FAA starts 'expedited review' of pilot rest rules

[Longtimer]

FAA starts 'expedited review' of pilot rest rules, plans 'rapidly' to develop new rule
Thursday June 25, 2009

US FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt said yesterday that the agency is initiating "an expedited review of flight and rest rules" and "will work rapidly to develop and implement a new flight time and rest rule."

Babbitt said that "pilot fatigue [is now] a high priority" for FAA and called for US airlines and pilot unions "to respond [to FAA] by July 31 with specific commitments to strengthen safety at regional and major airlines." He said carriers must "obtain all available FAA pilot records, among other actions."

In a statement, he said he will establish an Aviation Rulemaking Committee on pilot fatigue by July 15 comprising FAA, labor and industry representatives "that will be charged with developing recommendations for an FAA rule by September 1." Also by July 15, FAA inspectors "will complete a focused review of airline procedures for identifying and tracking pilots who fail evaluations or demonstrate a repetitive need for additional training." Inspectors additionally will review airlines' pilot training and qualification programs to ensure they meet FAA standards.

"Safety remains the airlines' top priority," Air Transport Assn. President and CEO James May said yesterday, adding that Babbitt's statement "reflects our shared commitment to adopt meaningful safety initiatives on an aggressive timeline."

Congress and FAA have become intensely interested in pilot training and rest procedures, particularly at US regional airlines, in the aftermath of February's fatal crash of a Colgan Air Q400 outside Buffalo. Babbitt, formerly president of the Air Line Pilots Assn. and an Eastern Airlines pilot for more than 25 years, signaled last week that the agency this summer would tackle aggressively issues surrounding pilot training and fatigue and rest rules (ATWOnline, July 17).

Babbitt said he told airlines in a letter sent yesterday that they should "immediately adopt a policy to ensure that their pilot applicants release any records held by the FAA to the hiring air carrier while the agency works with Congress to update the current Pilot Records Improvement Act of 1996." He added that FAA "expects airlines that have contractual relationships with regional feeder companies to develop specific programs to share safety data and ensure that their partner airlines mirror their most effective safety practices."


by Aaron Karp




ATW Daily News (http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=17032)

[act700]

Good luck fixing that!

That's like trying to fix the US immigration system!!

[ClippedCub]

Hope they don't get caught up in crew duty time and forget to take trainees to the pusher in the sym, at night, in IFR with ice.

Crew rest include commuting across country before you flight.

[merlinxx]

Well slap me belly with a kipper, the Feds have woken up to FTLs, **** all in FAR91 & FAR121 is useless.:ugh:

[woodpecker]

I seem to remember the ""powers that be" suggesting that down-route layovers should be scheduled to avoid the 18 to 30 hrs off duty rest period.

Every east coast stateside trip (and many others) had the off duty right in the middle of this "avoid" period.

Alas it was only a recommendation.

[A and C]

Perhaps EASA should also take a good look at subpart Q !

[Intruder]

Maybe they'll finally dust off the NPRM on rest rules that has been sitting on their shelf for 10+ years. IIRC, that one had ALPA's support (probably why it's on the shelf -- not endorsed by ATA)...

[Wiley]

I predict there'll be huge resistance to any moves to include commuting before start of duty. Anyone with two brain cells in his head would surely include it in FTLs, but the same people who always chime in saying they prefer minimum rest periods at layover ports so they can have more time at home will be vocally against the idea.

I've got no problem with people who want to commute home after a long FDP, but those who demand the right to do so immediately before a long FDP totally destroy the credibility of the majority who say that long FDPs, particularly those crossing multiple time zones, are fatiguing.

Standing by for the inevitable "incoming"...

[fire wall]

Wiley, agreed 100%.
Lifestyle does not take precedence over safety.

[woodpecker]

All those BA longhaul trips out of Gatwick (for Heathrow based flight crew) were/are always preceeded by a hotel in the Gatwick area... Sensible

[flyinthesky]

The situation surrounding the Colgan crew and their extended time positioning across the country BEFORE operating their duty is mostly (though not totally) unique to the US. I feel it would be unfair for me to comment as each pilot has the right to live where he/she wants and here in the UK, commutes are by geographical nature much shorter. However, I do feel that it is every pilots duty to look seriously at their actions, including pre flight and ask themselves if what they are doing is sensible. Are they adequately rested etc etc?

My problem is the inadequacy of the present rule set regarding FTL's. Most reasonable states have a clause stating that 18-30 rest periods should be avoided. However most operators use this as a target. And just how the addition of an extra crew member on the flight deck enables an operator to not factorise a LH sector beggars belief (this only applies for those carriers without onboard rest facilities) The system is a sham built up over the years at the behest of companies willing to push crews further and take the risk. Our regulators need to be more independent and grow a set of teeth.

Here in the UK, the whole 18-30 and heavy crew issue was supposed to be investigated by the CAA. But guess what, the companies brought commercial pressures to bear and it has been shelved yet again. It is only a matter of time before something serious happens that is related to these areas.

[beamer]

Fly

Sadly you are right - the CAA have back peddled far too often at the operators behest. You only have to look at each CHIRP document to see that time after time they are apologists for problems they have the power but not the will to sort out.

I have three early starts coming up - alarm clock three in the morning followed immediately by longhaul - legal but hardly condicive to a sharp mind !

[wobble2plank]

Perhaps when they've sorted that out they can get on with the implementation of the second phase of 'Openskies'?

Or is it just a one way street again?

Oh, forgot it's America, land of the free and the restrictive business practices.

