Pilots falling asleep BEFORE they report.

[Justbelowcap]

Over the last few years, as house prices have shot up in the SE, I'm flying with co-pilots that are living further and further from LHR. It is not unusual these days to fly with a guy who has just driven in from Wales, Devon, Manchester or even Newcastle. We also have lots of commuters (one co-pilot even commutes from Australia and thats on SH, many many more on LH) from Spain, France Scotland etc.

BA seems to turn a blind eye to these practises and even helps promote commuting by supplying buses to and from the terminals to the Compass Centre. I have every sympathy with guys trying to find somewhere to live that offers the best quality of life BUT I feel that you are not fully rested if you have just done a 3hr car journey or a spent 6 hrs traveling from France before you report for duty. The last guy I flew with had just driven in from Sheffield, a 3 hour plus car journey. This is just not on especially with some of the long duty days we have. Is this the same in other airlines? Is there not any legislation that restricts the distance you can drive before you go to work? Or restricts the distance you can travel as a pax before you operate? It is not uncommon to see guys get off overnight flights from the states to then do a 10:30 report to operate back out again. Apart from being extremely tiring do the pax not have a right to expect a pilot to turn up to work fully rested. Maybe it's time for the CAA took a long hard look at the some of the ditances pilots are living from their regular places of work.

[nexeuk]

That's a good idea if you also agree to nobody ever going beyond 11/2 hrs, lets say, from the airport. Thus no more holidays, no more visiting friends outside of this 11/2 hr radius - otherwise you might turn up to work tired! What a dumb call for legislation, haven't we got enough restrictions already? Let me be responsible for turning up in a fit state. If you're so concerned offload the guy. Also, where do you draw the line? Who's to say that a commuter is more tired than a guy who couldn't sleep the night before, or (god forbid) went out and had a later night than usual with some friends - perhaps we should put a bed time restriction into the legislation aswell?:E

[Bubbette]

I think in the US it's not uncommon to not live close to your base and have to catch a flight to report for work.

[Justbelowcap]

Not sure that I get your point Nexus. Why do you mention an 11 1/2 hour limit?

I just feel that there are too many pilots reporting to work who aren't fully rested. A 3 hour car journey, for me, is not playing the game. I just wondered what the situation was in other airlines and if there is any current legislation that actually puts any restrictions on how long a pilot can travel to his/her regular place of work.

It's not the time of report that you have to worry about it's the 13 hours later, after a multi-sector day, when you might make a serious mistake due to being tired. Maybe I'm wrong and nobody cares about this subject anymore. Certainly when I joined our contract said you had to live an hours drive from your home base. Things must have changed but one thing that hasn't changed is that a tired pilot makes mistakes.

A few months ago I did have to refuse to go into discretion because my co-pilot was simply to tired. He had driven in from Wales that day.

[Big Tudor]

There is already legislation in the UK for this. Your company operations manual should have the statement
If the journey time from home to normal departure airfield is usually in excess of 1 1/2 hours, crew members should make arrangements for temporary accommodation nearer to base.
If the normal travelling time is in excess of 1 1/2 hours then the crew member concerned is in breach of the company ops manual in the same way as if a duty was rostered in excess of Max FDP. Of course using the word Should rather than must does cloud the waters somewhat.

[Justbelowcap]

Thanks Big Tudor you are right. There is mention of a 90 min restriction, it's just that nobody is taking any notice of it.

[Big Tudor]

Isn't it odd how some parts of the ops manual are 'overlooked'. Wonder how many people would notice if there were insufficient days off on the roster!:rolleyes:

[hapzim]

The Caa need to first look at the practice of Level 2 ops sending a heavy crew out in the back, in normal pax seats, surrounded by pax and then having to operate home. Usually late night / early departures. Knacked when you get in the seat yet within FTL's.

Much less tiring actualy working both ways with use of discretion, but can not be rostered.

Same goes for staff carparks being in the next county.

And this is from someone who lives close enough to the airport to see the gear retracting.:hmm:

[LanFranc]

Justbelow

I don't think you've given enough thought to the premise of your post. Does it matter WHY a crewmember reports "fatigued" for a work assignment? Why do you single out commuting? Is it okay for a pilot to stay up all night with a sick child then show up for work? Can a young single guy stay out and party all hours (no alcohol of course) and show up with no sleep as long as he lives close to work? The requirement is to report for duty "fit to fly."

What someone does on his own time, off duty, is NO business of yours or the company for whom he works. If you have a problem with someone reporting for work unfit, take THAT issue up with the individual and if necessary, management. DO NOT start pushing for commuting limits for the 99% of us that commute and commute sensibly. With declining pay/benefits/conditions it isn't always practicable to sell up and move for every base change for whatever reason. Its all some guys can do to hang onto a quality of life. Some pilots recognize a job as temporary and moving would be insanity. Mandated maximum commuting times/distances/practices would adversely affect a LOT of people.

I don't know where you live, where you work or what your circumstances might be, but in this environment none of our careers/positions/situations are 100% safe for the next 40 years. You might be driving a few hours to your next base for your next company in a few years. Unless, of course, you'll sell up and move the family whilst you're in training.
Regards,
A one time commuter by necessity

[Big Tudor]

LanFranc

Nobody needs to push for commuting limits for UK based airline crew because THEY ALREADY EXIST! Please read my first post which is an extract from the UK CAP371 The Avoidance of Fatigue in Aircrew.

