Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: GRUNHERZ on January 19, 2003, 09:12:41 AM
-
Was watching a show last night about 747s and they said that on the -400 the flight crew was reduced from 3 to 2, with the flight engineer position being eliminated. What happened with the excess flight engineers no longer needed on new planes, were they pilots as well, could they retrain to be pilots or copilots? What did the unions say about this?
-
At almost every airline, Flight Engineers are required to be rated pilots. The way it works is that you are hired as a pilot and must meet those requirements. However, in the old 3 pilot days, the lowest paying jobs generally the Flight Engineer jobs. So, new hires and junior pilots ending up filling those seats under the seniority bid system. (People tend to bid the highest paying equipment (job) they can hold. Not always, but usually.)
So, as a 3 pilot fleet is replaced by newer two pilot aircraft, the Flight Engineers have their bid "canceled" and they rebid other equipment.
New equipment doesn't arrive in a lump. It trickles in usually. It took my airline years to phase out its L-1011 three pilot aircraft and replace them with 2 pilot 767's.
So, it really isn't that big a deal given that you have retirements, medical retirements and such making new bids available all the time. Plus, if the airline is expanding... getting more total planes... the excess is easily absorbed.
Now, if you just got rid of aircraft, you could possibly end up with surplus pilots. If it got bad enough, they "furlough" the junior pilots. Basically, release them from all obligations with no pay or benefits but with "callback" rights if the airline expands again.
The Unions supported the switch; it was a matter of a negotiation in some areas (duty hours) but it went without a hitch just about everywhere.
-
Thanks for the good explaination! :) What did the flight engineers do, was it like on B29s for example where they took care of engines settings and now this is done by computers etc?
-
No, at my company the FE's did not touch the throttles at all. Some airlines had a different policy.
Generally FE's on the ground were responsible for the "walk around" inspection, ensuring all fluids quantities were correct (engine oil, etc.) and interior aircraft inspection (O2 bottles, fire extinguishers).
Inflight they monitored and adjusted the electrical, hydraulic, fuel, pressurization and air condidtioning and secondary engine systems/indications. They maintained the FAA required contact with Company dispatchers, monitored weather enroute and at destination and computed all performance data (max cruise altitudes, approach speeds). Secondarily, they dealt with passenger problems in the back and did minor "fix it" stuff for the Flight Attendants... like finding the circuit breaker for the galley coffee maker and resetting it.
In event of an inflight emergency, the FE read the checklist and made sure everything was accomplished in the proper order and double checked switch movment as the steps were followed. Many of the E-checklists consisted of mostly FE duties... like manual lowering of the gear on a 727.
Then there's the fact that they also provided "another set of eyes" in the cockpit. Always handy in high density traffic areas and always welcome during the really nasty instrument approaches.
Now without them on board, some things have been automated and some things have become MUCH more difficult. Some things just don't get done so they reclassified them as "unnecessary". IMO, in the really serious inflight emergencies in bad weather the FE is missed. But that's a rare situation and the bean counters accept the risk... because nothing happens to them. :D
But hey, getting rid of the FE's saved about $5 a ticket....... maybe not quite that much. ;)
-
Thanks again.
-
Just curious, how'd you come to these questions?
Doing a biz management paper on those bad old unions featherbedding?
;)
-
Discovery wings or one of those channels had a show about the 747 last night and they discussed how the plane evolved. One of them was how -400 got a new cockpit with no flight engineer and I assumed that wasnt just changing on the 747 so I got curious what happend with those people and what opportunities they had after the change - ie did the they become pilots or whaterver. I also wondered what the unions thought of this since they are of course very protectionist about job losses.
Now I will use this inside info to destroy all the unions and buy myself sharks with laser beams on their heads. Muhhhahhhaa. :D
Basically I was curious what happend to those guys.
-
Well, basically nothing happened to them. The transition was so gradual and the industry at that point was mostly expanding.
The company just put out a "system bid" that showed where they needed pilots and where they didn't (cancellations) and people "bid off" the equipment that was leaving and into new seats on aircraft categories that had vacancies. It was pretty painless.
I was already a F/O when it started in earnest, so it did not affect me at all.
There were some "ROPES", Retired Old Pilot Engineers, that were above age 60 and flying as Flight Engineers (no age restriction) that got squeezed out eventually. But by the time that happened most were in their upper 60's and ready to quit I think.
Very few folks in any event.
-
What do you think of the forced retirement age?