:}

[Mr Angry from Purley]

Fly
Don't entirely agree with your post. UK carriers have to add a 3rd Pilot to avoid the factorisation issue. In Europe 2 crew just get on with it legally.
The CAA are looking at the 2 man crew issue (bearing in mind what sub part Q offers and the fact Pilots suggest having 3 tired crew is the same as 2 tired crew). A couple of airlines are undertaking 3 man v 2 man fatigue studies to answer your concerns.
The 18-30 hours rest is one where i agree Commercial pressure comes into it. There is however a case for it to be better with night / day transitions perhaps

:\

[flyinthesky]

Mr A

sorry if I wasn't entirely clear. I understand why the third crew member is added in the UK and absolutely agree that all it results in is 3 tired pilots rather than 2. What winds me up, is the principle of adding a 3rd pilot in some way means that we are able as a crew to operate for a longer period of time legally.

Tha CAA have no teeth and refuse to confront many issues surrounding the health and wellbeing of crew, be they FTL or security. You need only look at CHIRP. All in all it is a shambles.

[Southernboy]

Isn't it amazing how politics drives. The NTSB have had this flagged as an overlooked issue on their website for years - but what do they know?

Now a public crash & change of political tone & suddenly it's important to try & protect people. Great, I'm glad, but why are safety issues controlled by politics (IE Corporate power) alone?

[4PW's]

Croc of ****e. Nothing will happen. Not a thing. The issue will die down when the next news item hits. That'll be something along the lines of ECONOMY TANKING, MAN THE LIFEBOATS. Hey, I'm not joking. This is exactly what'll happen. It's happened before, and will happen again. Nothing new under the sun.

[flyinthesky]

With a heavy heart, I have to agree with 4PW. Nothing will happen, the next bit of news will break and the regulators will heave a sigh of relief and crawl back under their stone. The companies will be happy. Fait Accompli. Nothing has changed with regards to security and the ridiculous uneven standards applied at different airports and nothing WILL change with regard to FTL requirement. Upset the applecart, not likely.

It will once again rely on the professional pilot community to exercise some sense regarding rest etc. Whilst we all want our respective companies to be successful, how anyone can expect someone to remain sharp on a 14-15 hour day, I do not know. But the crash on the motorway after the individual has left work has nothing to do with FTL's, does it?????

CHIRP makes for interesting reading, but is about as useful as a chocolate fireguard in reality. But never mind, Simon Calder and his cronies in the media keep telling us all that pilots only work 25 hours a week and have half a year off. I must remember to tell myself that.:mad::mad:

[Airbubba]

I predict there'll be huge resistance to any moves to include commuting before start of duty

Yep, a lot of the folks over the years that whine the loudest about fatigue are also the ones that commute in from the coast for a crossing the same day. I've had a fellow crewmember call to tell me he was taking the redeye from LAX to the East Coast to operate a morning departure to Europe. His flight was due 30 minutes before show time and if he wasn't at briefing he'd meet me at the plane.

American pilots traditionally have had very wide latitude on commuting and ready access to the jumpseat on other carriers. As far as I know, the feds have never formally put any limits on this 'transportation not local in character' since it is not required by the airline. However, the Colgan BUF CVR transcript has put long commutes without much rest in the public spotlight. Captain Sully is a coast to coast commuter, he'll probably be called back to Capitol Hill to testify on this subject.

I believe FedEx already has some crew duty time system to track people who ride on their jumpseats to operate longhaul, anyone know for sure?

Be careful what you wish for when you demand that the feds scrutinize pilot fatigue issues...

[Roadtrip]

The FAA is run by worthless, do-nothing idiots owned by the airline executives.

You can expect NOTHING to be done. This crap has been going on for years and they KNOW the problems but have done NOTHING except when ordered by court. Pilots in the cockpit are what keep the aviation industry as safe as it is, in spite of the FAA.

[flyinthesky]

Roadtrip

Spot on, and where the FAA go, the CAA blindly follow. Nothing will change on either side of the pond as it is not in the interests of the companies. The problems are slightly different in the US compared to the UK but in the main, nothing will change.

Bit like the ridiculous state of security screening really. But don't get me started!!!

C'est la vie

[BryceM]

Probably a dumb question, but be gentle...

Why are the airlines so opposed to further regulation of duty hours? As it would affect all of them equally, no airline would lose out compared to any other airline, would it? (And if it doesn't affect all equally, why aren't the ones who would benefit from rule changes lobbying for those changes?).

[flyinthesky]

OK, gentle answer forthcoming!!

Lower/ more restrictive duty hours/ practices would mean an increase in the numbers of pilots needed to operate the programme. Therefore there is a cost involved. Therefore it goes against the grain of a commercial operation.

Now I for one like working for my company and want to contribute to it being an efficient operation, HOWEVER certain working practices beggar belief. E.g 3 pilot heavy crew ops without appropriate onboard rest facilities.

So Bryce, whilst I understand your point about all airlines being affected equally, each airline will only ever look at the effect on its' own operation, and any increase in cost is a very big negative.

I hoep that was gentle enough, yet informative! :ok:

[MarkerInbound]

While I agree with FITS that spending any money brings forth a visceral reaction from management, there are some differences between airlines. Some operate with only the FAA regulations as limitations while others have contractual limits set within the union contract. Those airlines operating at the FAA limit will see their 'advantage' disappear while management at those with a better union deal will worry that at the next round of contract talks it will get even worse since "we have to be better than the FAA minimums."

[ClippedCub]

The focus will be on the wrong aspect from this crash - crew duty time and red eye flights to work, because that has a personal impact on the pilots. Sure, crew rest might have contributed to being 40 knots low on approach, but the crash occurred due to poor training to stick pusher. Afraid addressing the root of the crash will be lost with everyone hung up on crew rest, and the accident scenario will repeat.

[cvg2iln]

Those stout souls doing the rounds and shaking hands within the beltway report that both Congress and the FAA ( now headed by the ex-chief of ALPA) are falling over themselves in an attempt to preempt regulatory change with reference to duty regs. The Colgan crash has been something of an impetuous. Also in the pipeline is a minimum of 1500 hrs and an A.T.P. requirement to occupy the right seat when operating under FAR 121.