[maxy101]

Just Below Cap...Some interesting points and from what I hear from Senior Management, one that is being blamed for our recent mishaps. Would be interesting to know how many of the relevant crew were commuters. Though BA management never let the facts stand in the way of a good story.
Your points beg the question , Do you sleep all day until waking up for your report to work? Are you fully rested otherwise?
I commute and manage to snooze for an hour on my 2 hour flight. Less tiring , I find ,than my old 1.5 / 2 hr drive up from the South Coast when I lived there. Unfortunately, those of us that were LGW based don´t get housing allowance if you move up to LHR.
This means most of us had to drive PAST our preferred base up to the big smoke. I´m with the other posters here, One has to accept responsibility for some things in life, otherwise, what´s the point of a pilots licence? I don´t think commuters are any worse than anybody else in reporting for duty unfit. That´s not to say some people don´t arrange their sleep patterns so that they will be able to sleep in the bunks and extend their duty day. How do you legislate for all that?
What I suspect is that there has been an element of envy among management and various UK based crew at the semi-rich lifestyles that some of our ex pat colleagues are lucky enough to have.

[unowho]

After all the rules and regs are read. Is it not more relaxing being a pax from sunny Spain rather than fighting you way around the ******* M25. Not only is it more sensible but life here is still a lot better than the UK.:ok:

[Hand Solo]

Over the last few years, as the population has shot up in the SE, I'm flying with Captains that are breeding further and further from LHR. It is not unusual these days to fly with a guy who has young children in Wales, Devon, Manchester or even Newcastle. We also have lots of second marriages.

BA seems to turn a blind eye to these practises and even helps promote procreation by supplying part-time working. I have every sympathy with guys with young children BUT I feel that you are not fully rested if you have just done 3hrs sleep or a spent 6 hrs tending to a poorly child before you report for duty. The last guy I flew with had just driven in from the school run, a 3 hour plus car journey. This is just not on especially with some of the long duty days we have. Is this the same in other airlines? Is there not any legislation that restricts the number of kids you can have before you go to work? Or restricts the attention you pay them before you operate? It is not uncommon to see guys get off overnight teething duty then do a 10:30 report to operate back out again. Apart from being extremely tiring do the pax not have a right to expect a pilot to turn up to work fully rested. Maybe it's time for the CAA took a long hard look at the some of the nippers pilots are having away from their regular places of work.

PS I take it JustbelowCAP doesn't live far south of the M25 roadworks by T4 or his home might just have moved outside the 1.5 hour band and he'll have to sell up and move north!

PPS I'm sure all the Picadilly line commuters will be thrilled at JBCs implicit suggestion that the company busses from the Central area to Compass should be removed. Then they can all drive in and JBC can add yet another 30 minutes to his journey time in order to find a space in our overcrowded car park.

PPS If I ever fly with you on an early remind me to tell you just how knackered I am after getting up at 03:30 to drive 120 miles to work, aaah........ sorry what was I saying?........ yes tiredness.....zzzzzzzz

[Justbelowcap]

Actually Hand Solo if you have been up all night looking after a kid then I feel that you aren't fully rested and that you shouldn't report for a long multi-sector day. It's called being a professional.

I'm in no way having a go at commuters, an hours flight as a pax is probably a lot more relaxing than driving round the M25. But positioning for 6 or 7 hrs and then operating is just not on. Neither is doing a three hour plus car drive. That is taking the mickey out of the system. The pax have a right to expect the pilots to be fully rested. I hadn't realised that there are proscribed limits. It's time the CAA and BA started to enforce them. This job aint a joke, the mistakes we make are for keeps. Tiredness is a killer. You wouldn't turn uip for work drunk why should you turn up not able to safely operate for the legal day plus discretion.

[Dewdrop]

BIG TUDOR
which companies ops manual ?

[maxy101]

JBC , I feel your ammunition would be better used at highlighting fatigueing rosters, for example, on the 777. Why not highlight the companies lack of CAP protection for 5/6 Atlantics a month or apply pressure to construct back to back trips (as they do for the CC) with a nice warm hotel bed across the road from Compass?

[f40]

Justbelowcap, if companies do not even take work & rest rules seriously and generally try to stretch crews out to the max, why do you believe that anyone in management would be even remotely interested in this? It's just not going to happen is it?

Seems to me that nexeuk suggestion is the only workable one, though frought with problems and not exactly making for a hassle free start to the working day. ....recently had an FO who went out salsa dancing in Berlin all night, and announced that fact to the whole crew when he arrived in the lobby 3 minutes before our 0400 pick up. FAs very upset by this, so I approached the Captain. Who also wasn't best pleased but decided to fly with him anyway...... So we flew and the FO looked like a wrung out dish rag slumped in his seat, very very annoyed with us for having questioned his being fit-for-flight. Lesson learned for me was that next time I will either refuse to fly and take with me the FAs, or just shut up and hope for the best..... Realpolitik isn't pretty. :rolleyes:

Having said that, I do think Justbelowcap's concern is valid. I live a 5 hour car-train-plane trip from base, and I almost always travel out the day before starting duty. On the rare occasion when I commute and work on the same day, I definitely notice the accumulated effect of the commute plus a 3 leg day. Being tired and stressed even before starting my flight makes me feel that I'm less alert than what I should have been. The idea of not reacting appropriately in an emergency due to self induced tiredness is what keeps me commuting the day before.