-
Personally, I'm in favor of it.
Two reasons:
1. I've flown with age 60 guys a lot on the International. Like all groups, it's a bell curve just like the rest of the population. Some are sharp as ever, some are "average" and some are clearly slowing down. So, you can devise a system to "test" or you can just have an agreed upon retirement age. The retirement age was agreed upon a long time ago. I don't buy the "losing valuable" experience thing, either. By the time you get to age sixty, just about everyone in that condition has at least 30 years in the job. So the guy taking his place, the guy "moving up a number" has... 29 years. Big deal. The only "inexperienced" pilots are the new hires and to get hired you probably have to have 3000+ hours of multimotor time now or 1500+ of fighter time minimum. Not rookies by a long shot and those guys will get 10 years of further seasoning in the right seat before they get their fourth stripe.
2. Every single one of the guys trying to go on past age 60 was overjoyed when he was younger and somebody retired by age. It meant they "moved up a number" on the list and more seniority means better pay, choice of vacation dates, choice of trips to fly. So they were all happy to see a guy retire. Heck, some of them kept lists in their flight kits and gleefully scratched guys off, keeping assiduous track of their rising status.
Now it's their turn and suprise, suprise... it's just not fair!
My view is "a deal's a deal". We all knew about age 60 when we hired on and we were all glad to "move up a number". Time to be a man about it and move on like the rest of 'em did.
-
Mr. Toad - interesting material here. :) Have you ever read "The Unfriendly Skies"? The anonymous airline captain reveals all... hehe - it could have been you who wrote it yourself - lol. In case it wasn't, there's a piece in there about what happens when there's a major air disaster in which the flight crew is lost. The author of the book states that morbid though it was, he would wonder to himself: "what was the captain's seniority number?"... What do you think of that?
Still waiting for you to check your logbooks for Friday 30th May, 1997 and the 8th of June following. ;)
-
It's so common there's a joke about it.
Just before V1, the Captain clutches his chest and keels over in the seat. What do you, as F/O, do?
Take control of the airplane, abort the takeoff and bring the aircraft safely to a stop. Take your seniority list out of your flight kit and cross the Captain off the list and update your number by minus one as you tell the Flight Engineer to "get that dead SOB out of my seat!" Call "checklist complete".
Seniority is everything. It's that simple.
Although no one's as coldblooded as this joke would have one believe or Mr. Unfriendly Skies would propose.
At least I hope not. Everybody is somebodies' Daddy ya know. ;)
-
BTW, Beetle... Here's your anonymous author.
Rodney Stich (http://www.defraudingamerica.com/author_bio.html)
Seems he has some......... issues....... with the Feds.
There's a bit of a "black helicopter" overtone to his bio here... and it sounds like he wrote it himself.
Ya just never know.
-
http://aviation-safety.net/cvr/cvr_ja46e.shtml
-3 is the flight engineer, who gets to say things like:
1245:30 {24:14}
CAM-3 thanks @, buddy. --- I don't care how much, you, I, how many beers I owe you in the past. this one I'm going to pay off on. OK?
-
Toad,
I flew Frontier Express the other day, a "Canadair" Shuttle. First I've ever heard of this jet. You know anything about it?
-
Probably the "RJ". It sort of defines the "Regional Jet"; we've got a slew of them.
Ridden the cockpit jump seat no them several times. Seems a very nice aircraft to operate. Somewhat power/altitude limited though and not especially fast for a jet.
Still, all airline managements are "hot" for these things. They were initially cheap to buy. IIRC, Comair got their first bunch for under 15 mil each. Now I hear they are in the 22 mil range. Usually flown by pilots at "entry level" in the industry so they can pay them low wages crap and get crews. (Son: Hey Mom! I'm an Airline Pilot now! F/O on an RJ! MOM: What do they pay you son? Well, $18K a year and I had to pay $18K for my training but NEXT year I'll make $18.5!) <--- Yeah, it's not that bad but it isn't real great.) And you'll notice management still charges the same for a ticket as they do for a flight on a "normal" jet
I don't think the comfort level in the back is anything the traveling public is going to fall madly in love with, however.