A Republican administration headed by Old Man McCain and Bimbo Palin would most certainly have maintained the less than satisfactory status quo which favored profit over safety (" Well golly" says Sarah. "Gotta protect those share holders even if the passengers do occasionally end up kinda dead. Ya know, I can see Russia from my deck! "). But Republicans are yesterday's news and changes are a coming. There's political capital here, and I both suspect and hope that it's going to be spent.

[BryceM]

Thanks for the replies, FITS/Marker. This is more or less what I assumed; but I still find it odd that the airlines who perceive themselves as being undercut by the shadier operators who work only at FAA minimums don't try to increase the burden on those competitors (by lobbying for shorter duty hours). But evidently, they don't, so what the hell do I know. (...blah blah blah game theory blah blah blah prisoner's dilemma blah blah blah...).

CC - To be fair, the review is supposed to be of training as well as fatigue, and the PIC's failure of several (4 or 5, from memory) reviews seems likely to be examined.

I know this probably sounds hopelessly naive, but there's no evidence right now that the new head of the FAA is doing this for anything but the right reasons...

[manrow]

I do love your logic Bryce!

The problem is that the FAA in common with all regulators worldwide is having to look over its shoulder and make sure that any rules they implement will not adversely affect their national airlines in competition with the foreign operators!

Someone, sometime has to take the lead and I don't expect it to be the FAA, but hope to be proven wrong!

[No RYR for me]

The problem is that the FAA in common with all regulators worldwide is having to look over its shoulder and make sure that any rules they implement will not adversely affect their national airlines in competition with the foreign operators!


I think the main issue is commuter airlines in the US and as far as I am aware they don't have much to fear from foreign operators! :cool:

[FEL1011]

The issues of traveling into a trip, for our friends across the pond, is due to the less than permanent nature of bases for crew. Relocation is almost never compensated for by your employer. If it is done, it is nowhere near enough to cover actual costs. The regionals will open or close a base just on the whiff of a contract. Using Colgan Air, feeder for US Airways, United and Continental, as an example. The list that follows is example of their numerous pilot bases:


Aircraft Type: S340B:
ALB
ABE
BGM
BHB
BUF
CRW
CHO
IAD
IAH
ITH
LGA
PQI
MHT
TYR
SCE
SYR

Aircraft type: Q400:
EWR
ALB
ORF

This carrier has listed a total of 50 aircraft! The mainline carriers, over the years, have had bases open and close, as well.


There is a dirty little secret about our supplemental carriers. For international operations, there is no duty limitation, per day! The only restriction is for one 24 continuous period free of duty in the past 7 days! Think about how long a heavy freighter crew has been up with one or two stops for freight and fuel and have a total block time of 11:30 for the day. It can be well over the teens and into the twenties. For domestic operations, you are required to have 8 hours off of duty in 24, but there is no requirement that they have to be consecutive. Travel time to the hotel is not duty time and thus, may get taken out of the eight. Legal is not necessarily safe!

As far as the the captain in Buffalo, he may have been a great guy, but with 4-5 busts in his history, someone should have counseled him to do something else. If he had pulled back to fight the stick pusher, he missed the relationship of swapping altitude for airspeed. That is PPL material and should be instinct for any pilot.

The hens have come home to roost, since the deregulation of the US aviation industry many years ago. Scope clauses have become a joke and the mainline carrier management has outsourced safety to the lowest bidder. They in turn, hire the cheapest labor they can get.

Plumber out!

[WHBM]

The issues of traveling into a trip, for our friends across the pond, is due to the less than permanent nature of bases for crew. Relocation is almost never compensated for by your employer.
However, what I find I cannot explain to those outside the industry is that, for the crew of the two recent accidents in New York State, in the Colgan case, one came from Florida and one from Washington State, in neither of which I believe Colgan has ever had a base, while for the US Airways ditching, one came from California and one from Wisconsin, where the same is true - or if they do have any base in California, it seems an unusual place to crew East Coast services from.

In the case of living in Washington State and needing to commute ovenight by FedEx via Memphis for an operation based in Newark, you have to wonder what the Colgan HR recruitment people were thinking of. Which I am sure the enquiry will ask them.

[FEL1011]

WHBM,

The simple way to explain the situation is to ask non-industry types, Would they live in the parking garage or lot where they work. They commute to work via, foot, personal vehicle or public transportation. If their employer transferred them to another location in the area, would they move? What if their current employer shut down or they were redundant? Would they shoulder the expense to move 30-40 km, just to be at the new company estate? I think not. They would extend their commute. In the US we never had a cadet scheme for airline pilots. You get your primary training and experience elsewhere. As long as you do not miss a flight or training due to your commute, most airlines do not care where you live.

The rule for aircrew in the US is, find a place you want to live and commute. Airlines and bases change, your family hopefully won't. I know people who moved to Atlanta for Delta Airlines. They were assigned Salt Lake City after initial training!

The other issue is airline mergers and acquisitions. American bought TWA. The St. Louis operation was home for TWA. When all of the big jets went away, the crew that survived the redundancies, got sent elsewhere.

I have experienced multiple assigned bases in one year. There were hundreds of miles separating them. I received US$180 for my troubles. I had my home, that never changed, but had rented accommodations at each location. Air crew eat those costs to work. The pay for the regionals have those people paying out of savings to get experience to get their, hopefully better paying, next job.

Some young pilots and flight attendants will actually live with family, due to the lack of pay. Others will live like university students with 4-6 people sharing a one bedroom flat. In the Colgan Air example, the F/O made US$19,152, before taxes and adjustments. So, her net pay may not have broken US$1,250 per month, for her first year. She would have a hard time finding a place to live at any of the bases. Then to have the possibility of a base change or get reduced. Why do it?

