Indian Government Scraps Pilots Flight Duty Time Limitations

[jetsreams]

The Indian Director General of Civil Aviation through a notice published on its website www.dgca.nic.in has announced a decision by the Ministry of Civil Aviation to keep a Civil Aviation Requirement (CAR) governing pilots’ Flight Duty Time Limitations “in abeyance”. This C.A.R was introduced in August 2007- despite protests from airline managers stating that some pilots were going to be granted more rest and hence, were going to be “underutilized”.

The DGCA had earlier announced on the same website that it had cancelled the earlier FDTL known as an Aeronautical Information Circular (AIC) of 92 and that the new CAR would super cede it. The new CAR had also introduced norms for Ultra Long Haul Operations, since Air India, the national carrier had introduced such flights. This new FDTL policy, while granting pilots more rest on certain types of airline operations was considered by many professional pilots to be a step in the right direction while drawing flak from airline managers who were strapped for pilots.

As of this moment the Indian Government has declined to give anything in writing as to what pilots should follow as none of the two documents is valid. Hence technically, India does not have any FDTL policy at this point of time making all flights on Indian registered aircraft with Indian DGCA licence holders non-ICAO compliant.

Furthermore in the absence of the CAR, no official document exists in India on the number of pilots and the FTL required for Ultra Long Haul Operations such as those operated by Air India on the Mumbai (BOM) –New York (JFK) and Delhi (DEL)-New York (JFK) non -stop routes.

The DGCA notice announcing the decision to keep the CAR “in abeyance” also states that the decision was made by a “competent authority” in the Ministry of Civil Aviation- thereby tacitly implying that the DGCA per se could not be held responsible for this move due to the involvement of a “higher office”. This casts a serious shadow over the autonomy of the DGCA and exposes its complicity with its parent ministry which ironically also runs Air India, the national carrier. Most decisions therefore, are made to benefit the commercial interests of Air India along with those of other private airlines – some of whom are politically linked. One of India’s large airlines poised to start international operations is even owned by a sitting member of parliament also known to have close ties with the Minister of Civil Aviation.

As per the DGCA’s notification, a committee to review the CAR on FDTL has been formed – chaired by a bureaucrat in the Ministry of Civil Aviation- whose terms of reference include “recommending certain amendments, keeping in view the availability of pilots and their optimum utilization”. This openly exposes the collusion between the Indian Ministry of Civil Aviation and the Operators of Indian air carriers to curtail the rest hours of pilots so as to “utilize” them more. Faced with confirmed orders of hundreds of new aircraft and an acute pilot shortage caused primarily by a mismanagement of available resources, such desperate measures by the Indian Government can only lead to disaster.

The airline owners of India had earlier formed a cartel known as the “Federation of Indian Airlines” chaired by the erstwhile Air India Chairman V Thulasidas, who also happened to be a senior bureaucrat in the Indian Administrative Service, to lobby for favorable Government policies. Whilst in service, Thulasidas had issued directives to all heads of Air India stations the world over to obtain copies of FDTL regulations in their respective countries so as to pick and choose parts from each that could be incorporated in a revised CAR to favour air operators in India whilst at the same time satisfy the public that International practices were being adhered to. What they would not tell the public of course, is that FDTL is a complex aero medical issue that requires the expertise of avation medicine specialists and NOT file pushing greedy bureaucrats.

After retiring from his post as the Chairman of Air India, Thulasidas has been offered a post at the Prime Ministerial Office to facilitate the acquisition of new aircraft for Air India Ltd. Interestingly enough, India’s top bureaucrat in the Ministry of Civil Aviation, Ashok Chawla, is also a member of Thulasidas’ parent cadre – the Indian Administrative Service.

No surprise therefore that the C.A.R on pilots FDTL should be “reviewed” by a committee headed by a Joint Secretary from the same Ministry and from the same administrative service! According to internal sources within the ministry not a single member of this committee is a pilot or an aviation medicine specialist.

So desperate is the Government to modify pilots’ FDTL to cater for the commercial interests of airlines that it has given its own established procedures a go by. According to a document that lays down the procedure for modifying an existing C.A.R states “Whenever a new CAR or revision to the existing CAR is proposed to be issued, the draft of the proposed CAR/revision shall be posted on DGCA website or circulated to all the persons likely to be affected thereby for their objections/suggestions. The objections/ suggestions received within the stipulated period shall be analyzed and if found acceptable shall be incorporated in the proposed CAR before promulgation.”

