Pilot Fatigue - 7:30 report

[framer]

With regard to some form of performance test on a computer at sign-on: as a natural 'lark' I would fare OK at 0600, even after only my usual 6 or 7 hours sleep. Trying the same test 12 hours later would produce (in my case) a worse result, even if I hadn't been at work. At 2300 I would probably fail it every time . The 'owls' would work better the other way, probably peaking around 2100 if that was their sign-on, and falling into a huge heap at 0500 even after a weekend off. So I don't know what testing would prove other than we are all different.

I think the system would be individualised (is that a word?) Anyway, there wouldn't be a base-line score that you had to achieve, the software would be looking for a departure from the norm of a certain magnitude for you as an individual, at that time of day etc etc. The longer the system ran the better the data on you. The first three months an individual was on it might be just a data gathering exercise but it doesn't matter, the airline would adjust it's rostering practices to achieve a minimum number of fails anyway so the 'new-hires' would probably not be fatigued anyway.
It could have the added bonus of giving you an annual rate of decline in your abilities as well which may give early warning of a health problem if the graph takes a sudden dip. Your thoughts MAE?

CASA, if company A is charging 15 dollars for a ticket in 2010 do think there might be some areas where things might be running a little close to the edge.

True, and the longer established companies are forced to cut costs (read safety) to compete. There is a line that we shouldn't cross but who knows where it is?

[aveng]

First of all I sincerely agree with limiting duty due to fatigue. Even flight attendants who might spill coffee on someone due to fatigue.
But did you know that the person who just rebuilt your engine (ie. LAME) has no duty time limits!!!
Perhaps thinking about this on takeoff may wake you up.

[Mach E Avelli]

Aveng makes a very good point. Many years ago I had to do a test flight on an F27 that had just undergone an engine change. The engineer who did it, worked alone for 23 hours straight to get the job done. The short test was OK; max power good on takeoff, quick circuit during which feather, unfeather, relight all OK against the stopwatch and back on the deck.
Then we loaded up and departed. About 5000 ft in the climb the oil temperature went to the redline, so of course back we came. The overworked engineer had left a blank on the oil cooler. Of course they wanted to pull his ticket, sack him etc (overseas location where workers have no rights). However, between us we got reason to prevail and the poor guy got off with a reprimand. Which was still bloody unfair.

Re the testing idea. If it could be individualised AND also data was adjusted according to sign-on time, probably it could detect a decline in one's performance over time. If that helped identify and treat either health or fatigue, then great. But, what if: "Sorry old buddy, the computer indicates you are no longer fit for our particular gruelling operation because you are failing to meet your own peak standard of xx years ago. You are just not as sharp as you were when you joined us. It must be burn-out. Too bad, so sad. We have found a young stud with 1200 hours who can ace the programme, so we are going to increase the flight and duty limits. Because he is so young, we should get 5 years out of him before we burn him out too". Meantime, he has your seat."

[framer]

But, what if: "Sorry old buddy, the computer indicates you are no longer fit for our particular gruelling operation because you are failing to meet your own peak standard of xx years ago. You are just not as sharp as you were when you joined us. It must be burn-out. Too bad, so sad.

There will be lots of "what ifs" with anything new. Always is. I'm sure we could attack each one as it arises and come up with a good system. Here is one idea to combat that problem, there are probably hundreds more....make the fatigue test through an independant company, that company owns the rights to the software and the only thing they are interested in is plotting your individualised data and calling any sharp divergences (like 20% from one 5am sign on to the next), everyones data is confidential and the airline only has its usual checking and training data to hold over you, as is the case now. With the way things are now and with internet 2 already up and running in some universities, the company could be on the moon and it wouldn't matter. If there were 4 or 5 companies offering the service, say one in the states, one in Aus, one in Germany, one in England etc etc , your airline could choose a provider and off you go.
There are solutions to these problems that get thrown up. I strongly believe that this would drop incidents and accident rates noticably. A decline similar to the introduction of EGPWS. I say this because fatigue plays a role in small incidents that never get reported as well as the Colgens and the Melb Emirates , eg, how many alt busts, tcas TA's, config warnings on the roll, forgotten PA's, hot approaches etc etc etc wouldn't happen if the crew were feeling well rested and full of energy? My guess is lots, but we won't know until we have a test for fatigue.
Cheers, Framer

[framer]

ATC and Engineers should have duty limitations in my view. I have done a 24hr shift to get a plane out of the hangar myself, I did my normal duty and then was asked to carry on so that the a/c could depart on an international flight at 0600hrs. we got it done but looking back (15 years) it was asking for trouble. In saying that, I have done 19 hour duties as a pilot in B737 with no rest facilities available whatsoever. In my opinion that was a greater threat to safety. Maybe this fatigue test can apply across the industry???