When the supply of young pilots willing to take the abuse declines significantly, then and only then will conditions and pay get better.:(

[flint4xx]

If the government regulates how I spend my free time before I show up at work, or after for that matter, then we might as well burn the Constitution.

[Max Tow]

Flint4xx. A pretty dumb comment, I feel. What is at issue here is the condition in which you present yourself for work as an airline pilot. If you've been travelling all night, you'll probably be tired. If you've been drinking all night, you'll probably be drunk. If you don't want that to be subject to scrutiny & regulation, go find another job. What you do after work is your own concern.

[filejw]

Max, That's not how we think here. 99% of the folks show up for work rested and ready to go and we are not about to stand by and let the 1% rule. Ever hear of the tail waging the dog....

[PAXboy]

[UK pax here]
"Safety remains the airlines' top priority," Air Transport Assn. President and CEO James May said yesterday, adding that Babbitt's statement "reflects our shared commitment to adopt meaningful safety initiatives on an aggressive timeline."That'll be a doozy to bring in. No sweat. Any corporate can adopt 'meaningful initiatives'.

Nothing will change because, as yet, not enough people have died. It is true that some folks really want to improve things and this first example where fatigue appears to be part of the problem (I have read the whole thread) is a wonderful warning. But, and I apologise for my cynicism, nothing will change - yet.

[dozing4dollars]

"Babbitt, formerly president of the Air Line Pilots Assn. and an Eastern Airlines pilot for more than 25 years, signaled last week that the agency this summer would tackle aggressively issues surrounding pilot training and fatigue and rest rules"

You are wrong this time..... Babbitt won't cave!

[Semaphore Sam]

I started flying military in '69, and was appalled at the flying duty time required for MAC. When I went to my airline in '78, I was ready for 'civilized' flying, with reasonable duty and rest periods. HA! At least the military required a 12-hour dedicated pre-departure rest period. The airline (in my case) cared not a whit...I could be on standby for 24 hours, then be assigned for a 24 hour duty day, and that happened (3-pilot crew). That happened, because the companies want it to happen, and CORPORATIONS RUN THE UNITED STATES (except for those not politically connected). The Dems have their favourite contributors, as well as the Republicans, as far as airlines are concerned. I am 'retired' (no pension, so I must work). But, don't expect any change in duty requirements from the political FAA. Ain't in the cards.

[coolbeans202]

filejw- So you'd be perfectly comfortably commuting on a flight being piloted by two people who fall in that other one percent?

As a passenger, I'd prefer that 100% of pilots for the flights I'm taking show up well rested and ready to go.

[Hobo]

fly

In post #11, you assume all commutes by UK based pilots will be within the UK.

This is simply not the case. Many UK based LH live in Europe, and several as far away as Australia, and commute from there on a regular basis.

[AirRabbit]

The FAA is run by worthless, do-nothing idiots owned by the airline executives.
You can expect NOTHING to be done. This crap has been going on for years and they KNOW the problems but have done NOTHING except when ordered by court. Pilots in the cockpit are what keep the aviation industry as safe as it is, in spite of the FAA.
Perhaps you are correct ... and if you are, then I would think the US should have but two options:
1) Find a way to make the decisions made by whatever professionals the FAA has in its employ to be implemented; or
2) Disband the FAA and leave airline operations up to those who own the airlines;
Oh, wait ... option number one would mean that the US would have to elect only "honest" folks into the houses of Congress, install only "honest" persons to run the various cabinet posts (like Secretary of Transportation, FAA Administrator, or NTSB Chairman), elect only "honest" persons to function as the President, and put only "honest" persons on the judicial benches. Hmm. OK. Go with option number two. Oh, wait (again), isn't that what you said was going on now?

So, I guess option number 3 would have to be to let those who are currently responsible for the safety of the system, officially "run" the system. And, I believe you said that was "the pilots in the cockpit." Right? Uh ... which ones would those be? ALPA, IFALPA, APA, Teamsters? Maybe, if we do it right, we could get all the unions running the aviation systems and eventually get to the condition currently enjoyed by the US automobile industry.

[flyinthesky]

Hobo,

What I actually said was...

The situation surrounding the Colgan crew and their extended time positioning across the country BEFORE operating their duty is mostly (though not totally) unique to the US.

which I think you will find does not exclude other countries from the argument, however in the US there are a majority of pilots commuting huge distances, be they LH or SH. This IS different to most other countries. I am well aware of UK LH pilots commuting from other countries but it is not the norm for most of us.

There are much bigger problems with FTL's than whether it occurs in other countries or not! :ugh:

[Roadtrip]

It would require honesty and integrity from the FAA, the Congress, and the airline executives.

Neither of which I expect to see in my lifetime.

[RAT 5]