The document goes on to say that “every revision shall be accompanied by a “Revision Notice” which shall indicate the pages affected and the justification for the revision. The Revision Notice shall be filed along with the revised CAR in the folder.

It also states that “whenever there is a major change/ revision, the Revision Notice shall indicate that the CAR has been revised in its entirety and CAR issued earlier shall be discarded. All revisions to the CAR shall be indicated by a sideline on the left side of the affected pages indicating the change/ revision to the CAR”.

No such procedures have been followed in this case.

Almost 70 percent of civil aviation fatalities are attributed to human error and of these; pilot fatigue contributes to approximately 15-20 percent of the total number of accidents- a fact that is being overshadowed by a few individuals blinded by greed.

[kwick]

This is another good example of the way airline "owners" manage their contacs, and consequently their operations. They do not realize that the cost of flying tired crewmmbers is much higher that hiring them or training new ones, because an accident costs much more, both in money and in image just to name a couple things.

I have friends flying in India now, one of them was very happy last year that FDTL limits were finally set there, because the thing was becoming really crazy. Who knows what will come next, maybe they reduce fuel carried on board to reduce fuel burn.

As far as I know, international attention has to be called upon, there are well structured institutions that will surely like to hear it from the affected personnel, although I can assure things like that affect us all. Will forward it to some contacts, hope it helps for a worldwide safe aviation environment.

[kwick]

Just browsed through the DGCA of India web page, and found the following:

CAR Section 7, Series J, FLIGHT DUTY TIME LIMITATION, Part III, Flight Duty Time and and Flight Time Limitations - Flight Crew Member, dated 27.07.2007 seems to be active, being able to get it from the following link: http://www.dgca.nic.in/cars/d7j-j3.pdf

What I did also find was the following:
CAR Section 7, Series J, FLIGHT DUTY TIME LIMITATION, Part II, Flight and Duty Time Limitations for Helicopter Pilots, dated 14.02.2000, says:
Cancelled in view of CAR Section 7 Series 'J' Part III

If these searches are wrong and all of the flight duty time limitations are suspended or cancelled, please let me know if I should direct to another link to get the updated info for correct forwarding.

[Mach E Avelli]

So, now it's up to ICAO to downgrade the Indian DGCA to a category 3. Within Indian sovereign territory than can flout internationally accepted standards all they like, but they have no right to inflict overly-fatigued pilots on the rest of the world.
What a knee-jerk and totally f....d solution to the pilot shortage!

[ELAC]

As someone who spent a great deal of time both flying under the Indian FDTL and analyzing its impact on operations I can say unequivocally that it was one of the most screwed up pieces of regulation to ever see the light of day.

One of it's many mysteries made it possible in some instances to continue towards further time zone displacement with 1/4 of the rest that was required before one could turn around and head for home. It was both operationally insane and completely contrary to what is known about the management of fatigue resulting from long-haul flying and time zone dislocation. I will not miss it for a second.

Having said that, the fact that the DGCA would place the entire regulation "in abeyance" without promulgating a replacement FDTL effectively leaving the country without any set of rules at all is amazing and yet entirely consistent with the quality of the now abandoned first attempt.

[PAXboy]

(non-pilot speaking) Based on nothing more than living in the world for 50 years ...

ICAO will take months to respond because everyone wants to do business with India.
When ICAO do respond it will be half hearted and everyone will enter negotiations - this is up to a year away.
Eventually (hopefully before real physical damage is done to pilots) India will settle for a new FTL plan that allows higher times and extended limits to everyone else. This means that they will have achieved their objectives.

[jetsreams]

Please log on to www.dgca.nic.in and download the notification suspending the said FDTL

[IFLY_INDIGO]

guys, here is an easy solution to a stupid problem... finish off the number of hours you want to log in the month and call in sick for the rest of the month...
isn't it simple enough...?

cheers..

[CaptainProp]

If this info is correct then one would think that banning Indian airlines from operating into EU should be the next step. This should be pushed by our unions and by the JAA member states! Why should we allow airlines not having sensible fatigue controlling scheduling in place to operate in to the EU when we don't allow airlines who does not keep maintenance up to certain standards?! :confused:

[777fly]

If CAR Section 7 Series J Part III is now deemed to be 'in abeyance' it must mean that the previous regulations as in CAR Section 7 Series J Part II, which were to be superceded by Part III, must now be considered active. Information on Part II is not available on the DGCA website. Does anyone know what the contents of Part II were?

