![]() |
| | #51 |
| Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 172
|
Transcon turns are pretty normal in Canada.
|
| |
| | #52 |
| Moderator Join Date: May 2003 Location: GRR
Posts: 8,631
|
Flyover & Doug, I'm not quite sure why you guys seem to be disagreeing over this. Looks to me like you guys are talking about two different things. Specifics versus general policiy issues. Apples and fruitcakes. Flyover says that the specific trips as outlined by JB would be very popular with crews (work 10 days a month), while DT argues that changing the rules (allowing exceptions, at least) will be bad in the long run for pilots as the exceptions are used against them. I'm sitting here going "yup, I agree" and "yup, I agree". Neither position precludes the other, IMHO. |
| |
| | #53 |
| Old Skool Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Georgia
Posts: 3,389
|
I agree. |
| |
| | #54 |
| Old Skool |
Guess, for certain pairings it would not be that bad, doing a JFK-LGB-JFK would not be that bad as long as the turn-around time in LGB was not that long, "2" hours or less. Really need to see the pairings that are being proposed. At Polar, the pilots would do HNL-LAX-HNL turns, they would block under "12" hours of flight time & the pilots liked them, got their flying in quicker and resulted in more days off. The killers was the duty time. This exemption would have to be limited to certain flights, and the duty time would have to be watched. Would not want to see a pilot flying JFK-LAX-MIA-ATL in one day.... |
| |
| | #55 |
| Old Skool Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Georgia
Posts: 3,389
|
We used to have a day on the -88 that went ORL-ATL-SHV-DFW-SAN or something like that. Now that was a killer. |
| |
| | #56 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Low Earth Orbit
Posts: 1,389
|
[ QUOTE ] We used to have a day on the -88 that went ORL-ATL-SHV-DFW-SAN or something like that. Now that was a killer. [/ QUOTE ] I'd love an easy day like that (4 legs/2000 nm)....Try BOS-DAB-SEA-SAN Of course......I wouldn't want to do either of them every day. |
| |
| | #57 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Bossier City, Louisiana
Posts: 591
|
[ QUOTE ] ...drag CEO into cockpit for 8 hours flight time. adreamer [/ QUOTE ] That would be about as productive as dragging Bill Clinton into a #####house to teach him not to be a sexual predator! |
| |
| | #58 |
| Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: NJ/ NY, USA
Posts: 52
|
I thought the time and duty limits were about to be revamped anyway? i thought i heard rumors that it was going to be in the new FAR's? Compared to the 135 fellas who are flying 16 or more hour days ferrying aircraft back to their base (say 8 hours overseas and then 8 hours back 91 where there are no regs on duty limits) this doesnt sound so bad. But who is to say they keep the max # of hours a month allowable the same if they are willing to push the hours around for this? I dont think JetBlue should be asking this question. I cant wait for the day when pilots can stand up and command a nice wage and working conditions but with this race to the bottom shown ... even for those who say Jetblue is the greatest thing since sliced bread i dont think its going to be in the next decade. It's all fun and games till somebody loses and eye... then its a new game FIND THE EYE! It's all fun and games until someone loses an airplane.... |
| |
| | #59 |
| Old Skool Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Georgia
Posts: 3,389
|
At least you cruise fast and high. We used to have to beat that -88 out across the Rockies at 310. In the summer we seldom held a heading more than 5 minutes as we dodged the thunderstorms and overhangs that guys like you were cruising above. But I'm not complaining. Wait, yes I am. |
| |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |