"Redeye" shouldn't mean the pilot.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Gaia
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Gaia
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its all OK .....CASA is onto it
To wit
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority’s stance on fatigue management in Australia is about managing the risk of fatigue within a defined environment or work setting, and not simply about managing the work or flight and duty times of operational personnel. Each organisation and individual has a role to play in contributing to managing and mitigating the potentially hazardous effects of fatigue.
CASA’s focus is on scientific, evidence-based, fatigue risk management. As a result of ongoing participation in such research, CASA proposes to issue guidelines for fatigue risk management during 2009.
To wit
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority’s stance on fatigue management in Australia is about managing the risk of fatigue within a defined environment or work setting, and not simply about managing the work or flight and duty times of operational personnel. Each organisation and individual has a role to play in contributing to managing and mitigating the potentially hazardous effects of fatigue.
CASA’s focus is on scientific, evidence-based, fatigue risk management. As a result of ongoing participation in such research, CASA proposes to issue guidelines for fatigue risk management during 2009.
That sounds good in theory, the reality is that a Fatigue Risk Management System is just a set of rostering rules written by the company, and approved by CASA, that looks remarkably similar to an exemption to CAO48.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New Zealand
Age: 60
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How do we test fatigue?
What is always missing in these debates are facts. What is needed is hard data.
The only way to set safe limits to flight and duty times is to have crews fly various rosters/trips and test them at the end of each shift. A set of cognitive, decision making and fine motor skills should do it. A framework of both short and long term testing would be required.
This would ensure they are capable of making good decisions about diversions, handling any expected emergency and otherwsie be at a level of alertness and capability so that the people who are entrusted to our care have every right to expect.
Cheers,
Brad
The only way to set safe limits to flight and duty times is to have crews fly various rosters/trips and test them at the end of each shift. A set of cognitive, decision making and fine motor skills should do it. A framework of both short and long term testing would be required.
This would ensure they are capable of making good decisions about diversions, handling any expected emergency and otherwsie be at a level of alertness and capability so that the people who are entrusted to our care have every right to expect.
Cheers,
Brad
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
5 Posts
Bradley, Qantas and AIPA did exactly that a couple of years ago and the results formed the FRMS report published by the University of South Australia last year. The report is supposed to form the basis of FRMS based duty limits for long haul flying, but the airlines suddenly don't like what it says about the fatigue levels of the pilots flying their aircraft, particularly on ULH east-west style flying.
It will be very interesting to see what happens.
It will be very interesting to see what happens.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: vic
Age: 23
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kremin I'd have to agree. I was listening to some CASA dude on the radio last week sprouting to the listeners about how they can sleep at night knowing that pilots and other aviation related workers will be drug and alcohol tested. Airlines were happy to go along with this as it takes the onus off them and really we are talking about a very small number of offenders. On the other hand, they have known about fatigue related issues in this industry ever since Orvill and Wilbur had a crack yet they choose to take a very placid approach because the airlines know how much it will hurt them financially and tell CASA to back off.
Make no mistake about it, the majors airlines in the country have run tests to see how it will affect them and they dont like it.
I mean the trucking industry has tighter regs than us.
Make no mistake about it, the majors airlines in the country have run tests to see how it will affect them and they dont like it.
I mean the trucking industry has tighter regs than us.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority’s stance on fatigue management in Australia is about managing the risk of fatigue within a defined environment or work setting, and not simply about managing the work or flight and duty times of operational personnel. Each organisation and individual has a role to play in contributing to managing and mitigating the potentially hazardous effects of fatigue.
CASA’s focus is on scientific, evidence-based, fatigue risk management. As a result of ongoing participation in such research, CASA proposes to issue guidelines for fatigue risk management during 2009.
Yesterday 13:45
CASA’s focus is on scientific, evidence-based, fatigue risk management. As a result of ongoing participation in such research, CASA proposes to issue guidelines for fatigue risk management during 2009.
Yesterday 13:45
CASA are concened with one thing only: covering their arses.