The argument "Look at how tired we get from working and that's all right with the company, so we might as well show up for work equally tired since the comapny doesn't give a sh*t either" doesn't work for me personally. The company might be an irresponsible @ss, but I try my best not to be.

But perhaps I have an over active conscience?
The nux of the matter is, with long working hours/teething kids, you don't have a choice. With a commute, you do.

Seeing how I do not 'command' anything more dangerous than a coffee pot and a bunch of FAs, I'm probably a great big fool for taking x amount of days per year away from the family to show up for work well rested though. :(

[Justbelowcap]

Maxy101 good points about fatigueing roster construction. It's time that this became a serious safety issue. Would be interesting to see the legal position of somebody involved in an incident after a long day preceded by an over 90 min journey to report.

Email on the way to LCG to see what the official line is, suspect the insurers would take a dim view of long commutes pre-checkin. Maybe a CHIRP report would clarify the situation for everybody.

[nexeuk]

Justbelowcap - 'tiredness is a killer'
On your argument then the companies will also have to provide accomadation for all crew post night operations, because having been up all night no one is really fit to operate even a car up the road - however, we know that won't happen.
But stop bleating on about tired crew, individual responsiblity not blanket legislation for the few who abuse. You're the captain, you are ultimately responsible for a safe flight, so accept that responsiblity and if you think a crewmember isn't fit - don't go! But don't highlight a problem for the majority of long distance commuters, drivers etc. who turn up perfectly ok.

[RoyHudd]

I always keep a pillow and a blanket in the car, and know the location of laybys between my place and LGW. And I also carry an inflatable neck-support in my flight back, to use when sleep opportunities present themselves.

I can't think of too many jobs where I would need to take such precautions, but our profession does require alertness, and naps help greatly in getting me through the days/nights.

[Sliding member]

I feel sorry for those chaps that have to do their home standbys from a layby near the airport, can't be good.

[moosp]

An airline with which I am familiar has its own rule that demands that if a crew member flies as a passenger on his own behalf before a flight then the full duty rest period must be taken before operating a flight duty period, i.e. you must be within 1 1/2 hours of the place of reporting for twelve hours before the flight.

A junior manager has the bone crushingly boring job of scanning all staff travel receipts each day to compare them to the rostered duty to ensure compliance. His only pleasure is when he finds a culprit and can get them. Some pilots and cabin crew have been sacked for this, even though they rested well as a passenger on the incoming flight. Paying full fare on another operator works, but there is always someone ready to dob you in if they see you at the airport.

Yes, it restricts commuting greatly but it does prevent that 1% of pilots from abusing FTL's and arriving tired for work.

Oh, and Lanfranc <What someone does on his own time, off duty, is NO business of yours or the company for whom he works.> is not true. A company may have no right to control what you do in you off duty time, but many do, both inside and outside the industry.

As an aside I often wondered why if I take the ferry from Macau to Hong Kong (one hour journey) to get to work I am OK but if I take the helicopter (14 minutes) I am in breach of company rules? Such is the silliness of a power and control bureaucracy.

[Devils Advocate]

Dewdrop - w.r.t. which companies Ops Manual.... I think you'll find that all UK CAA ( JAR? ) approved versions of this tome have the following statements within their FTL section(7), i.e. mine reads as follows:OPERATIONS MANUAL / Part A / Flight & Duty Time Limitations Scheme

Section 7.4.2 - Responsibility for the proper control of flight and duty time does not rest wholly with the Company. Crew members have the responsibility to make optimum use of the opportunities and facilities for rest provided. They are also responsible for planning and using their rest periods properly in order to minimise incurring fatigue.

The ANO places a further responsibility on crew members. Simply put, crew members shall not act as operating crew if they know, or suspect, that their physical or mental condition renders them unfit to operate. Furthermore, they must not fly if they know that they are, or are likely to be, in breach of this scheme.

Section 7.9.2 – Travelling time, from home to departure aerodrome, if long distances are involved, is a factor influencing any subsequent onset of fatigue. If the journey time from home to normal departure airfield is usually in excess of 1 hour, crew members should make arrangements for temporary accommodation nearer to base.

I'm sure that we'd all like to live within a sensible commuting distance of our base airport. However the problem is that, as good as the job is, the pay ( for a great many ) does not stretch so far as to allow either the purchase of a primary home in the locale of the airport, or renting of digs for the provision of pre/post flight rest ( on top of keeping a home elsewhere ).

E.g. Let's say that you’re a 30 year old newly qualified F/O, flying jets with a LGW based airline, and say your partner’s at home looking after your two young children, i.e. you’re the sole bread winner in your family.

Your total gross salary might be in the region of, say, £40,000 - which, after tax, will give you an approx net / take-home figure of £2,395 per month.

To live within a reasonable commute your base, i.e. less than one hour away, the kind of housing costs you’re looking at are:

East Sussex : Average Cost: £184,315 / Detached: £281,966 / Semi-detached: £176,192 / Terraced: £152,140

West Sussex : Average Cost: £206,886 / Detached: £325,707 / Semi-detached: £199,711 / Terraced: £165,294

Gatwick / Crawley : Average Cost: £169,922 / Detached: £269,099 / Semi-detached: £191,716 / Terraced: £151,107

Banks and Building Societies will presently / typically lend 3.75x salary ( I’ve just checked that with HSBC (http://www.ukpersonal.hsbc.co.uk/hsbc/personal_banking/mortgages-and-home-buying) ).

