See this website, sign up and have your say while there is time. Laugh at the videos... or cry.

flightdutytimes.eu

Go to EASA's facebook homepage and post there.

Email EASA. Rulemaking Enquiry - EASA Webgate (http://easa.europa.eu/webgate/rulemaking-enquiry/)

Failure means we will all pay the price with longer work hours, increased fatigue and unsafer skies.

Beachbud
96.2 % of replies came from one European Country. What's happening elsewhere in Europe?
Just to confirm also it's 2 months to respond to the latest scheme, then off to Parliment for approval and then 2 years to implement.
Increased fatigue - perceived. What's better 3 nights then a 0700 day flight or 4 nights?

I also fail to recognize an increase of duty hours. If I check the new draft of FTL, I see roughly 1 h less max duty in any duty start time bracket.

As far as i know its a website from the german union Vereinigung Cockpit. They had a TV ad running which prompted the public in germany to participate. Therefore the list on the german part of that website is quite long already for being up 2 days or so. But not enough signed by far, still needs a lot signed up.

As far as i know its a website from the german union Vereinigung Cockpit. They had a TV ad running which prompted the public in germany to participate. Therefore the list on the german part of that website is quite long already for being up 2 days or so. But not enough signed by far, still needs a lot signed up. Too bad a related thread has been deleted for what ever reason.

I thought it's a pilots board.....

Or is it just for brits?

uh, I see clearly now. VC again...

They tried to impress the public perception with a useless study about tired cockpit crews some months ago. In fact it was not a study but an opinion poll amongst pilots if they have "ever been tired in their lives".

I have to say VC does very bad politics. They suffer from a bad judgement of their own situation, since they have the best duty limitations in the world, at least the VC members in Lufthansa.

And I don't really feel much motivation to sign a petition whose wording is not there at all... - if I click on "facts" I don't get any facts at all. This site resembles dangerously to one of a religious cult.

You can also go here:
Participate! | Flight Duty Times (http://flightdutytimes.eu/petition/)

That happend quiete often in the past. LH-VC members become rather a obstacle then a support. If it is not born in theire head it cannot be a good idea.

I always remember that old joke about a "Pilots Union meeting", at the end the question was: Do you mean every Wednesday ?!?!

Time to go with the time, maybe some of them dreaming from the old times? They are gone a while ago......

We can all make fun of unions but really the joke is on us. Places like LH appear to have company agreements which are significantly better from a crew perspective than the regulations demand. The problem is in the smaller companies where the limits may be seen as targets in order to improve productivity.

If this was about common sense and very occasional long duties because of truly unforeseen circumstances the situation would be different. The reality is that some duties are constructed imaginatively, for example with unrealistic turnaround times, to make them fit within the limits. You know weeks in advance you are probably going to go into discretion on these runs. Of course it is all legal. You do not know before check in for sure. Only after months does the company get a slap on the wrist because time and again we go into discretion.

Hi folks.

Just a view thoughts: some previous commenter's are right that within LH there are much stricter FDT limitations, due to the collective labour agreements between the LH employees and the management. Nevertheless these agreements are substantially based on the specific current German regulation, still in power. But these will become obsolete when the new EASA proposals become law in all Europe, which soon will be the case. The airlines will then argue with the same old wordings which we have seen on other occasions already (such as after the introduction of the EU-OPS): we have to do the same as so and so as otherwise we have an economical disadvantage compared to our European competitors.

Don't forget: the EASA proposals are only partially based on scientific research (as it is the case with the new FAA flight duty time regulations). It were the Unions that forced EASA to rework their first set of regulations published early last year.

It seems that what EASA is going to push into concrete now is more or less a wishlist of the airlines. And don't fool yourself: once this is regulation in Europe it will be the base for all agreements, even future collective labour agreements. So you would like to have flight duty times up to 16 hours by commanders discretion (now the max is 15 hours)? This given the fact that most dispatches already take into account that the Cpt. will use this "tool" in order to get the bird and pax home? The cited survey of VC has shown that in most cases the planning of some schedules is that tight that you may only fly it under commanders discretion.

Also I really don't like the idea that crews are forced to be awake for 24 hours and then land an airplane - as it would be (besides commanders discretion cases) the case with "split duty" schedulings.

Do we really need to lay out the ingredients for incidents and accidents to happen by a new - European - wide - regulation?

"Safety in aviation is the absence of accidents and incidents by preventive measures taken BEFORE something serious happens as a consequence of previously known deficiencies." I stick to this!

You know weeks in advance you are probably going to go into discretion on these runs

Only after months does the company get a slap on the wrist because time and again we go into discretion.

