Aer Lingus Fleet/Routes Discussion

Tenger · 05-10-2018 11:45AM

California Dreamer wrote: »

The lull of WOW and the time to command and move to the 330 is very attractive. Although I hope those guys didnt move to Primera! :eek:

Good point. A couple of years to command on TA routes is definitely more attractive than multi sector shorthaul for a UK based person.

Jack1985 · 05-10-2018 02:07PM

Tenger wrote: »

I was told that the ex-Monarch and ex-Air Berlin flight crew have all departed (not sure if this is due to short term contracts or conditions/rosters)

Not all ex-ZB/AB staff have departed, a lot remain, some did leave even jumping over into work with Primera and we know how that ended. Another fanciful rumor being floated.

mx5ire · 05-10-2018 04:16PM

Does anyone have any idea whats up with EI 123 to Chicago today - meant to go at 11:30 - seems like its still there. This flight has had varying degrees of lateness for each of the past 10 days now. I assume some technical issue today. My wife is on it on Monday, with a shortish connection onto United - she is now very concerned about missing the connection.

Seems to be a few others late yesterday and today as well.
EI 101 to Newark also 2 hours late today, and it was a complete disaster yesterday.

Jack1985 · 05-10-2018 04:47PM

123 is about to be canned..

MICKEYG · 05-10-2018 04:54PM

Was traveling a lot this week and saw a few A350's. Absolutely beautiful airplane. Would love to see in the green of EI but very unlikely now.

Shame about all the delays to the transatlantic flights. People will think twice about booking with EI again. Those in charge will need to take responsibility just like they took the praise with the good figures.

Took the E175/190 with KLM to Dublin on the trip. Hadnt been on it since LOT flew it here. Lovely and comfortable even in ecomony with big windows at the right height for nerds like me. Can't help but feel it would be perfect for EI.

ISOP · 05-10-2018 05:56PM

mx5ire wrote: »

Does anyone have any idea whats up with EI 123 to Chicago today - meant to go at 11:30 - seems like its still there. This flight has had varying degrees of lateness for each of the past 10 days now. I assume some technical issue today. My wife is on it on Monday, with a shortish connection onto United - she is now very concerned about missing the connection.

Seems to be a few others late yesterday and today as well.
EI 101 to Newark also 2 hours late today, and it was a complete disaster yesterday.

I'm sitting here waiting to find out what the hell is going on. We we on the plane on the tarmac for four and a half hours whilst they tried to deal with a problem with the navigation system. Now we have disembarked and no one is telling us anything. Horrendous treatment of passengers

Tenger · 05-10-2018 07:58PM

ISOP wrote: »

I'm sitting here waiting to find out what the hell is going on. We we on the plane on the tarmac for four and a half hours whilst they tried to deal with a problem with the navigation system. Now we have disembarked and no one is telling us anything. Horrendous treatment of passengers

The lack of info is pretty bad. But a malfunctioning aircraft is an unforeseen and unusual indigent. I though there was a limit on how long you can remain onboard (I really should remember this stuff)

Edit; Just looking at aerlingus.com, I see it didn’t operate. Some serious compensation/rebooking/hire in costs incurred this week at EI.

Thanks Jack for the rebuttal to the info I had been given. Feel bad for those who went to Primera in the hope of better options.

kona · 05-10-2018 07:59PM

Tenger wrote: »

From what I’ve read here and been told this seems like the root cause; the minimum required staffing levels are great for the financials. But this system is always going to be caught short by any level of disruption (weather, tech, sickness, diversions etc)
In addition to numbers you also need incentive to stay. I was told that the ex-Monarch and ex-Air Berlin flight crew have all departed (not sure if this is due to short term contracts or conditions/rosters) I would have thought that keeping experienced F/Os during a time of expansion would be a priority.
We also read here about engineers leaving for other Irish employers due to salary differences. And on the ground this summer they were recruiting 20 hour a week short term shift work contracts. I can’t see then attracting quality individuals to such an unattractive job offer. In my opinion School leavers and nomadic workers would be the pool for such a position.

"4 star"

Nibs05 · 05-10-2018 08:01PM

I counted 3 EI A330’s parked up this evening... it’s a mess alright.

Jamie2k9 · 05-10-2018 08:03PM

Tenger wrote: »

The lack of info is pretty bad. But a malfunctioning aircraft is an unforeseen and unusual indigent. I though there was a limit on how long you can remain onboard (I really should remember this stuff)

If you have cleared US Immigration it complicates things, you will be on board if they expect to operate even if its means hours.

ISOP · 05-10-2018 08:19PM

Replacement flight at 16:00 tommorrow. I pulled the plug on this trip. Gutted

Jack1985 · 05-10-2018 08:21PM

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

If you have cleared US Immigration it complicates things, you will be on board if they expect to operate even if its means hours.