To honesty add Common Sense. You can't make rules to cover every scenario, hence the need for nouce. Sadly the desk jockies who do nothing but count the money have no such nouce. What ever rules they make these bean counters will find loop-holes. It's a game like foxing the taxman in Italy. There will be ferrets trying to find holes and round-about methods to cheat the rules.
It was well demonstrated by rosterers in 2 companies. FTL's is mathematics to them; nothing more or less. Maximise & minimise. On 2 seperate flights, in said 2 different companies, we started at point A, flew to B, a shortish flight, then back to A and finally onto C, a longish flight. The total duty time was too long for 2 crew. So, of course, we saddled up with 3 pilots and set off. Could we not leave the relief pilot sleeping at A and pick him up on the way back. Nope; not allowed, he had to be in the crew at the beginning. So now the relief pilot was as knackered as the rest of us, as of course the whole dingaling was a night flight, and with unsuitable crew rest facilities.
Common sense was AWOL. As long as this maximise/minimise attitude exists there will be no change.
I've always said that senior managemnt, rosterers, CAA inspectors and medical bods, plus a few from the Transport ministery, should be required to sit on the jump seat for a 3 day stint of mixed day/night short or long-haul. Then they might have a vague idea of what they are talking about and a bit more respect from us for the rules they make. At the moment the pilot commumity has little faith in any of them. One train crash and all hell is let lose by the politicians to prevent another. One tired pilot crash and simple 'pilot error' brushes it under the carpet. Share prices remain. Bad luck, but can't rock the profit boat too much. And please don't someone come back with "it's the profit that gives us a job." Of course it is, but there are sensible criteria and acceptable practices. It just makes me puke to hear all airlines saying 'saftey is our number 1 priority' and then operating in such opposite fashion regarding what some might say is the weakest link or the last line of defence. This includes everyone in the chain including all ground staff, engineers, ATC etc.
The next CEO who says safety will not be sacrifised for profit will grow a very long nose. It is rarely more than legal minimum.

[NOTSURE]

RAT 5 - totally right

Let me just add my five cents, from where I live/fly for the last decade, far out from home, with many legal but minimum rest and night duty periods.

1. Legislators/politicians/airline managers on BOTH sides of the pond simply MUST act.
It is not possible/sustainable in the long run to operate 11 (or more) hours for 11 hours rest - irrespective of time of day/night and expect us to stay alert/fit throughout. Check any truck driver duty time limits and you will know what I am talking about! In most places, they MUST rest after 8 hours of driving.
Even the cashier in the supermarket does have more rest then us! Traveling public is kept in the dark and the more vocal we are, sooner we will have our just requirement to have a life entertained.

2. Scientific study results done last year in Europe found clearly:
- NO 14 hours duty for 2 pilots crew, max should be 12 instead;
- NO 12 hours night duty - 10 hrs instead;
- max weekly duty time to be reduced. I think, again, that the traveling public has no clue we can be pushed all the way to 55, or 58 hours!

Well, let's hope the move by FAA will reflect these findings, and long overdue discussion in european parliament will follow and endorse these changes to reduce max duty time and force JAA to implement it.

Pilots - both individually and thru our bodies - we have to be vocal now, if we want majority of us to fly until retirement, rather then succumb to illness and fatigue mid-way:ouch:

[koi]

Its sooo easy. From Mischon Rea [Princess Di's solicitors]
'live near your work and always pay your taxes'.
Clear ?
Koi

[taildrag]

Many if not most US regionals cannot or will not pay new hires more than a pittance.

What bases will the most junior new hires draw? The least desirable.

Which are those? Predictably, the ones with the highest cost of living.

Such pilots based in, say, the metro NYC area, Boston, or many other regional hub bases cannot possibly earn enough to pay typical rents in these areas, so they are virtually forced to commute, or live like animals in a "zoo." (Ask any flight attendant, who makes even less, how he/she lives in NYC)

Over the years, regionals have tried to save hotel costs by basing pilots at out stations,where airplanes end their runs at day's end. Because bases are frequently changed, pilots are leery of settling in some of these small towns, because they know their airline could change hands, fail, or simply rearrange routes for whatever reason, requiring a move. So, they "choose" to commute.

Perhaps the airlines in expensive hubs, maybe as a result of new legislation, can build crew hotels with extra room for other paying customers, to ensure crews get proper rest before trips, and don't have to live in parking lot trailers and such like vagrants.

Pilots sacrifice a lot to get their jobs. They shouldn't have to sacrifice their lives, or those of others,because of a miserly salary that won't allow proper, safe accommodation where they work.:=

[CaptainProp]

Found this on Yahoo news....

Gov't struggles to find answer to pilot fatigue
After decades of delay, government, airline industry are prodded to deal with pilot fatigue

* By Joan Lowy, Associated Press Writer
* On Tuesday September 1, 2009, 3:06 am EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Current federal rules for how many hours pilots can be scheduled to work were written in an age of propellor-driven planes. Officials back then defined a reasonable work day for a pilot without a scientific understanding of fatigue and well before the modern airline industry.

Finding ways to prevent pilot fatigue has stymied federal regulators and the airline industry for decades. The National Transportation Safety Board has been recommending since 1990 that rules on how many hours pilots can be scheduled to work be updated to take into account early starting times and frequent takeoffs and landings.

On Tuesday, a committee made up of airline officials and union leaders is expected to deliver recommendations for updating the regulations. Although Federal Aviation Administrator Randy Babbitt has promised to vet those recommendations swiftly and turn them into a formal proposal by the FAA, the process will at a minimum take months to complete.

NTSB Chairman Deborah Hersman said she doesn't expect the suggestions to be offered Tuesday to address all the issues that are part of the fatigue problem, but she hopes they will supply a foundation. "You have to build all the rest of the house around it," she said.

Some members of Congress, though, don't trust the FAA to finally come to grips with the problem. Besides forcing the agency's hand, a bill proposed by lawmakers would require airlines to use fatigue risk management systems -- complex scheduling programs that alert the company to potential fatigue problems.

After the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee approved the bill earlier this month, Chairman James Oberstar ran through a list of the airline crashes in recent decades.

"The common thread running through all of it is fatigue," said Oberstar, D-Minn. "We have many experiences of the flight crew, the cabin crew, who in cases of emergency were just so numb they couldn't respond instantly to a tragedy at hand."

Linda Zimmerman, a retired Ohio teacher whose sister died in a 2004 regional airline crash in Kirksville, Mo., said the government's slow response saddens her.

"So many people have died and they haven't done anything about it," Zimmerman said.

