We’re hitting structural limits in Composite Work Practices that force workarounds and prevent accurate modelling of real operations.
Current constraints
Only two Composite Work Practice Groups.
Each group supports a maximum of three sub-items.
Operational impact
The available composite fields are consumed by fundamentals (e.g., single- vs multi‑pilot, standby type).
There’s no remaining capacity to capture critical context, such as:
Applicability by base status: Home Base vs Toured/Away Base
Note: Some teams treat “toured base” and “acclimatisation” separately; others couple them.
Crew acclimatisation state (acclimatised vs not acclimatised).
Extra conditions tied to specific deployments or client contracts.
Why this matters
Certain client requirements can’t be enforced reliably within current limits.
Applying these constraints only in the roster layer is insufficient when clients don’t use the roster.
This needs to be solved inside the Work Practice configuration itself.
Request
Increase Composite capacity:
Support more Composite Work Practice Groups (e.g., up to 4).
Allow more sub-items per group (e.g., 6–8).
Outcome: Enables concurrent monitoring of Crew Composition, Standby, Acclimatisation, and Base applicability without conflicts.
Context
This proposal forms part of the broader storyline documented in AM-I-857.
Leigh Morkel