So why do crew keep going into discretion?!! I just can't get my head around this! If you allow this practice to continue, it WILL continue! If you start parking jets down route it will quickly become a very expensive party for the company.

Only do discretion when there are really, on the day, "unforeseen circumstances".

Interesting, although 5 year old, article here Prevalence of fatigue among commercial pilots (http://occmed.oxfordjournals.org/content/56/4/263.full)

From the same article:

Pilots who reported regularly flying into their ‘discretion’ hours had lower physical and psychological health, and overall fatigue scores, and poorer self-rated general health.

The new EASA FTL draft gives me about 1 h less flight duty a day (depending when it starts), so I see it as a good thing.

There are a lot of misconception around about captains discretion. They go to the national aviation authority, if it's above 2 h they have to be sent immediatly. Any airline that will use this tool too often will hear something from their supervising body. Unless you are in a banana republic...

Tim, you want to tell me that Lufthansa will change their FTLs into EASA standard as soon as they are in force? Do you really believe this? VC would call out industrial actions immediatly. Anyway, I don't see why I should fight for them, since they are top of the food chain and the most powerful pilots corps on the continent (apart from the cabin crew in BA...). If they want to fight, they should fight for us, not we for them.

Good question Cpt. Prop! But I'm quite convinced that there is a lot of pressure within the companies to do so. There are only few commanders who have the strong shoulders to proceed as you outlined.

Why are many commanders flying their birds - as requested by the companies - more and more at the recommended max though the coffins corner become dangerously small? Do they just want to avoid the invitation for a coffee at their superiors. It is all about saving fuel, but it is always safe? Well AF 447 has demonstrated what may happen if you have some more factors associated with this. And BTW: while talking "fatigue" and so - how long was the F/O on the cpt. seat in the cockpit of AF 447 when the mess started? Ever heard of "sleep inertia"? - This was at least a contributing factor in another - fatigue related accident: Air India Express at Mangalore...

Hi Dani.

We are in a banana republic in Germany (thats why the shortening is BRD ;) ) !
The LBA has taken no steps - what so ever - against the more than 1.000 commanders discretion decisions of Air Berlin. They have even tolerated illegal flights to be conducted (duty time of commander of more than 17 hrs). Those who reported this irregularity to the LBA principal were sacked, as the LBA has nothing better to do then to inform the airline that someone (with name of course) has reported it. This is Germany - not Switzerland.

The Authorities - such as EASA too - unfortunately see their duty more in supporting the airlines and help them "economically" to survive than to enhance safety at an early stage.

Hey Dani!

It is about solidarity. Don't just lean back and let others do the job. Everbody is needed here and time is running out!

And yes, I think VC is also fighting for you and everybody else with a European ATPL. The aim of the campaign - as I see it - is to bring this subject to a wider attention in the population as they don't have a clue of what is going on in some back rooms in Cologne (EASA) and in Brussels (EU).

You can read and understand German so just read this and you will understand where the real danger lies here with good old EU commission and EASA:

Das Komitologieverfahren | Flugdienstzeiten (http://flugdienstzeiten.de/das-komitologieverfahren/)

You obviously do not understand a lot about EU legislation. Those are always minimal standards. No legal body is prevented of applying higher standards.

If VC really would fight for me, they would work on standards they are sharing with their company. This is not the case. The only thing they want is fighting for their own privileges. Why for example do Lufthansa pilots allow other VC members to have worse conditions then their own? Why are they forbidding other pilot groups (LH subcontractors, LH Italia aso) to share their privileges? This is a selfish bunch.

I say it again: The new EASA FTL regulations are an improvement for me and for most other pilots.

Dear Dani.

Having studied law I think I understand quite well what is going on here.
Working in the EU field for some decades I also believe that I have a very solid and good understanding of how the EU regulations are implemented into national legislation.

Your further bashing comments into the direction of VC just show that you have no clue of what you are talking. I also believe that you are represented by good old "aeropers", if you happen to be a member.

But It is not my task, nor duty to convince you of what a union does or does not. I'm not a member of VC, never been, and very likely will also never become.

I may somehow agree on some of your allegations in regards to previous boards that were majority formed by LH pilots. But this is long time history...

Give me a break, show me one practical case where EU wouldn't allow higher standards than their legislation. This has never happen and will never happen. Surely not in the EU we know. Law study is no replacement for logical thinking nor close observation of actual politics.

The same will happen to Aeropers pilots (union of the former Swissair pilots in Swiss): They will never adapt EASA, because they have better FTLs.