Last edited by Mr. Hat; 19th Jun 2009 at 10:17.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Australia
Age: 51
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Political Eggshells
After watching the you tube link that Jock p posted, I had the realisation that this subject is going to require careful introduction of change, due to the arse covering that is required by the relevent parties. (Except for Pilots 
)
The relevant aviation authorities cannot say that change to flight and duty time requirements is required without implying that the current regulations are, at least risky. Currently they are implicitly stating that they are adequate and safe. Thus developing an improved system is difficult for them.
Airline management are protecting their bottom line, and will not ask for change, for fear of losing market share. Change isn't required anyway, as the regulatory body states the regulations are safe, and their pilots are operating within those regulations.
So, it appears to me that the pilot body needs to 'step-up' and call for change. This is currently being looked into by the AFAP ( http://www.afap.org.au/?a1D1J&qiM&435&4vW ). When calling for this change, it needs sensitivity due to the reasons mentioned above.
The other thing that I picked up from you tube, was this subject is gathering a little momentum in the media.
Here's hoping that some good comes of it...
)The relevant aviation authorities cannot say that change to flight and duty time requirements is required without implying that the current regulations are, at least risky. Currently they are implicitly stating that they are adequate and safe. Thus developing an improved system is difficult for them.
Airline management are protecting their bottom line, and will not ask for change, for fear of losing market share. Change isn't required anyway, as the regulatory body states the regulations are safe, and their pilots are operating within those regulations.
So, it appears to me that the pilot body needs to 'step-up' and call for change. This is currently being looked into by the AFAP ( http://www.afap.org.au/?a1D1J&qiM&435&4vW ). When calling for this change, it needs sensitivity due to the reasons mentioned above.
The other thing that I picked up from you tube, was this subject is gathering a little momentum in the media.
Here's hoping that some good comes of it...
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dubai
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airline management are protecting their bottom line, and will not ask for change, for fear of losing market share.
CASA are concened with one thing only: covering there arses.
Perhaps we need a law passed that prevents people from suing the regulator for the crap flight and duty time limits we have been operating under until now. Pending or current investigations could be exempt from this law. Then, the regulator is immune, and can stand up and say that the current laws are dangerous, and need to be changed quickly.
Perhaps then we could get some quick action on this issue.
The relevant aviation authorities cannot say that change to flight and duty time requirements is required without implying that the current regulations are, at least risky. Currently they are implicitly stating that they are adequate and safe. Thus developing an improved system is difficult for them.
Anybody who rips into CASA or tries to take them to court for "improving" DTLs deserves to be shot. The big question is, who are they "improving" them for?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: 38,000 ft
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder what WorkSafe think of all of this. I keep watching the ads on telly every night and wonder if they have been asked for their opinion on this.
Management should be as concerned as the people operating. The crew onboard may or may not survive a fatigue related incident however you can almost guarantee that someone will go to jail for a very long time if they happen to kill anyone.
The trial will be by media and they will listen to every tom, dick and harriet's fatigue near miss. Its a shame that the Emirates incident in MEL will go down to pilot error rather than fatigue which is probably the reason behind the "error" in the first place.
Management should be as concerned as the people operating. The crew onboard may or may not survive a fatigue related incident however you can almost guarantee that someone will go to jail for a very long time if they happen to kill anyone.
The trial will be by media and they will listen to every tom, dick and harriet's fatigue near miss. Its a shame that the Emirates incident in MEL will go down to pilot error rather than fatigue which is probably the reason behind the "error" in the first place.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Update from US:
THE top US air safety regulator has said he hopes within a few months to have drafted tougher rules on fatigue among commuter airline pilots.
The new regime, and the speedy timetable for introducing it, is an indication that Randy Babbitt, the recently confirmed head of the Federal Aviation Administration, considers commuter pilot fatigue to be among the agency's top safety concerns.
Commuter airlines account for more than half of all commercial flights in the US.
They typically fly under contract from major carriers, ferrying passengers between smaller destinations and larger hubs.
Emerging from an industry-wide summit on commuter airline safety in Washington, Mr Babbitt also indicated his agency expected large carriers to provide more guidance and resources to improve the training and professionalism of pilots at their smaller commuter partners.
