FRMS
FRMS
The introduction of the fatigue risk management system seemed a sensible step. Crews were hoping for some more reasonable planning of fatiguing patterns and the airline industry was hoping for lower insurance bills.
As the latter has materialised, the earlier does not seem to happen, at least not to the extent that crews feel very much a positive pinch. Fatigue is the number one problem they face in daily operations.
When a problem is pointed at, quite often the airlines respond by saying that there are not enough reports to sustain a genuine problem. When enough reports arise, they respond by saying that their elaborated FRMS model does not show any problem with the particular pattern. It seems that in many companies the empirical pointing at problems is not taken into account sufficiently and subdued by pseudo-scientific data or statistics, leading the FRMS idea to be only a fig leaf for the industry, giving them the excuse of apparently doing something to mitigate the problem. Hpowever it almost made it worse.
This might sound provocative, and I am not involved in any such program, I am simply sometimes a victim of fatigue and can’t get rid of the impression of being misled or fooled by FRMS.
Am I the only one feeling that way, or am i slightly paranoid (fatigued)?