[kwick]

777fly, I found out that previous CAR Section 7, Series J, FLIGHT DUTY TIME LIMITATION, Part II, Flight and Duty Time Limitations was for Helicopter Pilots, and cancelled because of Part III which made it for all Crew Members.

[kwick]

Jetsream, now it shows on the web page and could reach it, for anyone the direct link is http://www.dgca.nic.in/Misc/FDTL%20COMMITTEE.pdf (http://www.dgca.nic.in/Misc/FDTL%20COMMITTEE.pdf)

[stowaway]

Dear Kwick,
Thanks for bringing this to public (and crews' ) notice. As one affected I read your post with interest.


Regards


Edited to say :- Thanks Jetstream!!!!!

[kwick]

Dear stowaway:

Thank you for your message, I really appreciate your consideration and kind words, but actually the one bringing this to attention and starting the thread is jetsreams.

On the other side, I am a strong believer that safety does not have to be compromised in any way, the worst error in saving money is to erode safety, and the cancellation of any safety measure like the ones on FDTL is a tremendous error. For this reason, I will support anything that relates to safety, and obviously oppose to anything against it.

Thank you again, and hope all pilots are aware of the importance of FDTL, support them when they are well structured, for safety.

[kwick]

In The Times of India

Govt move to put pilot rest rules in abeyance draws flak
4 Jun 2008, 0000 hrs IST,Manju V,TNN

MUMBAI: Aviation experts and pilots have questioned the wisdom of the Directorate-General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) move to put the rest rules for pilots in abeyance.
What was the hurry to put the new Flight Duty Time Limit (FDTL) regulations, being followed in countries like the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia, for review?
DGCA introduced the new FDTL last year as a Civil Aviation Requirement (CAR) and made it mandatory for airlines.
"The hurried decision to withdraw the CAR without adequate notification appears to be unprecedented and weighted by commercial requirements," the letter written by the Airline Pilots' Associations of India to the International Civil Aviation Organisation and international pilots' insurance companies says.
"The draft of a proposed CAR has to be circulated to all persons likely to be affected, for their objections and suggestions, whenever a new CAR is mooted. Other norms state that revision notices should be issued prior. No such procedure was followed in the case," the letter says.
What experts have found more intriguing is the fact that DGCA constituted a committee to review CAR to recommend amendments under several terms of reference. One of them was to "keep in view the availability of pilots and their optimum utilization".
A commander said: "Commercial reasons like the induction of more aircraft and pilot shortage cannot be cited as justifiable reasons to reduce rest hours of flight crew. Shortage of experienced flight crew in the country is due to poor management of available resources."
The other point of contention is that DGCA has not revealed the identity of the members in the committee.
"Up to 30% of accidents worldwide are caused by fatigue leading to human error. So it is a matter of public interest and the names, designations and qualifications of the members who will review FDTL should be made public," the pilots' letter says.
Incidentally, between 1988 and 1990, the DGCA constituted a committee under then director P C Sen to evaluate crew fatigue. The study group acknowledged that "the study of crew fatigue is specialised in nature and is best left to aviation medical specialists only".
"Airlines have to get 20% more pilots to follow the new FDTL rules and so they have been trying to get some of the rules in the old FDTL incorporated into the new one," a commander said. The old FDTL also did not take into account increase in retirement age of pilots to 65, the reduction in the number of flight deck crew, new equipment, the introduction of ultra long-range operations and various operational changes.

[chksix]

Insurance companies worldwide should refuse to support operations where fatigued crews are forced to fly.
The insurance companies forced order into the chaotic shipping business a long time ago time to put the same pressures on aviation in 3rd world countries.

Let the airline pay all damages when there is an accident.

[kwick]

Just wondering, in another thread I read that the Indian government wants foreign pilots out of there soon, but here I read that they have placed the FDTL limitations on hold. Does that sound right?????