The closed-door session, convened by the FAA, was attended by airline executives, pilot union leaders and other industry groups.
Mr Babbitt's comments indicate the agency is moving more aggressively than many airline officials had expected.
The FAA appears poised to act on more than a decade's worth of sleep research by crafting standards for tighter limits on flight hours and workdays for commuter crews.
"The bottom line is, I'm going to want a new rule" aimed at combating commuter pilot fatigue, Mr Babbitt said. "I'd like to do it in the coming months." Congressional and public concerns over commuter airline safety have grown since the February 12 crash of a Colgan Air turboprop outside Buffalo.
Investigators discovered that the captain of the plane, flying under contract to Continental Airlines, had failed a number of flight proficiency tests in his career.
The crash also highlighted questions about adequate crew rest for commuter pilots.
During Monday's session, Mr Babbitt was blunt in calling for industry action. According to his prepared remarks for the meeting, the FAA chief said there was a public perception that pilots could repeatedly fail proficiency tests "and still keep their job".
Regardless of the size of the plane or the airline, Mr Babbitt said, "we want passengers to have no doubts about the qualifications of the person flying their plane".
Pilot union leaders have been prodding the FAA to beef up academic requirements for new commercial pilots, and emphasise additional mentoring of such pilots by veteran aviators.
After the meeting, Mr Babbitt said some mainline carriers had tentatively agreed to share facilities and other training resources with commuter airlines, with the goal of ensuring that pilots across the industry met the same standards.
The FAA has stopped short of agreeing to raise minimum requirements for issuing various licences to pilots, such as total number of flight hours or time spent behind the controls of multi-engined aircraft.
In many ways, however, proposed fatigue rules are bound to be more controversial with airlines.
THE top US air safety regulator has said he hopes within a few months to have drafted tougher rules on fatigue among commuter airline pilots.
The new regime, and the speedy timetable for introducing it, is an indication that Randy Babbitt, the recently confirmed head of the Federal Aviation Administration, considers commuter pilot fatigue to be among the agency's top safety concerns.
Commuter airlines account for more than half of all commercial flights in the US.
They typically fly under contract from major carriers, ferrying passengers between smaller destinations and larger hubs.
Emerging from an industry-wide summit on commuter airline safety in Washington, Mr Babbitt also indicated his agency expected large carriers to provide more guidance and resources to improve the training and professionalism of pilots at their smaller commuter partners.
The closed-door session, convened by the FAA, was attended by airline executives, pilot union leaders and other industry groups.
Mr Babbitt's comments indicate the agency is moving more aggressively than many airline officials had expected.
The FAA appears poised to act on more than a decade's worth of sleep research by crafting standards for tighter limits on flight hours and workdays for commuter crews.
"The bottom line is, I'm going to want a new rule" aimed at combating commuter pilot fatigue, Mr Babbitt said. "I'd like to do it in the coming months." Congressional and public concerns over commuter airline safety have grown since the February 12 crash of a Colgan Air turboprop outside Buffalo.
Investigators discovered that the captain of the plane, flying under contract to Continental Airlines, had failed a number of flight proficiency tests in his career.
The crash also highlighted questions about adequate crew rest for commuter pilots.
During Monday's session, Mr Babbitt was blunt in calling for industry action. According to his prepared remarks for the meeting, the FAA chief said there was a public perception that pilots could repeatedly fail proficiency tests "and still keep their job".
Regardless of the size of the plane or the airline, Mr Babbitt said, "we want passengers to have no doubts about the qualifications of the person flying their plane".
Pilot union leaders have been prodding the FAA to beef up academic requirements for new commercial pilots, and emphasise additional mentoring of such pilots by veteran aviators.
After the meeting, Mr Babbitt said some mainline carriers had tentatively agreed to share facilities and other training resources with commuter airlines, with the goal of ensuring that pilots across the industry met the same standards.
The FAA has stopped short of agreeing to raise minimum requirements for issuing various licences to pilots, such as total number of flight hours or time spent behind the controls of multi-engined aircraft.
