Aa Wants To Fly Hnl To Nrt

[mjk]

LAX-I f/a crews fly it now. The dfw-lax-nrt-lax-dfw sequence is for cockpit only, and that could just be temp. until LAX gets their 777 cockpit numbers up.

 

[Kev3188]

This route also means there would have to be company maintenance in HNL since HNL-NRT would require an ETOPS 1 check.

Just out of curiosity, why don't you have mtx there now? Does "twin"flying to the mainland not require a etops 1 check?

 

[IORFA]

of course it requires an ETOPS check. Who knows what type of equipment it will be, probably 767 at first then might get upgraded. Need to get the route first. It will probably be added to a NRT trip as it most likely will need 9 F/A's and HNL 767 trips only have 8 max plus, it needs Japanese speakers. It also depends on the level of service. My guess is that DFW will get it as they have 2 NRT trips a day on certain days of the week. The second flight RON's for like 70 hours or something like that. they could do a turn or something. Who knows how manning will do it

 

[AAStew]

Operaations,
It can be very expensive to stay at the airport. I fly Paris and imagine a $20 hamburger with an attitude!
They do take us to the city but if you got to the hotel at noon and didn't get settled in till around 12:30 (and I am speeding things up here) imagine having to be downstairs to catch a bus at 3:30 Paris time.
I would rather stay at a shabbier hotel downtown, as long as it is clean and safe, than at the luxury hotel we are staying at at the airport!

 

[operaations]

I can't believe you asked this question...
Back in the day (about 10 years ago) I had a 75hr layover in Lisbon. I can't imagine spending that at the airport.

My point was made with your response. You are there on business. To do a job not a mini vacation. Stay where you are put up and as long as they are not deplorable accomodations live with it. When you are on your own dime and on vacation they you can stay where ever you want.

 

[IORFA]

try again operations. the contract doesn't allow what the company is doing. if they wanted to do this they should have changed it in the RPA. they didn't. now we are stuck at the airport easily paying double if not more for food and a lot of the times spending the whole 24 hours at the airport because the free transportation is at undesierable times. We NEED sleep and food. it shouldn't cost $20.00 for a sandwich. We shouldn't be sequestered at the airport for 24 hours either. there are options, AA doesn't want to address them. can you here the pair of feet dragging? they aren't APFA or APA's! Don't forget BRU either. don't forget the reason for going to the airport in the first place. It was for our security. That is and has been a moot point for quite awhile. AA wants the hotels to pay them for the privelage of having us as guests, well it doesn't work that way. it is a cost of doing business and AA should be ashamed of their actions. You did notice that for the active engagement meetings that management stayed at a 5 star hotel in Dallas? the Fairmont if i remember correctly. I am sure they didn't share rooms either. whats good for the goose is good for the gander. don't try to tell me that they couldn't find anything cheaper in Dallas either. the Harvey hotel has rooms for $29.00 a night. It to is clean, safe and acceptable.

 

[lpbrian]

Kev,


No, we don't have mx there now. Return trips to the mainland require an ETOPS 2 check, which may be performed by contract mx. ETOPS 1 checks must be performed by company personel. I wonder if the company will try to get around this to avoid having to recall AMT's.

 

[jimntx]

My point was made with your response. You are there on business. To do a job not a mini vacation. Stay where you are put up and as long as they are not deplorable accomodations live with it. When you are on your own dime and on vacation they you can stay where ever you want.

Operaations, you are a big one for everyone following the rules.

Ok, both the pilots AND the flight attendants have contracts with the company that say the layover hotels will be mutually agreed to by the company and the unions; unless the company has a compelling reason--extreme difference in price, lack of security, etc--for choosing a hotel other than agreed to by the unions. Knowing Europe as I do, I doubt seriously that the company is saving very much at all by arbitrarily putting the flight attendants at the airport while allowing the cockpits to continue to use the downtown hotels during long layovers.

Also, if the company chooses to use a layover hotel not agreed to by the unions, it is supposed to give the reasons. Shouldn't the company be required to follow the rules also?

This is called pissing off the flight attendants just because you can. In the short time I flew for AA, I saw multiple examples of management actions that had no real business purpose other than that.