[teghjeet]

strange isnt it.
at one time there is such an acute shortage that FDTL is scrapped and at the same time there are many type rated pilots awaiting wide body launch in a premier airline...about 90 cpts i guess

[GULFPILOT76]

Look at what is happening in Europe with Subpart Q (FTL) the ECA website is full of it. Airlines around the world are leaving no stone unturned to have their crews work as long as possible and with as little rest as possible. It has become common practice in a world where 'safety is first' as long as it doesn't cost too much. Competition/economy first, then safety? We as pilots have to be strong and show our managements and NAA's that the only people who can judge fatique are the ones who do the work,.......us.

[kwick]

:ok:
Move to cut pilots' rest hrs draws HC ire
18 Jun 2008, 0235 hrs IST,TNN

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Tuesday questioned the aviation ministry’s sudden decision to keep the scientifically chalked out flight duty timings of pilots in abeyance. The lawyer representing the Director General of Civil Aviation had no reasonable reply and sought three weeks’ time to file his say, but a bench comprising Justice S B Mhase and Ashutosh Kumbhakoni gave him only a week, pointing out that the issue was serious as it concerned the safety of not just pilots and passengers but also of people on the ground in case of a crash. TOI had on Tuesday reported the pilots’ associations’ decision to challenge the DGCA’s action in the HC.
“Why have you put the civil aviation requirement (CAR) rules concerning the flight time and duty hours of pilots in abeyance? Why are you creating unrest? Why aren’t you following procedure?’’ the judges wanted to know. When a feeble attempt was made by the DGCA lawyer to explain that a committee had been set up to revise the rules, the judges observed that there was no reason to keep the rules in abeyance so that a committee could get into consultation for their revision. The judges said, “In normal circumstances we cooperate with the Centre, but this is a very important issue from the safety standpoint and we will give you only a week to reply.’’ They added, “Why don’t you continue with the 2007 rules even as the committee gets into consultation?’’
Sanjay Singhvi, counsel for the Joint Action Committee of the Airlines Pilots’ Association which had moved the high court to quash a May 29, 2008 circular that essentially lengthened the pilots’ work and flight hours, said that by keeping the rules framed only in 2007 in abeyance, the ministry was reverting to the 1992 rules. Singhvi said that the aviation industry had come a long way since the early 1990s and pilots were more stressed now with more demanding schedules. As a result, they required adequate rest between duties. He said the DGCA had taken seven months to frame the 2007 rules after approaching the issue scientifically and methodically.
The judges agreed that the aviation industry had grown rapidly and told the DGCA counsel, “You can’t expect the pilots to follow old rules. Tomorrow you might say follow rules that prevailed in the 1950s without taking the ground realities into account.’’
The pilots’ joint action committee comprising three associations of pilots from Air India, Indian and Jet Airways had challenged the ministry’s and DGCA’s action on the ground that it meant that their work hours would be devoid of longer breaks which were essential to maintain alertness while in the cockpit. They feared that airlines would now make them “give every ounce of blood and sweat’’ in order to beat the competition and alleged that the sudden circular appeared to have been issued under pressure from airlines which wanted to cut their operational costs following the fuel hike.
Spokesperson for the Indian Commercial Pilots Association Sushant Nag told TOI later, “We hope the government will realise the importance of the safety of passengers and crew alike and respond in a responsible manner by restoring the rules.’’

[kwick]

Flight safety can't be compromised: HC
2 Jul 2008, 0329 hrs IST, Swati Deshpande,TNN

MUMBAI: ‘‘The larger public interest and even the safety of flights and pilots were literally thrown to the winds, on the dictates of the civil aviation minister, to protect the financial and other interests of a few wealthy airline operators.’’ With these strong words, the Bombay high court on Tuesday stayed a recent circular issued by the Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) that essentially curbed crucial rest hours between flight duty for pilots and the cockpit crew.

A bench comprising Justices S B Mhase and Ashutosh Kumbhakoni, said, "No one was even heard before the aviation ministry’s knee-jerk reaction to the representation made by airline operators and no reasons were set out for putting the 2007 rules in abeyance."

The court said the ministry was free to undertake a study to revise the 2007 rules but clarified that pending such revision, it must continue last year’s Civil Aviation Requirement (CAR).

The court was passing orders on a petition filed by three pilots' unions belonging to Indian Airlines, Air India and Jet Airways. The unions had challenged the validity of the DGCA circulars of May 29 and June 2, 2008. The bench, without any hesitation, rejected a plea for an eight-week stay of its order.