[airtags]

The whole fatigue (a new 'f' word) as stated rests amid a number of dubious and less than articulate regulatory issues.
Essentially, Australia is one of the few IATA aligned regimes not to have mandated FRMS. CASA's position of 'leaving it to the EBA's' is not satisfactory. Further, by implication, the lodgement and review of the FRMS "plans" as part of the Operator's certification is largely unaudited and typically deemed undiscoverable or exempt when made the subject of FOI's.
Risk minimisation has become risk rationalisation. The regulatory regime has through the delegation instrument the green field for cost reform.
Reality is however we feed this culture and choose to fly Nadi returns or back for east coast sectors after a BOC trans continental, back up when we are really tired after reduced min rest, or there are even those who elect to run over or fudge duty limits by small margins simply because they want to get home to our families.
The Cabin Crew in the 20:16 NPRM dealing with crew ratios did manage by stealth to get defacto FRMS scruitny in the day of Ops/whole of duty safety case that the AOC holder is required to lodge. Sadly, DJ, QF, JQ and just about everyone else diligently lodged renewals for their current exemptions giving them to around 2012 in breathing space. In the future these defacto reforms may be the only recourse if something horrid was to happen. Only with transparent contestable process can the preserved veil of commercial in confidence can be drawn back.
FRMS is fundamental - it should not be 'held back' as is the CASA agenda. It is every pilot ATC's Eng's & and CC's responsibility to keep pushing and lobbying. Start with the Minister and work your way down the long list.

AT

[tio540]

I have several issues operating under the FAID system.

It was based on road transport and rail systems, where the driver could stop the truck when he/she felt fatigued.

1. It does not consider the type of duty undertaken. ie C172 circuits in daylight or multiple night ILS approaches to the minima. They both accumulate the same fatigue points.

2. It assumes that the crew are able to diagnose their own fatigue.

3. The FAID system states that above, from memory 60 points, there should be no use of heavy machinery.

It is a published fact, and the Sleep Research Centre acknowledge this, that humans cannot accurately diagnose their own fatigue level.

The flaw in the FAID system is aircrew operate heavy machinery at the 80 points level, diagnosing their own fatigue level, and due to the nature of the industry, are unable to stop midflight like trucking counterparts.

I am however in favour of a better system than CAO 48.

My two bobs worth.

[mates rates]

We can talk all day about different system,different types of flying,different times of flying.The really is from what I have seen over 40 years anything over about 650 hours has the potential to be fatiguing.This applied to CAO 48 rules will keep you from becoming fatigued.Of course the companies want more productivity.But you just use your sick leave provisions to protect yourself from fatigue!!

[framer]

But you just use your sick leave provisions to protect yourself from fatigue!!

That doesn't work for everyone. Many pilots (myself included) are loath to call in sick unless they are actually sick. I'm not sure why, I think it has something to do with the individuals upbringing/family background etc.I'm not saying its a good thing or a bad thing, but it is a thing. There is no doubt in my mind that using sick leave to avoid fatigue is not an acceptable method for preventing fatigue related incidents in the industry.
The funny thing about this is that if fatigue were measurable, airlines would very quickly develop rostering systems and techniques that brought their crews right to the limit of starting to become fatigued without becoming fatigued.
There have been "fatigue tests" developed with all sorts of different techniques like measuring eye movement etc.
If such a test were mandated by law then the airlines would come up with the rostering systems for us quick smart. The problem of tired pilots, drunk pilots, hung-over pilots, pilots stressed about their wife leaving them or just with low blood sugar levels........all solved overnight. Safer industry, more efficient industry, more cost effective industry, better lifestyle for crews...... we've led the other industries with engineering and CRM etc, lets do it with fatigue issues.
Framer

[tio540]

But you just use your sick leave provisions to protect yourself from fatigue!!

That is a very simplistic and narrow view. How do you go sick 30 mins before landing, at 4.00 am, when you have an ILS to fly?

My information is that in the not to distant future there will be a blood test to check fatigue levels in deceased pilots and motorists. If that is what it takes then so be it.

[breakfastburrito]

My information is that in the not to distant future there will be a blood test to check fatigue levels in deceased pilots and motorists.

Assuming this is viable, like all the other testing, it merely confirms that you are fatigue status at the moment of test, not in X hours time.

Any testing regime would require a predictive function to include the entire anticipated TOD, otherwise it would simply be used as a punitive tool post incident.

Really any testing should be done both prior to and at the completion of the TOD, and the data fed back to the rostering system. Can I see this happening?

[tio540]

My information is that in the not to distant future there will be a blood test to check fatigue levels in deceased pilots and motorists.

I did say deceased.

[breakfastburrito]

tio540, my bad. I was referring to generically to any fatigue testing method, including blood.
I also made the assumption that if it it works dead, it probably does alive...

[Ozguy7]

I work in the Ops department of a long haul operator.

