again.

 

05:42 - Day off 1. Yeah right. You're still buggered from the back-of-clock flying and you're in no mood to do anything except sleep today!

 

07:10 - Commuting. You almost miss your scheduled operating flight because all the flights are full and the company gives you no priority as a commuter.

 

07:53 - What fireworks would look like if they weren't obscured by cloud.

 

08:28 - You fly under the contrail of another aircraft. You hit its wake turbulence. Galley cart upended in economy. Coffee spilled all over Chairman's Lounge frequent flyer in Business.

 

09:35 - Last sector touchdown. Thank god this trip is over!

 

 

[SDQDI]

How's your week been so far dutchie?

 

 

[rgmwa]

LOL... and to think I once wanted to be an airline pilot!

 

rgmwa

 

 

[biggles]

Yeah , but that was only one day Dutch . Tell us about some of the good ones . Don't suppose you'll be doing Mel/Singapore next Wednesday by any chance . Bob

 

 

[dutchroll]

Yeah , but that was only one day Dutch . Tell us about some of the good ones . Don't suppose you'll be doing Mel/Singapore next Wednesday by any chance . Bob

No, I just did an unusual string of Singapores (I actually quite like Singapore, as opposed to most other Asian destinations of ours) all in a row. My penance will probably mean all-domestic next roster knowing my luck!

Yeah you do have good days, but airline flying has changed a lot in the last 10-15 years. You work a lot harder nowadays and airline management has become quite adversarial in recent years - certainly where I work anyway. Used to be a team effort with a bit of give and take, but now it's very much "us and them" with only the CARs to fall back on.

 

 

[facthunter]

Staff bashing is a sign of inferior management. There's a lot of "jealousy" in their attitude. They have no idea what your job really entails and care even less. Nev

 

 

[dutchroll]

There has been a new breed of airline CEO coming up through the ranks in recent years. Young, university educated, ruthless, so narcissistic that he could technically be classified as a genuine psychopath, sucked up to all the right people, and totally new to the business of his company. They're passengers along for the ride, suck the company dry over a few years while fudging a few book figures, then they move on to the next one. Same for Board members.

 

 

[facthunter]

It started in the USA probably 30 years ago. Look at the failures they have had there. Shenanegens abound with complex bankruptcy laws. Airlines are rarely true profit makers. It usually needed a government freight contract. If you added all the costs and all the expenses over the whole history of commercial aviation it won't come out a plus figure. Nick Xenophon has some info on what you are talking of. The world wide "grounding" was interesting.The facts on that would make interesting reading.

 

Years ago I did a tertiary Psychology Course at the University of NSW. Most of those attending were Business Management over 30's types. The course was fine but what those people wanted from it was an eye opener to say the least. Essentially it was to fool the workers, rather than understand and work with them..

 

There is an enormous resource in the workers. The Germans have enough brain power and mature ego's to utilise this, and it shows in their results. Naming ourselves the "Clever Country" is one of the greatest acts of stupidity we indulge in here.. Nev

 

 

[alexbrown2005]

I fly because I've always loved aviation. I took my first commercial flight at six, to Los Angeles. While, over time, my dream of flying did take a back seat to school and university, it never once died. I took a TIF last year, and was hooked. I dropped my Law degree and am now in my last year of an Arts degree, with 28 hours under my belt.

 

I've always been keen to fly for the Royal Flying Doctor Service. And one day, I will.

 

 

[dutchroll]

I could tell you some amazing facts about the grounding, but I won't detail them on this public forum. For example, certain individuals at the top actually issued directives which maximised the inconvenience to passengers (eg, leaving them stranded when they didn't need to be). This was a calculated move. When I saw the televised "apology to our customers" I wanted to vomit.

 

 

[facthunter]

How did the pilots get back home and how did they get crews to pick them up later? A Bizzarre move. Loss of loyal customers and just how much revenue?

 

 

[Gnarly Gnu]

I could tell you some amazing facts about the grounding, but I won't detail them on this public forum.

Can we move on from this stuff? Whilst many of your complaints may well be legitimate I'm not sure why they are on this thread. Not to be rude but general advice is if you hate your job look for another. If you (or your union) don't like the way the company is run buy a controlling interest and have a say, or start your own well run company.

 

 

[facthunter]

Talking about conditions in the type of jobs many seek is not really off topic. It might be an eye opener for a few here, who aspire to work for airlines, and is first hand information.. Your last 2 suggestions are hardly practical or realistic, Gnu.. Nev

 

 

[dutchroll]

Can we move on from this stuff? Whilst many of your complaints may well be legitimate I'm not sure why they are on this thread. Not to be rude but general advice is if you hate your job look for another.

They're not "complaints" as such, though they're not glowing endorsements either and you may well interpret it that way.

The thread is "why do you fly?". I fly for a living (for nearly 30 years now). An idealised video was posted purporting to reflect that flying-for-a-living world. Though there are certainly good times, the reality is quite different from the video. Totally on topic, and vastly more so than some other threads!

 

If you (or your union) don't like the way the company is run buy a controlling interest and have a say, or start your own well run company.

Not how it works in a very large Board-run airline in a comfortable duopoly owned by large institutions!

 

 

[Keith W]

Things getting very serious on this thread, how about to get away from the missus.

 

 

[Geoff13]

Things getting very serious on this thread, how about to get away from the missus.

No my missus flys with me.