Corporate Airlines Flight 5966 was preparing to land on Oct. 19, 2004, when the twin-engine turboprop slammed into trees. The pilots and 11 passengers were killed. Two injured passengers survived by jumping from the plane moments before it was engulfed in flames.

The NTSB said the pilots failed to notice that their plane had descended too quickly because they failed to follow procedures and engaged in unprofessional cockpit banter. But the board also said the captain and first officer probably were exhausted -- they were completing their sixth flight of the day, had been on duty more than 14 hours and had flown three trips the day before.

Studies show exhaustion can impair a flier's judgment in much the same way alcohol does. It's not uncommon for overtired pilots to focus on a conversation or a single chore and miss other things going on around them, including critical flight information. In a few cases, they've just fallen asleep.

Last year, two Mesa Airlines pilots conked out for at least 18 minutes during a midmorning flight from Honolulu to Hilo, Hawaii, as their plane continued to cruise past its destination and out to sea. Air traffic controllers were finally able to raise the pilots, who turned around the plane with its 40 passengers and landed it safely.

NTSB said that even though the pilots had not been working long that day, they were clearly fatigued. They cited the pilots' work schedules -- the day of the incident was the third consecutive day that both pilots started duty at 5:40 a.m. -- and said the captain had an undiagnosed case of sleep apnea.

FAA rules on how many hours an airline pilot may fly or be on duty before he must rest have been virtually unchanged for nearly a half-century, mainly because if airlines have to allow their crews more rest, they would have to hire more crews.

An FAA effort to tackle the issue in the mid-1990s foundered because airlines wanted concessions from pilots in return for reducing flying hours, and the pilots unions wouldn't go along. The agency proposed a new rule, but it has languished for years without final action.

NTSB's investigation of the crash of Continental Connection Flight 3407 on Feb. 12 near Buffalo, N.Y., killing 50, has spotlighted the long hours, low pay and long-distance commutes of regional airline pilots.

It's not clear where the captain of Flight 3407 slept the night before the crash, but it appears he may have tried to nap in a busy airport crew room where his company -- regional carrier Colgan Air Inc. of Manassas, Va., which operated the flight for Continental -- kept bright lights on continuously to discourage extended sleeping. The first officer commuted overnight from her home near Seattle to Newark, N.J., to make the flight to Buffalo.

Current rules say pilots can be scheduled for up to 16 hours on duty and up to eight hours of actual flight time in a day, with a minimum of eight hours off in between. They don't take into account that it is probably more tiring for regional airline pilots to fly five or six short legs in seven hours than it is for a pilot with a major airline to fly eight hours across the Atlantic to Europe with only one takeoff and landing.

One way to compensate would be a "controlled napping" policy, based on NASA research more than two decades ago. It found that pilots were more alert and performed better during landings when they were allowed to take turns napping during the cruise phase of flights. Other countries have adopted the policies, but the FAA has not.

According to Curtis Graeber, who ran NASA's fatigue research program for 10 years, some high-level officials worried that controlled napping would become the butt of jokes by late-night comedians.

Don't expect changes any time soon...The last sentence says it all......

[Gretchenfrage]

Don't expect changes any time soon...

I have to agree. Lipservice is the top action in today's world when it comes to such issues touching the wallet. Global warming, banking-world bonus excesses, human rights violations and so on. Every one would decently agree that something has to be done - but the others first, please.
There is a cynical little nuance in aviation though. It has that "it will not happen to me" thing a little bit more than with the other themes. The managers and regulators are most eloquent at the memorials, promising any kind of immediate action, swearing on the honor of their mothers, just to forget about that the next morning at the first meeting with the company beancounters and attorneys (and later with his personal banker for that matter). Their butts will most probably never be on board, therefore ..... where is the problem? The public will soon forget as the next scandal is just around the corner, so just sit it out.

We pilots make such easy, beatiful and defensless scapegoats, once in the smokin' hole. Nothing will happen, it is financially just too convenient for the establishment.:yuk:

[sej]

Maybe the UK CAA should put the tea cup down and do the same.

[once bitten]

Nippon Cargo Airlines of Japan, NCA (B744) legally can and do operate flights up to 15 hours duty and 12 hours flight time (block time)... SINGLE (2 man) CREW!!!

[sb_sfo]

I'm passingly familiar with the Japanese carriers, and I'd like to see some documentation of that claim.

[once bitten]

See NCA Operations Manual OM
Chapter 8 Flight Crew Members
Paragraph 8-7 Duty and Rest
Sub Paragraph 8-7-2 Standards of Flight Crew Scheduling
point 2.
"Flight crew schedule shall not exceed the limitations described below:


Composition of Flight Flight Time Duty Time
Crew

Pilot qualified as Captain 1 12 hours 15 hours
Pilot qualified as captain or
Pilot qualified as Co-Pilot 1


The above copied straight from the NCA Operations Manual.

[RAT 5]

NTSB said that even though the pilots had not been working long that day, they were clearly fatigued. They cited the pilots' work schedules -- the day of the incident was the third consecutive day that both pilots started duty at 5:40 a.m. -- and said the captain had an undiagnosed case of sleep apnea.


I wonder what the RYR pilots really think of their 5 earlies. Getting out of bed for 5 consective mornings at 04.00, with what might be only 5 hours sleep in a normal family house. It might be your own bed, but that brings with all the noise of normal family life. Perhaps Leo might enlighten us with his secret of how to cope with "the best roster in the industry'.

This is not a RYR bash by any means; indeed the opposite; more a wish for some realism. What is finally happening is, hopefully, a recognition of what us sharp end jockies have known for years. Sadly I will not hold my breath. The power of money, both profit and loss, is too great. Crew duty times have lengthened to match the endurance of a/c. Manufacturers design them to fly longer and longer, so for profit they have to be flown by 2 crew. All the CAA's have allowed this to happen. Only strong unions in the majors have managed some form of balance. Those of us lower down the food chain had no such buffer and the CAA's listened to the finacial argument for airline survival, not the safety warning of their own AIB's or NSTB's.