Not even VC is implying that the new FTLs are binding for them. So you shouldn't neighter. If they would really fear, they would put this on top of their petition. But on the contrary, they don't even write what you are signing for! What an utter violation of basic democtratic principles...

I guess you are Tim van Beveren, the well known aviation journalist, who didn't even know the difference between a B777 and a A330 in the biggest Swiss newspaper and after that in a spotter forum. Have you taken over some PR mandate for VC in the mean time?

Why for example do Lufthansa pilots allow other VC members to have worse conditions then their own? Why are they forbidding other pilot groups (LH subcontractors, LH Italia aso) to share their privileges?

You do not seem to have a shimmer of a clue about how VC works. Quite understandably from someone from switzerland where there is at least one union per company and nobody from the bigger one helps the smaller ones at all (which lead to a complete erosion of T&Cs in Belair for example), which is actually quite different from the VC where the main money comes from LH guys and the main part of the work is done for other companies. And yes, each pilot group has to represent themselves and has to negotiate their own CLAs in germany, LH can't help me at all (apart from paying our lawyers) in my non-LH company, simply because it would be illegal.

And of course the current legal framework is always the basis during every negotiation about T&C's, which will make it much harder if not impossible to hold current CLA's. And especially in germany many parts of the CLA's are not defined independent of the current legislation, which means that those CLA's will change with changing rules.

Dream on... Dani! Be happy about the one hour less for you on your joystick, - so you have won another hour that you can do dogfighting with your buddies. Hey: - Enjoy!:ok::ok::ok:

where nobody from the bigger one helps the smaller ones at all

That was a good one - LH pilots helping the other ones. Never laughed so loud since I last dogfighted my joystick :E

LH never had interest in the other pilots corps, they are using the others to fulfill their own goals. How would you explain that all the LH subcontractors are paid a miserable lot and are not even allowed to wear the crane on their fin! This is an absolute pervert missuse towards your collegues. Of course, they are very afraid of them, because they could replace them all. And I promise you, they will, as long as LH pilots have better conditions.

And yes, I agree, Aeropers is exact the same miserable bunch of selfish guys. If you would look further, yes there are good examples, but not in German spoken aviation. Looking further is not their union's strength...

Hello.

Some of you might be aware that EASA's new proposals for the becoming new European Flight Duty and Rest Times Regulation have been published on January 18th, 2012 (http://www.easa.eu.int/rulemaking/docs/crd/2011/CRD%202010-14/CRD%202010-14.pdf) - with considerable delay after receiving more than 50.000 comments (most ever received by EASA) towards the old NPA as of December 2010.

These proposals will become Europe-wide regulations in 2013. What many do not know: this "law" will not follow the normal democratic avenue that most know from any other legislation, it will not be "adopted" by a majority vote of the European parliament. The reason is a "relict" from the early days of the European Community which is called the "comitology procedure" (see below).

Though the new proposal can be regarded as a "considerable improvement" to the original draft as of last year but it is far from being appropriate. In contrast to the new US regulations (except Cargo, - I know) they are still ignoring scientific research and incident and accident analysis about "fatigue" as a contributing factor.

Therefore some European Pilot Associations have launched a campaign and are collecting signatures of citizens who object these new proposals and support the idea that the new regulations should be based on science rather then commercial interest of the operators.

The campaign is supported by some really funny video spots placed on YouTube. My favorite is this one:

Episode 3: staying awake 0.3 - YouTube

but there are 3 more others available in English, French and German.

English: Episode 1: Commanders discretion - YouTube

French: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05r_fc8hbbM&feature=BFa&list=ULgSu-S1eAFII&lf=mfu_in_order

German: Episode 1: Der Kommandantenentscheid - YouTube

So please help distribute the message and get also your friends and significant others to sign the petition, available at

www.flightdutytimes.eu (http://www.flightdutytimes.eu)




The comitology procedure

The word “comitology” comes from the French word “comité”, or “committee” in English. The first committee to consider binding regulations for the European Economic Community already met in 1962. For its part, the Council of the EEC then determined that it could itself decide whether to issue so-called “implementing regulations” or transfer this task to the European Commission. Fundamentally, once such a regulation is passed and comes into force, it becomes legally binding in all applicable European countries. In 1987, these powers were transferred to the European Commission.



Since then, the Commission has been permitted to issue – in close cooperation with the Member States – binding regulations applicable across Europe. Doing so, it is supported by committees in which civil servants from all Member States are represented. This comitology procedure as currently practised in the EU is regarded by its critics as being undemocratic and lacking in transparency.