In many ways, however, proposed fatigue rules are bound to be more controversial with airlines.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe old news, but I had this one emailed to me recently - interesting read given that the study was done in conjunction with one carrier and was funded by the regulator.
The Impacts of Australian Transcontinental 'Back of Clock' Operations on Sleep and Performance in Commercial Aviation Flight Crew
Summary
This aim of the study was to provide objective data to inform fatigue risk-management processes by determining the quantity and quality of sleep obtained by airline pilots during transcontinental back of clock operations, and any changes to subjective fatigue and neurobehavioural performance during these sectors. Typical transcontinental back of clock route pairings involve a departure close to midnight Perth local time, with a dawn arrival into an East-coast city such as Melbourne, Sydney or Brisbane. In many instances this first sector is followed by a second sector to another east-coast destination, with sign-off at approximately 0900 Eastern Standard Time. Data were collected by participants during a two-week period of a normal rostered flying for an airline. During each of the 14 days of data collection, participants were required to undertake the following: 1) Wear an activity monitor wristwatch 7 days prior to, and 6 days after, a transcontinental back of clock flight; 2) complete sleep and duty diaries, which record time of sleep, subjective alertness, and time of duty; and 3) complete a simple 5-minute Psychomotor Vigilance Task (reaction time task) during the cruise of each sector, and three times on non-flying days. The results of this study suggest that Australian transcontinental back of clock operations, as operated by the airline involved in this study, differed significantly from a baseline sample of daytime duty periods in a number of important areas with respect to prior sleep, neurobehavioural performance, and subjective fatigue. While there were some significant differences in sleep and subjective fatigue as a function of a single transcontinental sector of back of clock flying, these differences were, on average, of a magnitude that was unlikely to impact on flight crew performance and overall safety. However, when a primary transcontinental sector is followed by an additional east-coast sector, there is evidence of reduced prior sleep, impaired neurobehavioural performance, and high levels of subjective fatigue.
Download Complete Document: B20050121 [
PDF: 1158Kb]
Type: Research and Analysis Report
Sub-Type: Grant
Publication Date: 27/03/07
The Impacts of Australian Transcontinental 'Back of Clock' Operations on Sleep and Performance in Commercial Aviation Flight Crew
Summary
This aim of the study was to provide objective data to inform fatigue risk-management processes by determining the quantity and quality of sleep obtained by airline pilots during transcontinental back of clock operations, and any changes to subjective fatigue and neurobehavioural performance during these sectors. Typical transcontinental back of clock route pairings involve a departure close to midnight Perth local time, with a dawn arrival into an East-coast city such as Melbourne, Sydney or Brisbane. In many instances this first sector is followed by a second sector to another east-coast destination, with sign-off at approximately 0900 Eastern Standard Time. Data were collected by participants during a two-week period of a normal rostered flying for an airline. During each of the 14 days of data collection, participants were required to undertake the following: 1) Wear an activity monitor wristwatch 7 days prior to, and 6 days after, a transcontinental back of clock flight; 2) complete sleep and duty diaries, which record time of sleep, subjective alertness, and time of duty; and 3) complete a simple 5-minute Psychomotor Vigilance Task (reaction time task) during the cruise of each sector, and three times on non-flying days. The results of this study suggest that Australian transcontinental back of clock operations, as operated by the airline involved in this study, differed significantly from a baseline sample of daytime duty periods in a number of important areas with respect to prior sleep, neurobehavioural performance, and subjective fatigue. While there were some significant differences in sleep and subjective fatigue as a function of a single transcontinental sector of back of clock flying, these differences were, on average, of a magnitude that was unlikely to impact on flight crew performance and overall safety. However, when a primary transcontinental sector is followed by an additional east-coast sector, there is evidence of reduced prior sleep, impaired neurobehavioural performance, and high levels of subjective fatigue.
Download Complete Document: B20050121 [
PDF: 1158Kb]Type: Research and Analysis Report
Sub-Type: Grant
Publication Date: 27/03/07
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA are concened with one thing only: covering there arses