[RAT 5]

NTSB said that even though the pilots had not been working long that day, they were clearly fatigued. They cited the pilots' work schedules -- the day of the incident was the third consecutive day that both pilots started duty at 5:40 a.m. -- and said the captain had an undiagnosed case of sleep apnea.


I wonder what the RYR pilots really think of their 5 earlies. Getting out of bed for 5 consective mornings at 04.00, with what might be only 5 hours sleep in a normal family house. It might be your own bed, but that brings with all the noise of normal family life. Perhaps Leo might enlighten us with his secret of how to cope with "the best roster in the industry'.

This is not a RYR bash by any means; indeed the opposite; more a wish for some realism. What is finally happening is, hopefully, a recognition of what us sharp end jockies have known for years. Sadly I will not hold my breath. The power of money, both profit and loss, is too great. Crew duty times have lengthened to match the endurance of a/c. Manufacturers design them to fly longer and longer, so for profit they have to be flown by 2 crew. All the CAA's have allowed this to happen. Remember, the upper deck on B747 was originally designed as a crew rest lounge. What ever happened to that concept? The Italians even said that the autopilot was a 3rd pilot for FTL's, and a real heavy crew could sleep in the cockpit a al Air Europe. The Dutch allowed heavy crew with no crew rest area, only a pax seat. Only strong unions in the majors have managed some form of balance. Those of us lower down the food chain had no such buffer and the CAA's listened to the finacial argument for airline survival, not the safety warning of their own AIB's or NSTB's.

[Mr Angry from Purley]

Rat 5
Whilst RYR have done little research on the effects of 5 earlies, Easyjet have and I believe plenty of stats to go with it (and more importantly Pilot support although I stand to be corrected).
SEJ
Disagree - the UK CAA do have teeth and I can assure you they are being used. Any variations these days to CAP371 are only granted with Fatigue Risk support. These variations are likely not to be even Sub Part Q limits also.

Rat 5
You'll be pleased to know i've done my FRMS course - see things are moving! :\

[68+iou1]

F^ck your research! I’m a zombie after 3 earlys!

[68+iou1]

See I can’t even spell earlies?

[dick badcock]

I was on a RYR contract almost 7 years ago, we were on a 6 on 6 off schedule. 6 lates not a problem, but 6 earlies were pretty bad. And that was back when the earliest reports were 0530, many were later. Apparantly the IAA took issue and next year it had become 5 on 5 off (talking about contract pilots here, not permanent RYR pilots).

In the US, the FAA really need to wake up! If you are working for a major, flying longhaul, Part 121 works fine. It means you are always (well, mostly) 3 crew across the Atlantic at a time when most JAA operators are down to 2 pilots. I know the charters are particularly bad, CPH-CUN non stop, 2 crew anyone?

The worst of the lot is the supplemental carrier rules. I have worked for one of those as well. 0100L report, fly empty to St. Kitts, pick up pax, fly to Pittsburg, then fly empty back to base. On chocks at 1530L, a 14:30 duty day, 2 crew since the last sector was an empty positioning flight (and flown in accordance with Part 91). Under CAP371 (UK FTL rules) the max duty possible for that report would be 10:15, meaning we would have had to be finished by 11:15L. Who in the FAA thinks that a crater in the ground is smaller just because there are no passengers aboard?

I read an article a while back from some Fed-Ex pilots where they were trying to pursuade the FAA they needed to adopt UK/HKG rules for FTL (in other words your days duty is based on what time you report, if you are acclimatised etc). Did anything come of that?

[Ancient Observer]

There is a person within EZY who is particularly well placed to give a UK view on this.
Where are you?

[petermcleland]

In my day in BA we had the "Douglas Bader Rules" and they certainly worked very well in preventing fatigue...However, they proved commercially expensive and eventually got sold for a pay rise...:ugh:

[WindSheer]

I am a train driver and have just done 5 earlies starting between 4 and 5. 1 hour travelling each way, with shifts varying between 8 and 9 1/2 hours.

I don't know what planet I am on.....:eek:
I have got tomorrow off and am back in for another 3.

Any progress you make....point me in the right direction, the health implications are definately real....:uhoh:

[RAT 5]

There is another item to consider. I've been connected with 2 LoCo's who use a fixed roster or earlies/lates/earlies etc. There was no choice. It is a well known medical fact that some people are larks, others owls. I.e. they function better in the morning than night, or t'other way round. However, it was not possible to request the roster to suit your type. Some people would like to work all earlies or all lates. Not only could it suit their personal nature, but be more convenient for their family life. Why on earth is that not allowed? There is no cost issue. It is a petty "everyone must do the same" attitude.

[taildrag]

My first "real" flying job was with a small Beech 99/Twin Otter operator in West Virginia. The training department (no simulators in those days!) was run by some excellent individuals, one of whom is a Continental Airlines instructor today.

The airplanes operated from early morning to late night, making for an easy separation of pilot schedules into "Morning" and "Afternoon." The company chose to make schedules all one way or the other. Pilots were allowed to indicate their preferences.

It worked out that about half preferred early schedules, getting back home early in the afternoon, and the other half preferred to arise at a civilized hour,and didn't mind returning late. Pretty much everyone was happy with the rostering.

During one discussion of the compressed flying in the course of a day, some pilots complained that if they got behind (wx, etc.) early, they didn't even have time to eat, were hard pressed to "catch up," and discussed possible deleterious consequences of that. The chief pilot commiserated, and reminded the pilots that if they had no chance to eat, they were authorized to delay a flight for a reasonably short time to take some sustenance.