Neither the EU Council of Ministers nor the elected members of the European Parliament have any means of influence over this procedure. A regulation which is enacted in the context of a comitology procedure does not have to be submitted to the EU’s legislative bodies for their approval, even though such regulations can have major impacts both positive and negative on the everyday life of its citizens. Likewise, the forthcoming amendments to the Regulation on Flight Duty and Rest Periods are due to be agreed and passed in a comitology procedure.


However the committees which drafted and debated these regulations did not have any official representatives from the passengers on them, such as members of consumer associations or similar organisations.

Thanks for the explanation.
Shouldn't pilots be using FoI, or whatever each country has, to get the names of the Civil Servants sitting on the comitology procedure?
- One could always inform them about the science!...........and air their names a bit.

................and if you think comitology is bad, you should involve yourselves in a nasty little EU process where the UK is represented by an untrustworthy process known as "Ukrep". Basically, Ukrep is where the UK's position on lots of things is horsetraded - with zero application of any science - against other countries positions. It can be as daft as "we will support you on your cow/beef issue, if you support us on the tech spec for cars"

Well doesn't surprise me at all. We have seen that very drastically when the first media reports popped up about the "mad cow disease"... Even very reputable British scientists and professors lost their chairs in the wake of it...

Nevertheless, this nonsense has to be stopped before t.s.h.t.f...

Chaps, if you would be so kind and have Facebook, give the page a like and see if we can get some decent exposure.

Help Stop Pilot Fatigue - New Regulations are extremely dangerous - Info | Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Help-Stop-Pilot-Fatigue-New-Regulations-are-extremely-dangerous/201985629841352?sk=info)

Scotsman - not sure the comparison bewteen blood alcohol and fatigue levels are supported by the sleepy scientists or have i been told duff gen?

We have to remember the vast majority of Europe are already working these limits, in fact in the case of the night hours EASA FTL brings it right down to a more sensible and safe level. :\

TvB - would you agree that the recent incident where a German pilot who was made ill during an in flight fume event and was subsequently found to have jet engine oil in his blood may not be fatigued - but was suffering (like many, many others) from Aerotoxic syndrome?


Germania B737 Flight: First Officer Partially Incapacitated By Fumes (http://www.aerotoxic.org/news-and-articles/fume-event-incident-reports/676-germania-b737-near-milano-on-nov-18th-2011-first-officer-partially-incapacitated-by-fumes)

Pilot inflight collapse: Germany investigates cabin air poisons - Learmount (http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/learmount/2012/02/pilot-inflight-collapse-german.html)

BTW Your fatigue videos are....... brilliant! :D

Danger is the one factor promoted in curbing the trajectory of this regulation. Totally valid.

Now, don't we also have the right to health ? I am not going to cover all the types of stresses inherent to this profession. What I believe is this area needs to be tackled as well, especially as our retirement ages (depending on countries) are called to be stretched even further. I strongly believe in that right which ranks second, immediately below the danger factor.

The words "EU" and "democracy" don't belong in the same sentence.

This "comitology" is nothing but a loophole.

I don't know in detail about the new scheme. I have learnt about it in conversation with our FOI as to what we will be allowed. It is far better for us in GA, mainly because we are not stuck with a scheme designed for the convenience of airlines but can make variations backed by a safety case in line with our SMS.

Our FTLs will not change until we have applied for changes. Those changes won't be approved until we have made a safety case. So we will get more flexibility (which believe it or not our pilots want: we want to do the job if at all possible) with safety responsibility in-house but regulated. Seems like a good system for us.

Unions have an interest in restricting what pilots can do. This means airlines need more crew, more crew means more members and more dues. That site ray cosmic linked to was obvious propaganda, you only have to look at the link labelled "facts" to see that it goes to a page about accidents.

Unions have an interest in restricting what pilots can do. This means airlines need more crew, more crew means more members

er, yes...

thought more jobs was what we all wanted

EASA respond to pressure. The industry can excerpt more than pilots can as we are too busy trying to fly safely to be preoccupied with lobbying for safety, something we should be able to take for granted.

Gentlemen,

Is your home country pilot association planning action ?

It is time to urge our associations to let us know their plans.

Lets get out there

They ( EASA, ECA, etc, ) have to know that we do not accept changes which affect flight safety.

Fatigue kills.

I don't know in detail about the new scheme. Who would've thought?!

Our FTLs will not change until we have applied for changes. Who is we? If something becomes EU law and makes it possible to have pilots work more/harder disregarding safety you can bet your :mad: :mad: that it will be imposed on you - soon!
So we will get more flexibility (which believe it or not our pilots want: we want to do the job if at all possible) with safety responsibility in-house but regulated. Seems like a good system for us. If you want to "push the outside of the envelope", why not join the military, become a test pilot and then do the job "if at all possible". At all possible is, as is safety, relative and a matter of definition.