The plea was made by S U Kamdar, counsel for National Aviation Company of India Limited (NACIL), the new entity for the merged Indian Airlines and Air India, which had intervened to support the DGCA and which said that it would take time to reschedule the flight duty chart which was prepared as per the 1992 guidelines.

The judges were curt. "If the DGCA could put the 2007 guidelines in abeyance overnight then it is equally possible for it to change the scheduled programme immediately," they said.

The bench slammed the aviation ministry for issuing ‘‘unreasonable and illegal’’ circulars which revived rules dating back to 1992 after putting in abeyance the scientifically framed rules of 2007 which govern the flight duty hours.

The 2007 rules were pilot-and safety-friendly and provided for adequate rest hours between flights, especially long-haul flights that lasted for 12-14 hours and criss-crossed several time-zones.

The pilots, through their counsel Sanjay Singhvi, had pointed out that "the world over, 30% of airline accidents were due to fatigue-related trauma errors by pilots". In Mumbai, as TOI had reported recently, two pilots had actually fallen asleep in the cockpit due to fatigue and their plane had flown onwards to Goa instead of landing in Mumbai.

Calling for immediate implementation of the 2007 rules, the court said, "We find that the safety of the public at large and of pilots is very important and it can’t be put at stake because airline operators are suffering in their business."

The judges were clear that flight safety could not be compromised at any cost. The 25-page order, written by the newly appointed Justice Kumbhakoni, was replete with stern admonitions and criticism for the ministry's "mindless" move.

"It appears that the DGCA just acted on the dictates of the civil aviation minister (Praful Patel) without any application of mind in a most arbitrary and irrational manner without following the mandatory procedure." Besides, the court said, "By putting the 2007 rules in abeyance, the 1992 rules do not automatically get revived. In fact once the 2007 rules came into existence, the 15-year-old rules ceased to exist in law."

The judges said since 1992, technology in manufacture and the operation of aircraft had undergone a sea change and these were precisely the reasons why the outdated rules were reviewed in 2006 and changed the following year along the lines of international best standards.

The court found no merit in solicitor general Goolam Vahanvati's submission on behalf of the DGCA that the aviation minister had the authority, and even the director general himself had absolute powers, to issue the circulars without giving anyone a hearing. The HC said, "Even otherwise, the DGCA ought to have followed the principles of natural justice by inviting suggestions and holding discussions with all stakeholders before taking the drastic decision of withdrawing the 2007 rules."

The judges said caustically, "In a democracy, the concerned minister is duty-bound to act as per the law and to protect public safety instead of protecting the financial interests of airline operators."

The court also rejected advocate general Ravi Kadam's arguments that the DGCA decision was "a policy-making exercise" in which the courts could not interfere.

The judges said his arguments were "not substantial and on slippery ground". The ministry had argued that the 1992 rules did not in any way compromise the safety of flights or of passengers.

[aviatorguy]

Zounds!!!! Could it be that common sense prevails for once?????

[kwick]

A little interesting paragraph from the High Court decision (looks to me that judges had really big guts to say it):

17. From the perusal of the affidavit in reply filed by the Respondents and the Exhibit -I dated 7th May 2008 thereof in particular, prima-facie it is clear to us that only with a sympathetic view towards the Airline operators and to help them in getting over their alleged difficulties ( more particularly 'financial'), the Hon'able Minister for State for Civil Aviation (I/C) approved the decision of the Ministry of Civil Aviation to keep the 'said FDTL/FTL in issue' in abeyance.

[Aeronotix]

Thank God for the Judiciary of India, one of the few uncorrupted systems functioning here, at least at the HC & SC levels.

The learned judges slammed the DGCA & Aviation Minister for favouring a few wealthy airline owners by compromising safety instead of safeguarding it.

After such scathing remarks its obvious where the DGCA & Aviation Ministry's priorities lie! A major victory for airline pilots in India.

[Roadtrip]

Are we talking about graft, corruption, and compromises in safety in the Indian airline system?? Shocking.

[spearhead]

what happens next.? Which FDTL is inforce now?

[kwick]

According to the HC decision, the FDTL enacted in 2007 shall be in force now.

Let´s see what happens next.....................

[attitudeFlying]

@MTK
Here you go
http://dgca.nic.in/cars/d7j-j3.pdf

Also, the dgca website if prettry neat now compared to what it was earlier. The search function on the site works too for a change :D