Sure enough,shortly thereafter one brash young captain flying an afternoon schedule arose early one morning, picked up his mail at the post office, did his laundry, reported for work just after noon, flew the first leg, then delayed the next flight to eat lunch! Fired summarily, he got his job back (with no union!) after a few days off, ending up years later as a captain at a US major.;)

Burp!

[Banzai Eagle]

windshear
After 5 earlies it's normal/likely that EASY/FR pilots will get minimum 3/4 days afterwards to recover from the early starts. Do you as a train driver have limits on the number of earlies you can do?. Are you scheduled to have just 1 day off or do you have to back for overtime to make ends meet.

A reality check for us airline folk perhaps

[WindSheer]

windshear
After 5 earlies it's normal/likely that EASY/FR pilots will get minimum 3/4 days afterwards to recover from the early starts. Do you as a train driver have limits on the number of earlies you can do?. Are you scheduled to have just 1 day off or do you have to back for overtime to make ends meet.

I dont do overtime!

The railway industry is shockingly un-regulated.......its totally powered from within. As long as you have 1 day off every 13th day, you could do a 12 hour early shifts in 13 day stints, all year! Granted, you would have to swap shifts to maintain that string of earlies.

Our rostering system is sanctioned by union drivers, who ensure their 'higher order' rosters are looked after.......us rats at the bottom are slaved to dangerous levels.

I spent 5 years within airline ops........I would do anything for a pilots roster!

That is not me putting pilots down, I worship the industry!!:ok:

[RAT 5]

"After 5 earlies it's normal/likely that EASY/FR pilots will get minimum 3/4 days afterwards to recover from the early starts."

It always makes me smile (grimace) when I read this type of drivel in the 21st century. Why do some people seem to think that 'days off' are to recover from the burden of work. If you are in need of such then what state were you in on the last working day? Where is the balance between work and social life if you have no energy on your days off to enjoy the other side of life? After 5 days solid work and little time to do all the necessary jobbers, the so called rest time is spent catching up on the 'she who must be obeyed's' list whch has been growing over those 5 days.

There are those of us who work to live and the others who live to work. Let's wonder a moment where the majority lie in philosophy, and where they lie in reality. There is whole lot of difference being cooped/locked up in a miniture green house for 5 days x 10 hrs doing shift work timings, and doing 40hrs in an office with space enough to swing a cat, a coffee machine close to hand, a park for lunch and a regular sleep pattern at the correct times after a good family dinner at a proper table.
I still find it odd that so many industries and jobs, inlcuding those in Flt OPs rooms and ground engineers, have worked out that 4 on 4 off is a good way to go for shift work. it could be 2 earlies 2 lates 4 off, or a mixture. They have full office space to spend their workng life in, and can take breaks. Why is it that flight crew, including C/A's, are considered so macho we can be chained to a seat in glass house for purgatory periods and be expected to operate at 100% all the time. Sheer madness. It's amazing there are not more holes in the ground.
So why is 2 earlies, 2 lates, 4 off such an unachievable roster for short-haul ops? That way the middle night would be a full nights sleep; to recover from, perhaps even prevent tiredness.

[atpcliff]

Hi!

Here some stuff I know about, all allowed by the FAA:

240 consecutive hours of reserve, then called for a trip.

25 hour duty day (2 crew)

Flew a very long trip, then flew Part 91 (non-commercial aviation) from Yellowknife, NW Territories to El Paso, TX. Part 91 allowed because no passengers/frieght on board so "empty leg."

Lookback to last week, and pick a day you were on reserve the whole day, and call it a day "off" so you get your 1 in 7 days off. Approved by local FAA airline representative.

LOTS of this crap going on, all with the sanction of the FAA. NOT very nice!

cliff
NBO

[Airbubba]

Standard operating procedure for most freight airlines.

The freight carriers are working hard to be exempted from the new rest rules according to news reports. We'll see if the 'no significant loss of life' clause applies in this case.

[PPL_DK]

Tonight the national Danish TV ran a story about EUs failure to prohibit long working hours, despite EASA's own research showing increased risks due to fatigue.

Story included interviews with the chairman of the Danish Pilots Association, Mogens Holgaard, as well as the Head of the Flight Medicine Clinic at Rigshospitalet, Mads Klokker.
Pilot-formand: EU svigter fly-sikkerhed - dr.dk/Nyheder/Penge (http://www.dr.dk/Nyheder/Penge/2009/09/27/171312.htm) (in Danish)

Also mentioned was the the upcoming European Action Day in Brussels by
www.eurocockpit.be (http://www.eurocockpit.be)
The date October 5th was mentioned (date not yet mentioned on www.dead-tired.eu (http://www.dead-tired.eu))

Two weeks ago the Danish Association for Aviation and Diving Medicine had a very interesting lecture by John Caldwell, Ph.D., USA,
Understanding and Managing Fatigue in Operational Aviation Contexts
The presentations are available here
http://www.flyvdyk.dk/upload/cph_fatigue_workshop_2009_a[1].pdf
http://www.flyvdyk.dk/upload/cph_fatigue_workshop_2009_b.pdf

There is also background information at For Better Legal Protection Against Pilot Fatigue - European Cockpit Association (ECA) - eurocockpit.be (http://www.eurocockpit.be/index.php/ftl-section)

[framer]

A reality check for us airline folk perhaps
Not at all. You have to compare apples with apples.
For example, what is the cabin altitude in Windshears train and how does that affect the extent of his fatigue?

[411A]

One has to use reality, at least with ops in the USA.
Make no mistake, the airline lobby in congress is very strong, much more so than any pilots union, and so long as the airline business is firmly in the red, flight duty times are unlikely to change much.

[Uncle Fred]

PPL_DK - Thanks for the links to the Caldwell presentations. Very worthwhile to look at. That kind of info is the good side of this forum.