Unions have an interest in restricting what pilots can do. This means airlines need more crew, more crew means more members and more dues.:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh: This statement is absurd. Please (!!!) tell me you are the Richie Rich type 10 year old son of some capital stocking airline ceo's boss... :ugh:

Never heard of the industrial revolution (http://yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1981/2/81.02.06.x.html)? Never heard of the social question? Do you know why unions exist? Have you been to school or were you flunking history class while playing flight simulator? Read some books...or at least google a little. I'm not rude, I'm serious. I just can't believe a halfway sane working person affiliated with the airline/aviation industry claims that unions want tighter flight duty limits so that airlines need more crews to generate membership fees. This FTL campaign is not about lazy pilots wanting more money...it's about realistically being able to perform your obligation as crew: To bring airplanes from A to B safely! Being able to survive a standard 35 year career and not drop dead at 60 would be nice too...


If the conditions in which people lived in these factory towns were considered bad, then the conditions in which they worked can be appropriately characterized as being horrendous. Inside these factories one would find poorly ventilated, noisy, dirty, damp and poorly lighted working areas. These factories were unhealthy and dangerous places in which to work. Normally, workers put in twelve to fourteen hours daily. Factory Acts that were later enacted by Parliament regulated the number of hours that men, women and children worked. Pages 58-74 of E. R. Pike’s book, Hard Times, make for interesting reading on this subject.
The factory system changed the manner in which work was performed. Unlike the domestic system the work was away from home, in large, impersonal settings. Workers were viewed by their employers merely as “hands.”

Slowly, workers began to realize the strength they could possess if they were a unified force. It was a long, uphill battle for workers to be able to have the right to organize into officially recognized unions. Their lot was one of having no political influence in a land where the government followed a laissez-faire policy.

This hands off policy changed as the pressure from growing trade unions increased. A movement was beginning to free workers from the injustices of the factory system. Political leaders called for reform legislation which would address these injustices...


A few years ago the question was wether to fly a little bit or maybe a little more for good money.

Today the question is wether to fly even more or to fly dangerously tired.

justflyin
Flaymy actually makes some good points which you have choosen to ignore
Flexibility
Safety case
Changes we want
Regulated
Responsibility
For someone possibly at the bottom end of the airline cycle GA it indicates a positive, open understanding. EASA FTL will provide the framework, and active participation by both operator and crewmembers in the SMS will do the rest.

The proposed new EASA FTLs will only make pilots work longer hours and reduce rest times...

jstflyinWho is we?A small GA company. If something becomes EU law and makes it possible to have pilots work more/harder disregarding safety you can bet your http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/censored.gif http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/censored.gif that it will be imposed on you - soon!Nope (even ignoring your mischaracterisation of the law; it does not disregard safety at all, and for many countries it will mean tightening up of some FTL practices)

I suspect you might be working for the wrong people. I trust my CP, and I trust my Accountable Manager. That is why I work with them. The pilots work with ops whenever there is doubt, to come up with schedules that we can safely fly - and it is the pilots as much as ops who are frustrated by the illogical restrictions of CAP371. Funnily enough we want to fly, that is why we are in this game. We like our work.

Also we have been told exactly this by our FOI, that we will have to apply for any changes with a safety case. It will be decided by the FTL team at the Belgrano.At all possible is, as is safety, relative and a matter of definition.Is this nonsense or irrelevant to the discussion? Depends what you mean, and the sentence is ambiguous. This statement is absurd.Nope. It not only makes sense, it is actually pretty obvious.

I am quite aware of why unions exist. I am also quite aware that the reasons they exist are part of history - which is why they are going extinct outside the public sector, where there is still profit in extortion because of the ability of governments to survive insane inefficiency. I am also aware of the damage militant unions do to an industry, including aviation. My union gives me some legal protection. If I ever need a lawyer then they will back me. That is it.

leonard sky nerdthought more jobs was what we all wanted What makes you think that? We want to fly for a living, and do so well which will, of course, help the image of the industry. The rest is up to someone else.

The market is as big as the demand. Artificial inflation is a poor long-term strategy. It is far better to expand jobs organically by working in a safe, efficient industry providing the product people want at the right price.

Whilst I agree that fatigue in aircraft is not a good thing, I strongly disagree with the perception that the new EASA FTLs allow longer duty times.