 

[WorldTraveler]

This route also means there would have to be company maintenance in HNL since HNL-NRT would require an ETOPS 1 check.


No, we don't have mx there now. Return trips to the mainland require an ETOPS 2 check, which may be performed by contract mx. ETOPS 1 checks must be performed by company personel. I wonder if the company will try to get around this to avoid having to recall AMT's.

What is the difference between an ETOPS 1 and ETOPS 2 check. Isn't HNL-US mainland a longer over the water segment w/o diversion points than HNL-NRT?

 

[FA Mikey]

You can vent your frustrations with John all you want, but remember we (as the membership voted to reduce the layover rest rather than take under fly.

No we voted to give up the duty rig in exchange for. We voted or screwed in to voting in the min rest last April. With jw and dc planning there f/a screw job.

 

[Rusty Bullethole]

An ETOPS 1 check is required whenever an ETOPS flight departs the US mainland. The main differance between an ETOPS 1 and 2, is that the ETOPS 1 requires an airworthiness release, which can only be accomplished by authorised company personnel, so contract maintenance cannot accomplish this, but they can sign for an ETOPS 2 check.

Just a thought, has anybody considered that the HNL flight might originate in NRT, i.e. the A/C may fly say DFW-NRT-HNL-NRT-DFW? I'm not sure how this may work with crew scheduling, but I guess it may be a possibility.

 

[jimntx]

Just a thought, has anybody considered that the HNL flight might originate in NRT, i.e. the A/C may fly say DFW-NRT-HNL-NRT-DFW? I'm not sure how this may work with crew scheduling, but I guess it may be a possibility.

A puzzle for Sunday morning!

Well, using existing AA and JAL flights to build a "play-like" itinerary for such a trip, I get...

03MAY DEP DFW 1000
04MAY ARR NRT 1330
(assume minimum 24-hour layover)

05MAY DEP NRT 2000
05MAY ARR HNL 0815
(assume minimum 24-hour layover to re-align with
preferred departure times)

06MAY DEP HNL 1200
07MAY ARR NRT 1510
(assume minimum 24-hour layover)

08MAY DEP NRT 1200
08MAY ARR DFW 0920

Total days: 5
Total Flying time: 39:55
(And that's actual flying--not including sign-in, travel to/from hotel, etc. Personally, I'd have to be medicated.)

It would not be an easy schedule to build. You couldn't do "pure" lines because just 2 trips/month would be 80 hours of flying time. Isn't the max line on Int'l 75 hours? Doesn't Int'l also have a 30-in-7 rule also that would have to be waived?

 

[jimntx]

Oh, by the way. AA technically already does NRT-HNL on a codeshare with JAL. UAL codeshares this route with ANA (All Nippon).

According to Yahoo travel, fares for the NRT-HNL-NRT itinerary...

ANA $691
JAL $719
UAL $751
AA $2503!!!!!

Obviously, we are making a lot more on that route than the others.

 

[TWAnr]

It would not be an easy schedule to build. You couldn't do "pure" lines because just 2 trips/month would be 80 hours of flying time. Isn't the max line on Int'l 75 hours? Doesn't Int'l also have a 30-in-7 rule also that would have to be waived?

Does AA have mechanics at NRT? If so, problem solved, ETOPS 1 check at the flight origination on the US mainland for the outgoing and Japan for the return with an ETOPS 2 check at HNL during the stopover.

As an aside, planes and crews are often scheduled separately. I don't think that crews can work through flights from Tokyo through Honolulu to the US mainland without violating duty limits. Thus, it would not matter if the plane is routed NRT-HNL-NRT because, in any event, there will be a crew change in Hawaii.

 

[jimntx]

I don't think that crews can work through flights from Tokyo through Honolulu to the US mainland without violating duty limits. Thus, it would not matter if the plane is routed NRT-HNL-NRT because, in any event, there will be a crew change in Hawaii.

I don't understand. We weren't talking about NRT-HNL-DFW; so, there wouldn't be a flight through HNL to the mainland. And, if there is a layover after each leg, how is the duty limit exceeded--other than a 30-in-7 limit?