Still, RJ's are the "hot button" for the management lemmings and the phenom will have to run its course. RJ's have their uses and their limits. Right now, management has a hard time seeing the limits. Like when ours tried to run RJ's from Cincinnatti to Colorado Springs in the winter non-stop. Flight Ops told them it was too far but they flew for months stopping in KC to get gas. :D
-
RJ's definitely aren't comfy from a passenger standpoint, tho it's not too bad when you're on the single seat side. Of course, it didn't help matters of comfort that the AC on the ground wasn't working and this was at Bush in Houston... with a mom and her crying baby sitting across the aisle from me... :p
-
Canadair and Embraer make RJs, and I can't distinguish between the two. Seating's not bad: limited room for carry-ons (which may in fact be a Good Thing, except for the fact that they gotta have someone at the jetway take oversized carry-ons and stow them under.
Seat 1A (only seat in that row) is right behind the front left door (=the main loading door), and I can attest that at FL 30+ it gets pretty chilly.
Yeah, with RJs they can brag "All-jet service". And there are plenty of RJ pilots. AFAIK more than a few AH pilots fly RJs for a living.
-
Usually flown by pilots at "entry level"
I have to admit, that was one of the roughest landings I've experienced in a while.
My flight was Ontario, CA to Denver. Seems like a long haul for the little guy.
-
As regards Flight Engs - if I'm wrong I'm sure Toad will jump in - but I think a lot went to the freight companies as many of the old 3 crew pax planes were converted to freighters - we did a load of Tristar conversions at our place. Jumbo Classics went the same way - rip out the seats and stuff pallets roller tracks in.
As far as the RJ goes its a Bombardier plane - I work on the Global Express which is the biz jet version basically and I'm surprised you say its bad for the pax - its cabin is way bigger than other planes its size in height and width - maybe I'm just used to seeing it full of 18 Connelly leather recliners :D
Sparks
-
CRJ's are suboptimal but they beat the crap out of a Beech 1900. I think I rectally ingested several seat cushions riding in 1900's over the Rockies.
Of course I'm biased as a former member of the CRJ-700 team. :)
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Toad,
I flew Frontier Express the other day, a "Canadair" Shuttle. First I've ever heard of this jet. You know anything about it?
Made by Bombardier. The same Bombardier that invented the Ski-doo and Sea-doo...and made Cretien their squeak.
This diddlyer wants the Canadian Forces to buy another couple of these diddlying things, they bought 20 odd of these things about a decade ago. And he wants the CF to pay for them out of their own damn wallet. Corporate welfare our of our military's meager budget...there ought to be a law. :mad:
-
A couple of notes.
First, I am in no way impugning the "entry level" pilots. The reference is merely meant as "that's where airline flying starts". A scheduled carrier Regional Jet pilot IS an airline pilot. The F/O's are fully qualified to sit in the right seat and by the time they move over to the left seat they are highly experienced in airline operations. Which are quite different from "commerical flying" and considerably different from military flying.
So don't take it as a negative comment. It's merely meant as "this is where the airlines start".
Sparks, yes indeed. The old three seaters are doing a lot of freight work and doing it well. We tried to talk our company into a freight operation but they were not interested. This dispite the fact that at the time we had a daily 3 airplane backlog of freight going to and coming from Asia. Europe only had about a 2 day backlog. "No money in air freight" they said. Tell that to FedEx, I guess. ;)
Thrawn, Canadair has sold a TON of RJ's. There's tons more on order. Can't believe they aren't making money on it.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Thrawn, Canadair has sold a TON of RJ's. There's tons more on order. Can't believe they aren't making money on it.
I'm sure they are. I think it's Cretien's way of saying "diddly you." to Brazil for subsidising Embrae.
-
The "Jungle Jet"? Haven't heard much good about them from the folks that have to fly them.
-
Hehe, Mr. Toad hates management. ;) I know the feeling. As you get older with more experience of the "shop floor" of whatever profession you're in, you come to realise more and more how management consistently screws things up AND (more importantly) how they never listen to the advice of those working at the coal face. That was certainly true in my profession, and was one of the reasons I was not sorry to get out. I always remember one classic case in which my advice was ignored. I'll spare you the wall-0-words details, suffice it to say that "management" decided they could do without me. I produced a document suggesting why it was a bad idea to go in the new direction they had chosen, only to have it ignored. Oh well... 5½ months later, I got a phone call asking if I was available to come back - could I start the very next day? Yes, OK. Took me 6 weeks to get them out of the mess they'd got themselves into. When I reminded my former manager that I'd said they were heading in the wrong direction months earlier, I was told that I had "not put the case forcefully enough". But oh! It's never management's fault for not listening. :rolleyes: