CASA and FRMS... What a joke.

[Ollie Onion]

Enough said!

https://www.casa.gov.au/standard-page/fatigue-management-rules-latest-news

[Ollie Onion]

Couldn't agree more, when I started flying you only had to refer to the duty tables when the day had gone horribly wrong, now I check my roster against it just about every month to see if a duty is actually legally rostered.

[Oldmanemu]

So if there is to be any hope of success, CASA need to get someone in who understands FRMS and how to properly formulate a strong safety case for change. The previous guy failed big time, clearly. So what did CASA do? He was promoted!!
If he worked for me, he would have been encouraged to 'move on to persue other interests. If he is involved in the review in any way, there is no hope. You can bank on that.

[Popgun]

It is indeed a joke. Safety once again takes a very distant back seat to maximising work rates.

I haven't heard much pushback from the AFAP (or AIPA). Has there been much counter-lobbying behind the scenes???

Keep submitting fatigue reports where appropriate. At least the data will be there for next year's attempt!

PG

[Lookleft]

Evidence that CASA is not a regulator of industry but a captive of it. Two deferrals of the FRMS start date because the head of the RAA bleats that it is all unfair and it will hurt their business. What hope do the unions have in ensuring it is implemented when CASA gives a deadline. Let the floggings continue until the morale improves.:ugh:

[Deejaypee]

I think the S in CASA needs do be removed. Quite obviously CASA is in no way concerned with safety!:ugh:

[get_over_it]

I happened to read The Australian a few weeks back where the RAAA chief mentioned some post-ponement and scientific review of the fatigue rules. I queried CASA about this two weeks ago and was informed that they couldn't say anything but I had to wait for an announcement to be made by CASA. Funnily enough a delay and independent scientific review is exactly what CASA announced the other day. Can't help but join the dots and think the CASA Chairman is being influenced by his mate's in the regionals at the expense of aviation safety, and has been for some time. The RAAA claims there is no problem with fatigue whatsoever. I wonder if their pilots were ever asked what they think? I bet not. The way this is being handled is farcical - no consideration of aviation safety whatsoever - all about keeping dodgy little airlines in the sky while we wait for another Monarch, Seaview, Lockhart or Pel-air.


It's safe to say nothing in terms of fatigue will ever get done because of operators who cry poor, refuse to take safety serious and are too dumb to make the right business decisions. It's a race to the bottom if you work for a regional folks.

[C441]

I haven't heard much pushback from the AFAP (or AIPA). Has there been much counter-lobbying behind the scenes???

I can assure you there has been from AIPA……

[Blitzkrieger]

The RAAA claims there is no problem with fatigue whatsoever
But of course there isn't. At the company I work for, and by weight of evidence, there isn't a fatigue problem. They view fatigue reporting with a Spanish Inquisitions degree of scepticism, ergo, the fatigue goes unreported. An URTI without a medical certificate passes without question, but fatigue....no way.

[Roller Merlin]

What the public and corporate managers do not see, and what we as pilots see commonly is the reality of fatigue inside the cockpit. Recently I flew into an Australian city. On descent the captain had the 'nods' and was barely awake after an all night flight. I have previously been in the final stages of approach when the captain was unresponsive to a radio call and needed arousing before landing. I have spoken to other pilots and they ALL have some common stories. Our hundreds of unknowing passengers deserve better regulations. These issues go generally unreported and have in some places become normalised for pilots, especially on long back-of-clock flights. This did not happen decades ago as airlines self-regulated well inside the limits. But relentless commercial pressures changed this - current rules were never designed to be constantly 'red lined'. I know of many cases where pilots are rostered minimum sleep opportunity only at awkward times - because old rules don't allow for this. All this current risk is for price of a slightly cheaper ticket. If this continues it's is only a matter of time before Australia suffers a major peacetime aviation disaster with sleep deprivation and fatigue being a prime cause. CASA know about many of these issues and I am aware many staff want to act against the commercial pressure. Ticket prices need to rise a little and maybe profits drop a little, but we will all be far safer. The Australian public deserve it.

[Oldmanemu]

I think the RAAA chief is suffering from the 'big fish in a small pond' syndrome. He only represents smaller regional feeders with no back of clock or long haul operations. It's the main carriers who do all the heavy lifting and clearly need a comprehensive FRMS.

[Falling Leaf]

The battle is already lost...

At a recent FRMS conference the facilitator, a sleep scientists, told the audience with a straight face the importance of 'recovery' and 'preparation'; a direct acknowledgement that the way that pilots work, even on a daily basis, is not sustainable.

I'm no union cheerleader, but the union movement fought long and hard for the 8 hour day - the three '8's make sense to me, for work, life and sleep... how is it then that I can work a 10 hour 45 min day?

[das Uber Soldat]

I think the RAAA chief is suffering from the 'big fish in a small pond' syndrome. He only represents smaller regional feeders with no back of clock or long haul operations. It's the main carriers who do all the heavy lifting and clearly need a comprehensive FRMS.
One of the directors of the RAAA also happens to be the GM for Toll Aviation. No shortage of back of the clock operations there, and you can bet that an FRMS would limit an already very stretched crew.

In no way is safety any part of the equation. Dollars.

[neville_nobody]

So what exactly are RAAA's objections to this? FRMS have you working much longer days than the stock standard CAO and provide much more flexibility.

The only thing I can think of for them is either they consider that the minimum rest periods are to long, or they have some philosophical objection to Pilots having the ability to call in fatigued without the company putting them through the Spanish Inquisition.

[propsmear]

I think the RAAA chief is suffering from the 'big fish in a small pond' syndrome. He only represents smaller regional feeders with no back of clock or long haul operations. It's the main carriers who do all the heavy lifting and clearly need a comprehensive FRMS.