Thus, assuming you needed a mortgage for a property purchase in the Gatwick / Crawley area – average cost £169,992 and where you supply a 10% / £17,000 down payment ( “Oh look, there’s a money tree !” ).

Your repayments on that will, at present interest rates, be approx £900 per month – which will leave you & your family with £1,495 per month to live on ( i.e. £345 per week ) - and gawd help you when the Bank Of England raise interest rates ! :rolleyes:

Of course having paid £900 on your mortgage, what’s left of your salary will then need to cover Council tax, house insurance, electricity, gas, water rates, food, vehicle ( insurance, tax, mot, servicing, and petrol at +80p per litre ), pension & life-cover, union fees, clothing, etc, etc, etc........ and, needless to say, all of this assumes that your net income is ‘entirely disposable’, i.e. that you have no other pre-existing major debts, such as repaying your flying training and / or a type-rating, perhaps ?!

So, apart from the fact that you will struggle to find a house near your base that you can afford and / or one that’s in a locale that you’ll want to live in ( rather than in some ‘sink estate’ ) if you do manage to find one you’ll be close to skint - and if you’re able to stand financially still you’d be doing well – where the likelihood is that an unexpected bill will wipe you out. :{

Veritably we have to live in the real world. So what’s the answer ? Uhm, how about putting fares up and paying the crews more money, so that they can afford to live nearby ? :ok:

With everybody driving costs down, just what price does Joe Public put on safety – you can’t have it both ways, can you ?!

[HEALY]

Commuting from Oz, he must be stuffed. Pay cant be that bad then.

[5415N]

Once upon a time as a commuter , I managed to miss report time (due someone blocking the runwaqy at LHR) by about 10 mins , not a big problem , a/c left on time etc , no probs or so I thought , phone call from God reminding me of responibility etc , OK my fault I choose to live up north and to the west .

Two weeks later , on another trip I turn up for work to find myself alone as a prang on the M25 is causing probs , still no probs , do all the work and we leave lhr 2 1/2 hrs late . Little bit anoyed to find out that the two other pilots end up with letters from the company praising them for their professional and dedication to duty etc and also vouchers for M&S etc .

Have also heard rumours that my company keeps a beady eye on all commuters report times by fact of using their postcode etc and will always be treated diff by the company:*

[B737NG]

We have 220 commuting Pilots in the company. When one lives
further away then 90 min from the AP then we put them in a Hotel
24 hours before departure............... during his duty days we kill
them allomost by rostering them for up to 120 hours in an AC
but only 80 hours on duty in the cockpit. It is sickening and not
safe we think ...... but all is legal!

NG

[Desperate]

Remember Selby? Driver (allegedly) fell asleep, vehicle & trailer went down the embankment onto railway line. Hit by a train - passengers on train were killed.

Driver was charged with causing death by dangerous driving after the prosecution showed he had spent all night on the internet before driving: i.e. he'd not been properly rested. He went to prison for many years for a relatively minor action/omission (inattention/sleep) which resulted in a catastrophe.

If you fall asleep while driving and cause an accident the police will now almost certainly charge you with dangerous driving. It used to be 'careless driving' (also known as 'without due care & attention') but the Crown Prosecution Service are now pushing for the 'Dangerous Driving' charge. The (draconian) view is that if you're driving and start to feel tired you ought to pull over and take a nap. Pressing on then becomes 'reckless'. In the real world or course it's not that simple, but it won't stop you facing a jail term if convicted.

Those who sit in rush-hour traffic, barely awake after a 4 sector day that started with a 3.30am alarm had better have a good story ready should, God forbid, anything happen on the way home. The same thing goes for the drive into work and, for all those exceeding 90 minutes each way, you're probably in breach of your ops manual (and jar ops). Nobody cares until there is an incident, or worse. Then the lawyers will have a field day.

Of course, Chief Pilots and Ops Directors will claim no knowledge of individual circumstances and, hands wringing, will point to the rules. Likewise the CAA and the DfT. The $h*t will stick to you, not them. It never does. Forget the fatigue-inducing minimum-rest rostering - they've got you by the ball$ if there's an incident and you're regularly travelling in excess of 90 minutes.

I don't claim to have a simple answer - just a warning.




[I]

[Devils Advocate]

Desperate - might I say that is well said and very true !

[JW411]

I pointed out to Hand Solo on another forum (BA recruit DEPs) that it was my understanding that CAP 371 only allowed for a 1 hour and 30 minute drive to work. When last I worked under CAP 371 this was certainly written into our FDRs.

Hand Solo responded that "he and half of BA" were therefore breaking the rules and so it would appear that lots of you out there are doing the same.

It's no good pointing out the cost of housing in the South East at the subsequent board of inquiry. YOU will personally be held liable.

I have often been fascinated by pilots who drive to work from the likes of Cornwall and then bitch like mad if asked to extend a FDP by 10 minutes!

Mind you, they are then happy to drive back to Cornwall afterwards!!!!!!!

[Cumulonimbus]

Desperate

Well said.

A pilot living in Wales, for example, and accepting a job in Heathrow, that is his choice. The passengers, crew and the airline should expect nothing but a fully prepared, rested and able pilot to turn up for work. If said pilot cannot afford to find lodgings close enough to achieve the same, he should not accept the job and should allow someone who is prepared to abide by the rules to take it.

You wanna live in Wales? Take a job in Wales. If not move your house, your pregnant girlfriend and your wife and kids to the area, or rent a bed nearby, otherwise let someone else take the job.

Remember the story of the pilot in the US who used to fly his private airplane to work? Was rather foggy one morning, but he was so desparate to get to work on time, he landed on the taxiway!

Driving home long distances after a fatiguing day is as criminal as getting in an airplane unfit to fly. Both could kill innocent people.

Blaming fatiguing schedules only works if you abide by the same principles!

Cb

[bigflyingrob]

Trouble is in the London area 1.5 hours means living in the terminal! A friend of mine lives 7 miles from work and it takes her over an hour and thats by motorbike!

[swish266]

Argo36 saidFlight crew are subsidising airlines at the expense of their health.
I cannot agree more.
Our job as a job is going down d drain...
I am happy both my sons dont show a kink of interest in flyin.
But while we r at it, we must make sure we give our best as profis - meaning no compromise on rest!!!!!!!!!
Or else jump in the seat of the 25 yr old IT wizz kid who just bought his CPL for fun, but is definitely considering your job...

[Anti-ice]

I quite agree with the topic of this thread.

I think in many ways BA is to blame for this , especially with what i call the 'LGW displacement effect'

5-6 years ago BA at LGW was a busy happy place teeming with 767s,DC10s,747s,737s etc........
Alot of people were employed there , and lived reasonably locally , Surrey, the coast and so on....

Gatwick is now a ghost of its former self BA wise, with 10 777s and a handful of 737 destinations.

Of course,handfuls of the staff have had to go to LHR in the process.
Most cannot afford/have no desire to live in London and so have to commute , many daily.

I have a 40mile drive, but that is short compared to many, plus the effects of the M25 with frequent delays / traffic jams.

I think people should live a reasonable distance.... they stand more chance of being reasonably rested prior to their duty, and less chance of being late causing disruption.
As for some of the 'commuters' who leave it till the last minute to fly in from wherever - well they ask for all the trouble they can get if they leave things too late :p

In no way do i berate LGW, as for those of us who were previously based there - we would do anything to come back, if it was the thriving base it was mid-90's:ugh:

[Scottie]

When I worked at LHR we used to have a lot of guys who would commute from Somerset, Manchester etc. They all stayed in B&B's during their working week and commuted home for days off.

However some of them on their first day would have their alarms going off at 2.30am to make a 5.30am report, do a 12 hour duty day and then nightstop.

In an accident enquiry house prices would not be deemed a mitigating factor.

[Justbelowcap]

Nexus you say But stop bleating on about tired crew, individual responsiblity not blanket legislation for the few who abuse. You're the captain, you are ultimately responsible for a safe flight, so accept that responsiblity and if you think a crewmember isn't fit - don't go! But don't highlight a problem for the majority of long distance commuters, drivers etc. who turn up perfectly ok. but actually the one thing I can't do as a Captain is decide how tired my FO might be. That is down to him/her. The CAA should be aware of the abuses to it's regulations. If there was an incident then anybody who commuted more than 90 mins would be on very shaky ground. As the legal commander I have a right to expect that the FO has complied with all CAA/ BA regulations on checking in. Driving in from Devon or flying in from Spain is NOT complying with BA ops procedures. If you are going to travel long distances then make sure you do it the night before and not on the day you operate.

[seat 0A]

I share the same concerns as JBC.
I find it troubling to see how many of my shorthaul colleagues choose to live in France, Spain, Wales, or even Canada!
Since I do not work for a British carrier, I would be very interested to know of any JAA regulations concerning the mentioned 90 minutes commute rule.

[swedish]

I seam to be missing something here. CAP371 has been around longer than most of our jobs. The CAA requirement is 90 mins. I presume this is based on min rest (say 12 hrs) minus up to 3 hrs travelling = 8 hrs - a normal nights sleep. Breakfast etc is normally provided on the flight so no need for meals at home. Most of all you job contract specifies a base. All in all a normal safe and happy situation. If you over 90 mins away without a rest place closer then you are violating all the safety measures put in place to protect yourselves and everyone around you. If there is an incident because of tiredness you are to blame.

If companies acted in this way the tread would be 10 times longer than this. Selective reading of the Ops manual and CAP371 doesn't work - either by the company or the pilot / Cabin Crew.

[NigelOnDraft]

If you over 90 mins away without a rest place closer then you are violating all the safety measures put in place to protect yourselves and everyone around you Would be if CAP371 said so... but it does not. It (or certainly our variant does) says you should consider making ... (other arrangements).

So that's as clear as mud then !

NoD

[355N Driver]

Hi All:
Here is my 2cence worth. Would you want your Brain surgeon or Heart surgeon pulling this kind of thing before working on you? Not likely. Have a safe flight

[DouglasDigby]

CAP 371 (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP371.PDF)9.2 Travelling time, from home to departure aerodrome, if long distances are involved, is a factor influencing any subsequent onset of fatigue. If the journey time from home to normal departure airfield is usually in excess of 1½ hours, crew members should consider making arrangements for temporary accommodation nearer to base.

[Justbelowcap]

Nigelondraft makes a good point. The phrase "should consider" is about as useful as a chocolate teapot. Pilots can just easily say "I did consider getting accomadation near the airport but decided against it"!!!