Have a look at the draft:

Draft (http://www.easa.eu.int/rulemaking/docs/crd/2011/CRD%202010-14/CRD%202010-14.pdf)

The flight time limits are:

ORO.FTL.210 Flight duty period (FDP)

Maximum daily FDP — Acclimatised crew members (1-10 sectors)
0600–1329 13:00 12:30 12:00 11:30 11:00 10:30 10:00 09:30 09:00
1330–1359 12:45 12:15 11:45 11:15 10:45 10:15 09:45 09:15 09:00
1400–1429 12:30 12:00 11:30 11:00 10:30 10:00 09:30 09:00 09:00
1430–1459 12:15 11:45 11:15 10:45 10:15 09:45 09:15 09:00 09:00
1500–1529 12:00 11:30 11:00 10:30 10:00 09:30 09:00 09:00 09:00
1530–1559 11:45 11:15 10:45 10:15 09:45 09:15 09:00 09:00 09:00
1600–1629 11:30 11:00 10:30 10:00 09:30 09:00 09:00 09:00 09:00
1630–1659 11:15 10:45 10:15 09:45 09:15 09:00 09:00 09:00 09:00
1700–0414 11:00 10:30 10:00 09:30 09:00 09:00 09:00 09:00 09:00
0415–0429 11:15 10:45 10:15 09:45 09:15 09:00 09:00 09:00 09:00
0430–0444 11:30 11:00 10:30 10:00 09:30 09:00 09:00 09:00 09:00
0445–0459 11:45 11:15 10:45 10:15 09:45 09:15 09:00 09:00 09:00
0500–0514 12:00 11:30 11:00 10:30 10:00 09:30 09:00 09:00 09:00
0515–0529 12:15 11:45 11:15 10:45 10:15 09:45 09:15 09:00 09:00
0530–0544 12:30 12:00 11:30 11:00 10:30 10:00 09:30 09:00 09:00
0545–0559 12:45 12:15 11:45 11:15 10:45 10:15 09:45 09:15 09:00

which measn roughly 1 hrs less duty than my actual FTLs, which are covered by actual JAR/EASA.

I also do not see any worsening for split duty, captains discretion or standby duty. If one can find it, be invited to show me.

Captains desrection is so old as aviation itself. Every discretion report goes to the NAA (national air authority), if above 2 hrs right away. If your airline produces too many reports, your NAA will intervene. Or at least it should. If it doesn't, it's not the fault of new EASA rules.

I still fail to see where this online petition refers to the new EASA rules. I don't know what they want. I find these videos very unrealistic, not funny and very biased. I don't believe that passenger will get a better view of aviation if we shock them with unrealistic stories.

All in all, Vereinigung Cockpit is shooting in its own foot with this campaign, since it fights for something they do not follow anyway (Lufthansa has better FTLs than EASA).

Dani

And Lufthansa mainline is surprisingly just one of 20 pilot groups represented by VC. Many of which have quite outdated FTLs since it is not really easy to negotiate better ones.

Anyway, a splitduty where a 7 hour break on board of the plane is considered sufficient rest for an 18 hour day is not really my idea of good FTLs.

Dani
A well balanced offering. Is it more the case the Unions are trying to "manage" what is perceived by many to be a rogue LCC?

The market is as big as the demand. Artificial inflation is a poor long-term strategy. It is far better to expand jobs organically by working in a safe, efficient industry providing the product people want at the right price.

Yes, that's all very well, but the low cost airline expansion over the last 17 years hasn't followed your business model.

With FTLs regarded as some sort of efficiency target not as a limit, perhaps Flight Time Target would be a more appropriate title.

I would have thought that with more pilots, a company would be able to reduce the annual quota of duty hours allocated to each pilot and therefore reduce fatigue.

I suspect you might be working for the wrong people. I trust my CP, and I trust my Accountable Manager. That is why I work with them. The pilots work with ops whenever there is doubt, to come up with schedules that we can safely fly - and it is the pilots as much as ops who are frustrated by the illogical restrictions of CAP371. Funnily enough we want to fly, that is why we are in this game. We like our work.


lucky you, we don't all have this level of trust and respect.

The market is as big as the demand. Artificial inflation is a poor long-term strategy. It is far better to expand jobs organically by working in a safe, efficient industry providing the product people want at the right price. Yes, that's all very well, but the low cost airline expansion over the last 17 years hasn't followed your business model.Then it will fail, or at least lose money (not always the same thing in aviation, I grant you). The business plan I stated was a restating of a core principle of capitalism. However I believe the LoCos are doing rather well, so suspect they have grown organically.

