[QUOTE=Wireless;10285258]
I worked for many years on the roads.
Unlike aviation the road enforcement and regs don’t make such a fuss to seperate out tiredness is tolerable but it’s fatigue that is bad. They just draw the line at tiredness (hence those tiredness can kill matrix signs). You’re either in a fit state and alert or not. Certainly on the HGV side of things for example. The muddied waters between fatigue and tiredness get out clause wasn’t something DVSA and Police were interested in.
A nice comparison Wireless although the masters of the universe at ICAO also share the same definition of tiredness/fatigue:
Fatigue is defined as a physiological state of reduced mental or physical performance capability resulting from sleep loss or extended wakefulness, circadian phase, or workload (mental and/or physical activity) that can impair a crew member’s alertness and ability to safely operate an aircraft or perform safety-related duties.
I’m not quite sure how aviation authorities and airlines have managed to muddy this quite clear definition into if you’re tired it’s fine to operate. I’ve been in a few airlines and it’s intersting to see the difference in culture, at my previous airline no one would dare call fatigued as it would lead to an investigation. At my current operator, it’s expected to make it through the brutal summer months. What’s interesting is both have Fatigue risk management systems. It seems as long as you drop in a few buzz words in the ops manuals and have a “department” (read one poor bloke in a dark room with a PC)somewhere then the regulator can tick the box.
Two things are clear;
Under EASA the only thing keeping you safe is you, the FTLs Ignore all medical evidence and provide no protection.
The aviation industry’s view on human performance is at least 20 years out of date
Safe flying and driving