This gets right to the heart of the debate. I hate to have really proscriptive rules, who is to say that a 95 min journey is much more tiring than a 85 min journey, however we are talking about guys who regularly travel much, much more than this. BA knows it is going on, indeed some our managers in SH are the worst offenders, but just keep turning a blind eye to what is an increasing problem. The CAA is the regulator but seems to be next to useless these days. Eventually there will be a major hull loss attributed to an error that was caused by fatigue. When the investigation reveals that both the pilots had been travelling for 3 hours before reporting for an 11 hr day then it will become compulsory to live an hour from your regular place of work. Or BA (and the CAA) could make enforce the spirit of legislation and protect the travelling public. The trouble is the guy in BA who would have to signal the changes lives in Newcastle. His home base is LHR.

[Avius]

Justbelowcap,

my experience is, that the majority of problems with commuters lie usually with people, who commute say 3-6 hours DRIVING distance from the base. Often, they get attempted to drive just before duty, instead use the "B&B or Hotel" at the airport option.

People who commute from USA, Australia, etc to Europe can't afford to take the "last flight", therefore have contingencies in place and are usually well ahead their reporting time (24 hours, etc.) at base in a hotel, getting plenty of rest.

Just my 5 cents worth...

[cactusbusdrvr]

Commuting is a fact of life in the USA. Almost half our pilots commute from outside Phoenix - 900 pilots. We fly on a percentage basis more "redeye" or all night flights than most freight airlines. We have one domicile so we position crews from PHX to LAS every night, sometimes with a 3 hour sit in LAS before operating LAS to BOS or LAS to MIA. That's fatiguing, and it is the company doing that to the pilot group. We are professional enough to know when we have reached our limits. We have had exactly 1 incident in 20 years and it was fatigue related and neither pilot was a commuter. We have pilots commuting in from 2000 miles away to fly, everyone has a crashpad or a hotel room to rest before flying. The guys that drive more than 2 hours have it the worst but that's why the seats in the flightdeck recline. Personally, I live 15 miles from the airport, except for 2 months a year when I commute from YVR so I have a good appreciation of this problem. More rules are not needed - we are professionals here and we can self police the problem.

[Justbelowcap]

We have pilots commuting in from 2000 miles away to fly, everyone has a crashpad or a hotel room to rest before flying. The problem in BA is that the above statement is just not true. Nobody has a problem with people commuting large distances if they have a rest before report. The problem is that there are a large number of people that are driving 3hr plus car journeys immediatley before report. Crashpad is an interesting term, perhaps it should be Anti-Crashpad.



More rules are not needed - we are professionals here and we can self police the problem. I think it is very clear that it is NOT being self policed at the moment.





The guys that drive more than 2 hours have it the worst but that's why the seats in the flightdeck recline. This an unbelieveable statement. Are you suggesting that pilots catch up on their rest in the flightdeck? Statements like that are the reason that the current rules are not working.

"It's alright Captain I'm knackered at the moment but after a few hours kip on the aircraft I'll be OK"

[JP4]

355N driver said:

Here is my 2cence worth. Would you want your Brain surgeon or Heart surgeon pulling this kind of thing before working on you? Not likely. Have a safe flight"


We don't know if he's taking some rest before a surgery, but what we are sure of is that he does not go for a medical check up nor a professional evaluation every six month!!!!!!!!!!!!



Cheers

[allan907]

I learnt about being knackered from that.....

An interesting thread - hopefully the SLF don't read it:O

A couple of years ago I had to pick up a C182 from
Meekatharra for delivery for major maintenance. The owner had flown it in the day before and I transitted up from Perth by Greyhound coach (the only means of transport available). This is a 12-14 hour trip and uncomfortable! The bus arrived at destination at 0130 but, no worries, I had accommodation booked at a local hotel and they were expecting a late arrival. Except that they had cocked up the dates and I was locked out.

After hunting round town for somewhere open (nil) and checking in with the local cop shop (no help) I eventually roused the taxi service and went out to the strip where I was told I could use the terminal building (Big shed really) which tended to be left open. With all the heaters turned on (very cold night) I hunkered down as best I could but with the cold and the discomfort I got no sleep at all.

I didn't have my night rating at the time but it wouldn't have made any difference. Fortunately I was wearing a watch which made the mandatory 4 instruments compliant! So as soon as some viz was apparent I cranked up the aircraft and leapt into the luft. The trip was about 3 hours and a fairly low sun shone straight into the cockpit from my side.

A couple of occasions I caught myself just beginning to nod off. it frightened me senseless

At overhead destination I was diverted to a nearby gravel strip (about 40 kms) as there were some problems at base and was told to wait there until I was called in. I explained that I was totally knackered and that I was unfit to fly and that they had better send one of the other pilots over to do the ferry back to base. I was told that no one could be spared and anyway, as it was only a short hop, it wouldn't be a problem.

I was kept waiting for over 2 hours before finally being cleared to fly in to base. OK, it went smoothly with no problems but I was awfully glad to get the wheels on terra firma. This is not something that will ever happen to me again Personal preservation and passenger safety (fortunately none on this flight) will always come first with me now.

Only you, the individual, can decided whether you are fit to fly but don't push on thinking that it will be OK. It could be fatal:ok:

[normal_nigel]

Just below

I'm not sure you are being deliberately sanctimonious but you've made a good job of it.

If BA paid there young co-pilots a better wage - even one that matched many of our cabin crew - then I'm sure more peolple would live nearer work.

In this day and aage commuting from France/Glasgow/Newcastle or even driving a few hours isn't a problem. I do agree that anothe continent is pushing it unless you leave plenty of recovery time as the three people I know that do this do.