Precisely. A lot of the issues since yesterday which will now it seems continue for the next few days as a result are down to lack of reserve planning with cockpit crew on the 330 primarily. Similar issues are happening in Engineering as well as within the Cabin Crew section. Money can be offered until the cows come home for people to work days off but alas they can't be forced and they are not heeding to it.

mikel97 · 05-10-2018 10:26PM

Nibs05 wrote: »

I counted 3 EI A330’s parked up this evening... it’s a mess alright.

No crew and this is the begin. Smart allrite

joeysoap · 06-10-2018 12:07AM

You know the jokes about your credit card limit not being a target. I heard that AL nearly always run the 900 flying hours for cabin crew to the limit each year. Even in cases where someone has been sick for a few months, the 900 hours is stilll expected.

Jack1985 · 06-10-2018 12:39AM

joeysoap wrote: »

You know the jokes about your credit card limit not being a target. I heard that AL nearly always run the 900 flying hours for cabin crew to the limit each year. Even in cases where someone has been sick for a few months, the 900 hours is stilll expected.

It's similarly done to both Pilots and Cabin Crew, although sick leave varies greatly (in numbers) between the two (Pilots either Short-Haul or Long-Haul/Cabin Crew operate both). Not all crew will reach the 900 mark, but some do. You can't bust 100 block hours in any rolling 28 day period.

The rostering and ''doubling'' of duties and there pairings is questionable at times. Rostering at EI is and for some time now has been laughable.

Bussywussy · 06-10-2018 08:50AM

ISOP wrote: »

mx5ire wrote: »

Does anyone have any idea whats up with EI 123 to Chicago today - meant to go at 11:30 - seems like its still there. This flight has had varying degrees of lateness for each of the past 10 days now. I assume some technical issue today. My wife is on it on Monday, with a shortish connection onto United - she is now very concerned about missing the connection.

Seems to be a few others late yesterday and today as well.
EI 101 to Newark also 2 hours late today, and it was a complete disaster yesterday.

I'm sitting here waiting to find out what the hell is going on. We we on the plane on the tarmac for four and a half hours whilst they tried to deal with a problem with the navigation system. Now we have disembarked and no one is telling us anything. Horrendous treatment of passengers

There's was a choice of 2 -300 aircraft they could of swapped to do the 123 and grounded the one with technical issue....don't know the reason why not

ISOP · 06-10-2018 09:06AM

Bussywussy wrote: »

There's was a choice of 2 -300 aircraft they could of swapped to do the 123 and grounded the one with technical issue....don't know the reason why not

No crew to fly it as I understand it, the time spend messing around trying to rectify the issue meant the crew had worked over their flight time allowed

iancm25 · 06-10-2018 10:03AM

ISOP wrote: »

Bussywussy wrote: »

There's was a choice of 2 -300 aircraft they could of swapped to do the 123 and grounded the one with technical issue....don't know the reason why not

No crew to fly it as I understand it, the time spend messing around trying to rectify the issue meant the crew had worked over their flight time allowed

Just out of curiosity - I assume the crew still get paid as if they worked their full shift. Anyone know? Would seem very unfair if not.

basill · 06-10-2018 10:48AM

Unfortunately AL doesn't have duty pay like many other airlines. So if we come into work and sit around waiting for snow to clear/aircraft to get fixed then we get paid our annual salaries but no sector pay as we didn't fly.

joeysoap · 06-10-2018 12:00PM

HTCOne wrote: »

Those 900 hour FTLs are a hard limit, not a target, unfortunately many companies don’t see it that way.

My understanding is the 900 hours is the max flying hours. Doesn’t count the waiting around hours , boarding or unboarding hours etc. I don’t know, is it an EU ruling?

Anyway my understanding is that AL run it to the wire every year since it was increased a few years ago. I don’t know when the year ‘starts’.

Bussywussy · 06-10-2018 01:27PM

ISOP wrote: »

Bussywussy wrote: »

There's was a choice of 2 -300 aircraft they could of swapped to do the 123 and grounded the one with technical issue....don't know the reason why not

No crew to fly it as I understand it, the time spend messing around trying to rectify the issue meant the crew had worked over their flight time allowed

Could of swapped well before the troubleshooting started if it was a serious issue...

Jamie2k9 · 06-10-2018 04:51PM

HTCOne wrote: »

Because people start wearing out and getting sick. We see it in ATC all the time, people put their shoulder to the wheel for too long and end up getting every bug under the sun for the next few months because their body clocks and immune systems are all over the place, or they get fatigue.

Those 900 hour FTLs are a hard limit, not a target, unfortunately many companies don’t see it that way.