Or were you denying that LoCos are safe? Not what I would call part of any business model, in that safety is an underlying assumption and regulatory requirement. However even there I think you would struggle to justify your assertion, something I see you do not attempt.

Parliamentary Commitee (http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=10315)

Thanks for the pointer to that.

Mr David O’Brien, Director of Flight and Ground Operations for Ryanair.
No difference between factory worker driving home and pilot driving home. Really?
Factory worker has probably just been out of bed for 10hrs cf pilot who may have been up for 22hrs and crossed eight time zones.

Mr Andrew Haines, Chief Executive, Civil Aviation Authority.
Hey! I'm really worried about those pilots who don't sleep for 24hrs before a flight :rolleyes:

Pilot's can't afford to live near their palces of work anymore - many have long commutes. Think Coglan.

What is it going to take before these guys get the picture? Its not about facts / the mass of science behind FTLs /NASA research etc...it is about profit. Unfortunatley those who seek to implement dangerous FTL policies will find they are losing people as the impending pilot shortage starts to bite.

There are many reasons to fight this legislation, but an impending pilot shortage looks to be well wide of reality, just have a look at the wannabe forum.

Dr Rob Hunter, Head of Safety, British Airline Pilots’ Association.
Missed an opportunity to make it clear that, by the time passengers and crew are disembarked, immigration cleared, baggage collected and customs cleared, the rest period may commence before leaving the airport and that transport to HOTAC is taking place within the rest period.

Basil - I'll have to find the exact time it was discussed on the Parliamentary TV website, but Dr Hunter was asked in some detail about this by a member of the panel. The panel member said she was trying to "get a handle" on the actual FDP times and Dr Hunter did state quite clearly that the rest period included the above activities.

The other guy, representing UNITE also added that some hotels can be between 30-45 minutes, in some cases an hour away from the airport. So, I think the panel got the idea.

David O'Brien tried to draw a very poor comparison between a factory worker and a pilot, but I was rather pleased to hear him belittle his own comments when he said the only difference would be "the pilots car would probably be bigger". Ridiculous statement. I actually half agreed with O'Brien on other comments he made. Shame he made such a silly comment so early on. I'll put it down to nerves!

ART of flight. Have a look at the Boeing market forecast....or the UN pilot shortage predictions last week. ust a question of when not if.

Boing7117,
Thank you for pointing that out.
I've now watched and listened carefully to that part of the evidence and agree with you.
I apologise to Dr Rob Hunter for my error and will remove that part of my post.

I actually half agreed with O'Brien on other comments he made.
Yes, I thought he made some very sensible comments.

At least it didn't descend into a union vs airline vs CAA bunfight.

Calibrating Pilot...:ugh:who is this guy?

Dave is a real stand up guy. Read this (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/234377-ryanair-loses-legal-bid-identify-website-critics.html) link to say what an Irish Judge had to say about him and his fellow "Zed" team members.

It's been said before: "when his lips are moving"....

ELFAA my foot. I suspect that's a flag of convenience for Ryanair to try and look respectable.

Calibrating Pilot...who is this guy?

No idea how this fella managed to get on the committee.

First of all he apologises for being late to the meeting. Then he asks the question whether any of this entire debate has ever considered the flying task faced by calibration pilots.

The committee member seemed to be aluding to the fact that calibration pilots are the ones who make the multiple approaches into airfields and it is their data which is passed to airline pilots who just make the one approach. He painted the picture that calibration pilots make approaches all day long into a said airfield, constantly updating the commercial pilots in some technical "thumbs-up" way.

This individual got the completely wrong end of the stick and really took the discussion off into an unnecessary tangent.

I am not suggesting that calibration pilots don't have a difficult and demanding job, however, as correctly pointed out by the chap sat next to the UNITE fellow, calibration pilots fall under the category of aerial work rather than commercial aviation and therefore have not been considered in this discussion

Lets be a little realistic
EASA FTL comes into UK
BA protected by scheme and BALPA
Virgin long haul a lot of augmentation outside current proposals / Balpa
Easyjet leaders in FRMS, yeah Pilots may do 5 earlies but science says thats better than whats allowed under CAP371. BALPA protection. Who in EZY thinks they will move to 7 earlies, NOT.
Thomson - probably Charter Airlines will benefit by adoption of EASA FTL, protected by strong Union, other TUI Airlines in Europe already running to Sub Part Q so Thomson will see a level playing field. How come other TUI Pilots can manage SBQ currently
Thomas Cook - similar to above Charter / Balpa
Monarch similar to above Charter / Balpa
Jet 2 similar to above Charter / Balpa
All above started to invest in FRMS already, doesnt come cheap. Profits before safety you said alosauras? (dinosaurus perhaps)
Flybe - BALPA might be a bun fight?
DHL - Science supporting consecutive nights and BALPA, sole night ops currently outside proposals
Anyone left??