So here's a suggestion. Stop moaning and get on with it.

Anyone with kids is usually shagged out before work anyway particularly on a night sector.

NN

[Quod Boy]

Surely,presenting for a flight,is the responsibility of the professional pilot.So long as you are fit for duty,at the appointed hour,does it matter,where you live?

In other words,if you have to travel,long distances,do it with plenty of time to spare,the night before,or whatever,but sadly for at least the last 40 years,not everyone can live in Ascot and work from LHR.

The fact that pilots commute,is a reflection,that the job has consistently fallen behind,in terms of inflation and renumeration,as pay has not kept pace with the cost of living,especially in the SE.

To pitch up,knowingly fatigued,through poor planning,is unprofessional,but,preventable,and should not prevent puilots living where they wish.

QB

[Anti-ice]

At a former airline i used to work for in the late 80' s we had a captain who insisted on not being disturbed on night flights (ie no visits - poor FO ) , as he would always sleep - all sector .
Even on a LGW-PMI. (2 hours).

He had a long drive in from the west country, and i guess thats the reason he always demanded this.

However, 3 years on , sadly we were all informed that he had died instantly in a night time motorway crash .
He was obviously having the best of both worlds in his own mind, but also made his fo's suffer because of it (as nobody was allowed in the flight deck) , and then surely paid the highest price himself.....

[Midland Maniac]

on a similar subject, CAP 371 has just changed with regards to the use of hire cars. It now stated that if a hire car is to be used to positon crew, then this must be classed as a sector and count towards the flight duty period. It also states that driving a hire car must be limited to 2.5 hours during any duty period.

So if driving a hire car for longer than 2.5 hours during a FDP causes fatigue, then I am sure that 3 hours driving before a FDP causes fatigue also.

[Justbelowcap]

normalnigelIn this day and aage commuting from France/Glasgow/Newcastle or even driving a few hours isn't a problem. Yes it is a big problem. Fatigue is a killer and should be avoided. It's your sort of attitude that will eventually lead to a lot of people being killed. As it says on the motorway Tiredness Kills

I've no objection at all to people who commute large distances. But if you do then you should have accomodation near the airport where you can take rest before report. Where you choose to live should not effect how you turn up for work. You should be fully rested. That means not driving in excess of 90mins before report. It's time this was made current legislation.

[maxy101]

Justbelowcap , So what happens if you live in Maidenhead and get stuck in a traffic jam for an hour and a half on the M25? Does BA cancel its schedule for the day? These are the dangers of taking away individual responsibility and trying to legislate.
Is the 90 mins to the carpark or to Report? It can take 30 mins to park your car and get to Compass Centre some days. Does that mean you can only live 60 mins away?

[Justbelowcap]

That's a fair point maxy101. But the people that I have a real problem with are driving MUCH MUCH further than 90mins or commuting for 5 hrs before report. It's these individuals that the company should really take to task.

Cornwall to LHR followed by a four sector 11:30 min duty day is not really playing the game.

[Big Tudor]

I guess maxy's question is one of the reasons why the 90 minute rule isn't really enforced. With airport authorities moving staff car parks further and further away from the airport, a lot of crew are spending longer getting from the car park to the crew room than from home to the airport.

[maxy101]

Funny thing is, when I was based at LGW, some people lived closer to the report centre than the Z car park. Big Tudor is right when he points out the likes of the BAA shove the staff car parks out in the middle of no- where ( as we don't have a choice) and save the convenient car parking for the passengers. They do have a choice . Again, I would emphasize the dangers in asking for legislation here. It will end up like the locked cockpit door fiasco, penalising UK based operators but seemingly having no effect on everybody else using UK airspace and flying periously close to the centre of London. Mind you, knocking down the Houses of Parliament might actually do democracy in the U.K a bit of good.

[Flap 5]

If the CAA required pilots to be within 90 minutes of work then union pressure, and subsequently pressure from the courts, would lead to companies being required to provide accommodation for pilots close to work. Therefore the CAA do not make it obligatory or they will get airline companies complaining about the expense. It's so much easier just to make it the pilot's responsibilty. It's good old New Labour politics at work.

[Desperate]

Maxi101 asks if the '90 minute' advice of maximum travelling time is to the car park or to the place of report.

If you ask the CAA - as I have - they will tell you it's to the place of report. Their (logical) reasoning is that it's the entire journey that makes you tired/stressed. So driving past the airport to the staff car park, waiting for the bus then travelling back to the airport ALL counts as travelling time. The CAA's words, not mine.

But ask your company - once the corporate head is removed from the sand - and you'll get a different answer. Management don't have to wait in remote staff car parks, you see.

When these set of rules/guidelines were first incorporated in ops manuals, it was probably a reasonable compromise. Our (shorthaul) working day was easier, traffic volumes were a fraction of today's nightmare and minimum rest rostering was still in its infancy.

It can only be a matter of time before the realities of our lifestyle are tested before a court, following an incident where fatigue is alleged.

Legislation alone cannot be the answer and the powers that be will of course rely on the nebulous interpretation of the words 'regularly' and 'should'.

[Quod Boy]

Reading this thread with interest;I detect a little sanctimony,from JBC et al.

Youre happy to prevent people driving/travelling long distance,BEFORE they report,but OK with the concept,of the same journey home,AFTER a duty?