They would be mad not to get crew to complete there max hours. This shouldn't have any bearing on the current issues with crewing.

Tenger · 06-10-2018 06:21PM

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

They would be mad not to get crew to complete there max hours. This shouldn't have any bearing on the current issues with crewing.

I can understand the desire to utilise resources to the max. In the current aviation sector you have to remain lean and efficient.
But the lack of 'padding' around those resources is an issue. If you plan to reach 850 hours per pilot/csbin crew then you can only absorb ~45 hours delay throughout the year before that resource is exhausted.
With a small number of additional bodies (which obviously increase salary cost) you could plan to operate 820-840 hours per year. Thus you have more resilience for disruptions.

Same logic with your aircraft really. Give them a bit of time each day for check outs and minor fixes.

California Dreamer · 06-10-2018 08:21PM

HTCOne wrote: »

Those 900 hour FTLs are a hard limit, not a target, unfortunately many companies don’t see it that way.

Slight tangent. Same push for a new FO in Ryanair and can get his command in 3ish years. How long from right to left seat in EI?

HTCOne · 07-10-2018 02:46AM

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

They would be mad not to get crew to complete there max hours. This shouldn't have any bearing on the current issues with crewing.

Disagree.

Say you’re running an airline on the above philosophy....

Captain or FO X stuffs their car on the way into work, who do you call as cover? Not your own crew because you’ve already maxed them out....you need HiFly

Pilot Y gets a cancer diagnosis...off for 18 months....but you can’t cover them internally because all your employed crew are maxed out...HiFly.....or Titan....

My point being, you can’t max every staff member because these things happen. That’s why you aren’t supposed to aim for the FTLs as a target, because you won’t be able to cover your own shortfalls. There’s a middle ground.

Jack1985 · 07-10-2018 01:37PM

joeysoap wrote: »

My understanding is the 900 hours is the max flying hours. Doesn’t count the waiting around hours , boarding or unboarding hours etc. I don’t know, is it an EU ruling?

Anyway my understanding is that AL run it to the wire every year since it was increased a few years ago. I don’t know when the year ‘starts’.

1st of Jan, 850 (through agreement, 1000 is now the EASA limit) is our block hours limit which encompasses the time from push back to chocks on. Our Duty hours (from report to clearance of customs) can go upward of 1,500 in a year. It’s more so the time from Nov to Dec when everyone’s hours are screwed we seem to run into issues, however it’s early October and it’s a reflection of the usual bad planning and rostering which is well known. It’s costing them close to the 200K for each hire in, you’d have an extra few employees there in that one cost.

NH2013 · 07-10-2018 02:07PM

Don’t think the A330 issue is due to crew maxing out and running out of their hours per say, it’s more that all crew have been pushed to their legal limits as targets all year long and over a particularly difficult summer which is resulting in high levels of fatigue and burnout among pilots, higher levels than observed in previous years due to the tougher summer which has caught Aer Lingus management by surprise.

Just because a limit is legal, doesn’t mean it’s healthy on the body, particularly amongst long haul crews constantly experiencing jet lag and time zone changes for 6 months straight over a summer with no relent, very hard on immune systems and mental health and higher numbers than expected are now just unable to go on holding illness at bay. Crew are humans, not machines, you can’t expect them to work to such limits as targets and not expect to see higher levels of sick leave as a result. From what I’ve heard though it is rare in Aer Lingus for A330 Pilots to do more than 800 hours in a year so from that point there should still be some fat in the system.

Locker10a · 07-10-2018 02:55PM

God only know what next year will look like with the new aircraft and routes coming, surely they’ll have to recruit more pilots and crew!?

Kcormahs · 07-10-2018 05:42PM

The following routes for next year still for sale on a 757-200 seat map: BDL PHL MSP and JFK/BOS out of Shannon. Will aer lingus get an extra 757 or will they change one of these routes to a a321LR / a330 before next summer? I'd easily see PHL going on an a330 or BDL getting an a321LR due to the recent new signed agreement between BDL Airport and Dublin "Aer Lingus said it will devote one of its four A321neoLR aircrafts to the Bradley-to-Dublin route."
Also I am surprised that a 757-200 reaches MSP departing from DUB

http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/20180913/NEWS01/180919954/aer-lingus-extends-commitment-to-bradley-airport-ct-reduces-revenue-guarantee

Kcormahs · 07-10-2018 05:45PM

Although this isn't for sale yet, SNN (and possibly ORK) are getting a 737 ASL leased aircraft to operate FAO and AGP during the summer just like in BHD. This will free up one or two a320(s). Would these 2 a320s be deployed on new DUB/ORK routes or help on increasing capacity on existing ones? (either sunny destinations or European Key markets such as CDG/AMS/FCO)

Aer Lingus Fleet/Routes Discussion

Comments