I agree the RAAA chief is disillusioned. However, correct me if I have interpreted incorrectly Oldmanemu, but the main carriers don’t just do all the heavy lifting. Conducting 11 short consecutive sectors with minimum time on turn arounds, in and out of complicated airspace, vfr traffic laden airports along with often complex weather systems over what is essentially a 24hr period (including rest) warrants the need for a comprehensive FRMS. Especially when these shifts are often done back to back up to 6 days in a row.

[framer]

All different types of flying can knacker you. Long Haul, regional jet, GA, they all can bowl you over in different ways. What we really need, and will one day have is a quick, easy to administer test to say whether or not our pilots, train drivers, truck drivers are operating within coee of their normal cognitive and physical abilities.
Greater than 80% of your best ever performance? Off you go to work. Less than 80%? Go see the company doctor. Something like that. As long as we have office staff making rules about whether or not operational staff should be tired or not it will be a balls up.

[Twiglet1]

I was led to believe the Aussies were industry leading when it came to FRMS? certainly its the impression in Europe (or maybe i'm thinking Railways)
The only thing i will say is that in my gaff its currently split between Airline issues e.g. Rostering, day to day, Hotels and crew e.g. commuting, self management of rest, crew members responsibilities
There are some good points highlighted e.g. the suitability of in flight rest area's.
As Drew Dawson Kiwi chap says Aircrew relatively low risk of fatigue but high risk if it goes wrong, compared to Jo bloggs public higher risk of fatigue (, but low risk if it goes wrong (or words to that effect)
And the biggest risk remains driving home and crews need to know the difference between fatigue and sleepiness e.g. the need to sleep

[Oldmanemu]

Fair call propsmear. Framer may be right. Perhaps objective technology that monitors actual fatigue levels, rather than a predictive fatigue based roster system, could be a solution?

[KRUSTY 34]

I don't think FRMS is the problem per se.

The problem is, most operators don't have the first clue of how a genuine FRMS and it's associated management must work. Either that, or their corporate culture is at odds with a fair and transparent management of fatigue.

Either way, it's probable that the loudest voices in the lobby group are **** scared that they will either f#ck up the process, and/or their abissmal record on fatigue management to date will ultimately disqualify them from implementing whatever it is they think an FRMS should be!

And that leaves them with CAO 48.1

There's the real problem.

[Slippery_Pete]

What the public and corporate managers do not see, and what we as pilots see commonly is the reality of fatigue inside the cockpit. Recently I flew into an Australian city. On descent the captain had the 'nods' and was barely awake after an all night flight. I have previously been in the final stages of approach when the captain was unresponsive to a radio call and needed arousing before landing. I have spoken to other pilots and they ALL have some common stories. Our hundreds of unknowing passengers deserve better regulations. These issues go generally unreported and have in some places become normalised for pilots, especially on long back-of-clock flights. This did not happen decades ago as airlines self-regulated well inside the limits. But relentless commercial pressures changed this - current rules were never designed to be constantly 'red lined'. I know of many cases where pilots are rostered minimum sleep opportunity only at awkward times - because old rules don't allow for this. All this current risk is for price of a slightly cheaper ticket. If this continues it's is only a matter of time before Australia suffers a major peacetime aviation disaster with sleep deprivation and fatigue being a prime cause. CASA know about many of these issues and I am aware many staff want to act against the commercial pressure. Ticket prices need to rise a little and maybe profits drop a little, but we will all be far safer. The Australian public deserve it.

Did you & the skipper report both occurrences, Roller Merlin?

If so, well done. If not, you're both part of the problem.

[framer]

and crews need to know the difference between fatigue and sleepiness e.g. the need to sleep That's old school thinking right there. Sleepy? Tired? Fatigued? Due to short term sleep loss? Due to interrupted sleep? Due to long term sleep loss? Doesn't matter anymore, what matters is the degree to which your cognitive and physical abilities are effected. The whole ' you're not fatigued you're just tired' mantra is yesterday's thinking. Keep up Twiggy.

[propaganda]

Too true. I hate it when some smart ass kid in middle management says - you can't be fatigued the duty was legal.
Perhaps the Fatigue reporting mechanism needs to include a caveat which highlights the effect your Fatigue had on flight safety and submit an ASR or incident report as well.

Unfortunately, the onus now falls on the pilots to manage their own Fatigue / Safety as neither the industry nor the regulators around the world seem willing to address this fundamental important issue.:=

[morno]

Maybe CASA needs to read the investigation into the Canadian Rail crash that resulted in the loss of many lives, and then the changed attitude after that about fatigue management.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

The beauty of the position CASA is in is that they will never be held responsible for the outcome of an industry ill equipped to manage fatigue. Their defence will always be that the FRMS is merely a minimum, not a target. The focus then shifts to the airline who's defence is going to be that the pilot could have submitted a fatigue report and not operated. The focus then shifts to the PIC who has fvck all legs to stand on.


CASA and the airline management in this country only get away with this FRMS debacle because (a) we haven't had a fatigue attributable prang yet, and (b) they will never be held to account anyway. Sounds like the perfect crime to me.

[Twiglet1]

That's old school thinking right there. Sleepy? Tired? Fatigued? Due to short term sleep loss? Due to interrupted sleep? Due to long term sleep loss? Doesn't matter anymore, what matters is the degree to which your cognitive and physical abilities are effected. The whole ' you're not fatigued you're just tired' mantra is yesterday's thinking. Keep up Twiggy.
Framer
Um, approved UK CAA FRMS, according to BALPA up there leading the way. Its a mixture of all and everything not just what you state.