Imagine how you feel after a 12 hr LH sector,or a long 4 sector day,what then??Stay another night at LHR/LGW??Then refreshed drive home for a soomewhat reduced rest??

Tiredness does kill,but is death on the way home after a CAP 371 day,or indeed a company "approved" day,acceptable??

Your argument works BOTH ways,and most employers,are happy with the one way version,as are you,perhaps.

Turn up RESTED,go home,best you can,youve raised an important point,but dont berate people who cannot lead the life you do,turning up unfit,is irresponsible.Full stop.

QB

[Justbelowcap]

The bottom line is that the CAA have provided a guideline that is totally and utterly ignored. What do they do about it as regulators.................................................. .......................nothing.

The regulators become more and more important in todays world of commercial pressure but the CAA are completely useless in this regard. Just take a look at how they deal with routes that have constant discretion reports, they do.......................................................... ..............................nothing

The operators include the 90 min rule in they OPS manuals ( because its a guideline) and what do they do to those that blatantly ignore this........................................................ ....nothing.

The pax get on board a plane that has two pilots flying the last sector of a multi sector day, 11hrs after they reported for duty and 16hrs after they both started their journey to work. They have had no rest at all during these 16hrs. Tiredness leads to mistakes, sometimes quite unbelieveable mistakes. The aircraft tries to take off without flap. What do the passengers do.......................................................... .............mostly they all die.



In the court room your widow and kids get to see the CAA take the stand.

"Not our fault we issued specific guidance on how long people should travel before they report for work"

Then the company get on the stand and make the same observation. "Not our fault either, its written in black and white how much time it should take our pilots to get to work"

Then the insurance companies and lawyers and relatives of the dead start taking everything that you ever had, including your reputation.

The saddest thing is that nobody is really interested in stopping people from being killed. They are only interested in not getting blamed for it.
It's time the regulators started acting like regulators and not some pseudo-legal, pass the buck club.

[normal_nigel]

The pax get on board a plane that has two pilots flying the last sector of a multi sector day, 11hrs after they reported for duty and 16hrs after they both started their journey to work. They have had no rest at all during these 16hrs. Tiredness leads to mistakes, sometimes quite unbelieveable mistakes. The aircraft tries to take off without flap. What do the passengers do.......................................................... .............mostly they all die.

Just below

Stop being so f*****g melodramatic

NN

[Devils Advocate]

norman_nigel I too concur...... wherein perhaps all one can say, given the obviously vast scale of this ‘problem’, is that it really must be down to just pure luck that airliners aren't falling from the skies on a regular basis with knackered commuter pilots zzzed’ing at their controls. ;)

I once used to commute over 100 miles to work, then do a multi-sector scheduled service / 'low cost' day, then drive home after it and I felt fine the whole time; no incidents or accidents, consistently delivering a professional level of aircraft operation, good results in the sim & appraisals, never fell asleep either in the air or on the road, etc, ...... my commute seemingly had not the slightest effect on me - so there !

However, the funny thing is that, now ( working in ‘charter’ ), when the kids / wife / postman / gasman / neighbours manage to wake me up between night flights - which I didn't do in the previous job and wherein I presently only live 30 miles from work - I've had more times when I've felt tired with the present regime than with the former & its commute - so go figure, or maybe it’s just different strokes for different folks ?!

JustBelow - When was the last time you heard of somebody calling crewing and using the ‘F’(atigue) word as a result of, say, their sleep being disturbed ( by, say, kids / wife / postman / gasman / neighbours ) preceding a night-flight wherein one might be just a tired - if not more so - albeit that one might live close to the airport ?

Ps. What FTL's are applied to the armed forces ?

[Justbelowcap]

Thats kinda the whole point isn't it. You either think that fatigue and tiredness is a safety issue or you don't. Do you not think that there have been accidents and incidents in the past caused by fatigue? Maybe you are immune normal-nigel from making mistakes due to being tired. In my airline there have been several incidents recently caused by pretty simple errors. The Chief pilot wrote that we should all be a bit more professional but didn't at any point equate those simply errors to fatigue. Wierd as these were all classic examples as the type of errors that causes hull loses. Taking off without flap will kill people, so will not reacting to a GPWS warning, so will lining up without line up clearance. These are all the types of incidents made more likely by fatigue.

Very shortly the Euro FTL changes are going to be implemented, it isn't any good complaining about these unless our own house is order. At the moment I feel that some are:

a) poorly educated about the effects of fatigue

b) think it only applies to others and are not aware of the degradation of their airmanship as they get more and more tired.

c) Are aware but, even so, blatantly ignore the 90 min guidance on the grounds they can have a house with one more bedroom at the expense of reporting fully rested.

If you think it is melodramatic to equate tired pilots to airplane crashes then I suggest you go and have another read of your human factor books.

Are you guys saying that fatigue is not a factor in the error chain? If so then your arguments are fair enough.
I believe it can be one of the major causes to errors being made. Maybe as I've got older I've just become more susceptable to tiredness but I'm very aware how my own performance takes a dive when I am tired. generally I have to take a bit longer to do everything when at the end of a tiring day. Probably the most dangerous part is that it effects my mood and I become more introvert, less able to absorb the info that is given to me from outside sources. More likely to ignore a subtle bit of advice from my FO, missing radio calls, much more likely to just get a quick solution to a problem rather than the correct one, etc etc.

When training or checking it is even easier to see how pilots performances dip at the end of long days. We shouldn't be making these days any longer for ourselves.