Lastly, EASA FTL means that the UK has to sign up to it, but Airlines can keep their current schemes if they wish under derogation with a safety case.

Post by Mr Angry From Purley "Just to confirm also it's 2 months to respond to the latest scheme, then off to Parliment for approval and then 2 years to implement."
He has a point, but to clarify further: There is just over one week until the end of the comment period (http://flightdutytimes.eu/the-comitology-procedure/) for the new flightdutytimes regulations. Thereafter it becomes the final draft law.

10,000 + signatures and counting. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

The MP in the green tie (it would have been nice to know their names at the start of the session) at 1hr 13 asked Andrew Haynes, the Chief Exec of the CAA, whether pilots could land having been awake for over 22 hrs either now or under the EASA proposals. I was amazed that Andrew Haynes said this would be an "exceptionally, exceptionally rare event" and only after being called from a long standby, going into discretion etc.

I should think it must happen many times a day with long-haul arrivals and is an inherent risk of 18-30 hr rest periods downroute. Take a standard 2-crew East Coast trip arriving in the US/Caribbean at about 1700 local/2200Z. Meal, sleep, wake up at at 0300 local/0800Z. Can't sleep during the rest of the day (why should you on your body-clock?), pick-up late afternoon for a night-flight home, landing back in the UK at 0700Z after 23hrs awake. Bog standard duty, all on schedule, no discretion involved.

The whole discussion seemed to be subconsciously based on a short-haul operation. The really scary thing about the EASA proposals is that they would extend this model to 2-crew West Coast operations, so you'd routinely be landing after 27 hrs awake.

The MP for Calibration Pilots is one Julian Sturdy (Con). There must be a lot of them living in York Outer.

I had a brief communication last year with one of the key scientists at NASA at the time -whose work on crew fatigue formed the basis of some of the new proposals. I asked him what he thought of EASA's new proposals at the time, in particular how the FAA would feel about potentially over-fatigued crews (from the EU) flying in US airspace and landing there having worked a duty day which exceeds FAA restrictions. My impression from what little he could or would tell me was that this question had not been considered - which I found very interesting as it seems to be a pretty fundemental one. I also met with EASA and was equally surprised that they have no perception of any negative pressure whatsoever on safety standards from some of the 'coercive influences' used by some airlines to encourage excessive use of crew discretion amongst many other things. Needless to say I feel that EASA are rushing this through without adequate,thorough consultation of the people who really know what the implications will be - the people that actually fly aeroplanes.

Just to clarify, Julian Sturdy MP was indeed raising the question of Flight calibration in response to a letter sent from within his constituency.

As suggested by BALPA, a letter outlining concerns for the new FTL proposals was drawn up and I used examples from my current aviation role. For thse who have watched the meeting on Parliament TV, I'm afraid the chap who dismisses flight checking as not relevant.:- Last time I looked in my ops manual the flight calibration pilot is subject to CAP371.

At the moment at least I know that the very max I can do is 13 hours (And I feel the error rate in that discrectionary hour increases noticeably). I'm not looking forward to working longer than 13 hours in busy terminal areas, hand flying all my approaches down to 50ft gear up, flying 6-7 approaches an hour and 50% of the time against the flow (with a 40kt tailwind)!

So perhaps this particular MP was just doing his job and raising the concerns of his constituents!

GQ

We have situations right now where you can be on standby from 03.00 local until 21.00 local with the distinct possibility of being called out to fly a multiple sector nearly 12 hour night duty starting near the end of the standby period. Given this duty often goes into discretion and if you get up at a normal time say 06.30 you could be up for well over 24 hours before you land. We certainly hope it will not happen but I had a co-pilot recently who had this scenario occur on the flight before.

Says something that we had to fight very hard indeed to get some restrictions into our CLAs, so that standby duties can not exceed 16 hours (was 24 hours before) and that the total of standby duty and following flight duty can not exceed 22 hours. However there is still a loophole that allows up to 31 hours in some very rare cases. Has never happened, but it will one day as long as that loophole exists.

The actual event I have described has standby and scheduled duty at 27 and a bit hours (2 crew on a 737 but only one out of standby) and one of the sectors had a go-around due to wind shear in the middle of the night with a twenty knot plus crosswind in mountainous terrain! What is the loophole allowing 31 hours?