 

 

[Phil Perry]

PRAYER - O - PLANE

 

Following on from one of the comments in Dutchroll’s very entertaining post re; The company wanting us to fly with the bare minimum fuel upload,. . . . .

 

I’ve just read an article in a national daily newspaper entitled “Prayer-O-Plane” where in 2014, “Watchdogs” allegedly “Caught” 111 separate Brit registered RPT flights

 

“Flying on empty “

 

Out of the 111, 11 ( eleven ) of these (allegedly ) declared a fuel emergency in order to achieve priority over preceding flights in an approach stack. As with most newspapers, the article is “Funnified” with a picture of a car fuel gauge showing zero, and an A380 airbus with a speech bubble emanating from the cockpit saying “We’re a NO FILLS airline. . .”

 

I believe that the airline company dispatchers are usually God with regard to most flight ops, but is the captain of the aircraft not ultimately responsible for ensuring sufficient fuel upload for most contingencies, or is there really that much corporate “Career threatening” pressure brought to bear on aircrew to be frugal to the point ( apparently ) of stretching their chances a little ?

 

These stats seem a bit on the high side, and the “Watchdogs” refused to name the actual airline to which all of the eleven incidents (allegedy ) refer .

 

I can’t possibly have any idea what tax structure Airlines operate within, but I would have thought that the companies ought to be able to claim a proportion of the fuel cost as a reasonable expense ?

 

I have not had time to have a quiet word with the ( quite a few ) current RPT crew that I regard as friends, but I don’t suppose they would want to be TOO free with information since several of them have mentioned the confidentiality clauses insisted upon by the employers, so I don’t expect anyone to stick their neck over the parapet just to satisfy my curiosity !

 

Good post anyway Dutch, very informative.

 

Phil[/Quote][/Quote]

[facthunter]

Having less fuel on board doesn't save fuel It lets you carry more passengers and baggage as you are usually weight limited at some point. Unless you get a high load factor you can be operating at a loss. Where you end up losing money big time is having to divert, from places like Perth where you fly a big distance to a suitable aerodrome. Nev

 

 

[dutchroll]

The dispatchers are not "God" in the airline. The Captain is God in most countries, including here. However it's company policy that flight plans are always prepared with the bare-bones minimum fuel legally required. Eg, if a TEMPO period with thunderstorms finishes 5 minutes before the buffer period based on ETA, the extra hour's fuel will not be planned.

 

There are however many pressures to carry the minimum flight plan fuel. Some airlines (eg, yours truly) have entire "fuel conservation" departments run by a senior manager. They are always publishing emails and memos about saving fuel or not putting on extra fuel. At various times they have published spec charts to all aircraft Captains graphing their relative "additional fuel" orders against everyone else's. This is an overt attempt to pressure them into carrying less additional fuel. Before anyone asks - no there is not and never has been a "fuel bonus". It's all done with procedural policies and not-so-subtle pressure from the fuel conservation department. It's also a requirement to do a report when you uplift over a certain amount of additional fuel. This is yet another way of pressuring pilots to carry less, because pilots hate paperwork.

 

We are covered by CARs and airlines here in Australia know that very well. The aircraft Captain not only "can", but "must" uplift whatever fuel he feels is necessary for the safe conduct of the flight and there's nothing airline management can do about that here. Consequently I'm unaware of anyone in my neck of the woods - even those on the higher end of the fuel spec charts - who have had their careers threatened. Pressuring a Captain to breach federal laws would be taken pretty seriously by the authorities and the general public.

 

It does actually cost fuel to carry extra fuel due to the weight increase (doesn't matter whether that weight is extra fuel or cargo or whatever). This number is always published on our computer flight plan. It is pretty trivial on short sectors, but reasonably significant on longer ones or when the aircraft is much heavier.

 

Eg: on a short domestic sector this might be something like 10 kg of fuel per extra tonne of weight which we would consider insignificant. Looking at my most recent plan for an 8 hour flight, the extra fuel burn was calculated at 234 kg per tonne. So if we put on, say, 2 tonnes more fuel (or any weight) for whatever reason, we would burn an extra 468 kg of fuel during that flight. Again it's purely due to the weight increase, however the airline's point of view is that you don't make revenue carrying extra fuel, but an extra 2 tonnes of cargo will more than offset the 468 kg extra fuel burn with revenue.

 

 

[facthunter]

The fuel price differential comes into it too. You sometimes tanker fuel if the fuel en route is expensive The whole thing can get a bit involved, but there is pressure to carry just the legal requirements.

 

The point I tried to make is a divert when a small amount of extra holding fuel would have allowed an extra approach or two can save money. The plane becomes delayed and ruins a lot of scheduled connecting flights achieving an ontime departure throughout the day. This fact plus the extra fuel to the divert point and back is a big cost, perhaps not always being given the emphasis it deserves. You have extra landing charges too.

 

There is nothing more useless to an aircraft than the fuel you could have put on at the last aerodrome.. Nev

 

 

[Bennyboy320]

As long as you can back up a reason to carry the extra fuel there's never a problem, on the other hand if you have to divert & you've carried the flight plan fuel you are also covered, my company has stated that they would rather a few diversions a year than carrying extra fuel on every flight to cover the what if scenario, also most airlines fuel policy will only require a diversion when the destination is affected by wx, so if the wx is ok as long as you don't land with less than 30 mins of fuel no problems, if < 30 mins declare a MAYDAY (fuel emergency). Cant remember what the fuel policy was in Oz.

 

 

[Teckair]

I have found the posts by Dutch and FH interesting and informative.