The company regularly rosters crews on, flying the maximum duty limit, regardless of other factors. Their attitude is "it's legal so it must be ok".

They fail to take into account lifestyle factors, previous duties etc.

Just because the rules say you can fly an 18hr duty, doesn't mean it's practical or safe !!

[Reeltime]

Of course all this mumbo jumbo, which has gone on for the last 10 or 15 years, could have been avoided if CASA hadn't sold out to the 2 domestic airlines post '89.

After the dispute the airline bosses wanted pilots to work longer hours, so CASA said YES, and in comes the CAO 48 exemption.

CAO 48 is not perfect, no system is, but it worked...and continues to work.

Just because some bonus hungry airline executive wants something, does not mean it's safe. Think about it Mr CASA, and get on with correcting your previous mistake!

[redleader78]

to answere the question that somebody had about other areas I know a bit about the ambulance service. Fatigue is something that the ambulance service has been trying to address for quite a few years.

It is quite common for ambulance officers to have period where they are rostered on for 5 days work for somewhere in the vicinity of 40 plus something hours depending on workload then having a period of on call in between shifts. That can run for 7 days and can have large amounts of disturbances. I know of a situation of a 4 day period a pair of ambulance officers over a were awake for in the vicinity of 70 + hours This was due to long distance transfers for patients that had to go due to weather issues were not able to get an air assest in. Plus the "staff"/only resource in the area so when they got back they had large amounts of casualty work as well that interupted their sleep pattern. These officers didn't want to go off on fatigue as they lived in the community and knew that they were the only ones in the community that could provide a level of medical support. No dr in town over this period hence all the long distance transports. It is now a system where they manage there fatigue in 2 stages. Stage 1 they are only able to respond to "Hot responses" they are able to recline and have a sleep at there own address.
stage 2. They are not to be contacted for any reason for a minimum period of 10 hours and until the staff member makes contact back to the operation centre that they are fit and able to respond.
it has taken a lot to get to this stage. I know as somebody in operations that it really makes my job a lot easier if staff are able to manage their own fatigue and report it. It also makes the questions from the coroner a lot easier to answer on why a delay in response was made to a case. I know there was a lot of "apprehension" about big brother and people monitoring people when they called fatigued. They thought that it would go against them in promotion or whatever, so people wouldn't report it. Plus sometimes people wouldn't report it cause they missed a call out which can be worth big money especially on a sunday. (On a sunday a call out is worth about 14 standard hours pay) Where there has had to be a bit of a stick approach to that sort of thing taking the call out and then failing to report for their duty shift. On the whole there is no little black mark against you, it from an operations perspective find it so much easier to deal with when people report their fatigue levels and we welcome it with open arms. It has just taken from the operation centre and from human resource perspective the risks of not taking a stance on fatigue will expose you too more liabilities than the percieved "incovenience" of somebody going off on fatigue.

I think it is about applying common sense. I know some people do it but it isn't exactly wise to be commuting from perth to sydney before the commencement of your shift. It may be out of line for me to say this but it seems pilots are sometimes their own worst enemies. All fighting for their own little chance at a shiney jet, or whatever. So as mentioned in other it causes a degradation in terms. I think so many pilots only think of them selves so push the rules so hard to gain whatever advantage they can. So employeer have to play hard ball. I for one have better conditions than my fellow co workers because I don't go out of my way to rock the boat, I talk with my employeer about there expectations and I highlight my expectations. We often come out with mutually benefecial results. If the employer is a jerk, simple answer don't work for them. It might be hard as we all like to have a wage to live and do things but how much of the stuff we spend our money on is superferlous to our needs or spent out of debit. WE BECAME ENSLAVED not as we really should be are is a respected servant. So i am one for is report your fatigue, talk to your employer, let them know what you are capable of doing, and come up with a solution.

[Minosavy Masta]

I remember a time ..many years ago when a Check Captain would ask and expect to receive a correct answer to questions relating to Duty and Flight time limitations,In fact it was mandatory to have working knowledge of these and the knowledge was tested during Line Checks.
It seems to me in this day and age that NOBODY!! really has a firm Idea of duty and Flight time limits....certainly not to the extent that these can be discussed without reference to a FAM or CAO document.
The Old ANO 48 as it was then....had one thing going for it ....that current regulation seems to have lost along the way.....and that is adherance to the KISS principle in its drafting.

[Kelly Slater]

This is a post that I made some years ago. It didn't receive much of a response.

"COA 48 Exemptions & other CASA sanctioned quality of life destroyers

I always thought that the CAO 48 exemption was a lead up to a revised Order but 15 years or so on, nothing much has changed. 0500 sign on is not and never will be the start of a normal day. Fortunately, I have never come across any company that combines it with a 30 minute sign on, another of CASA's foibles. With boarding 15 minutes before departure, a 30 minute sign on would leave the pilots at security screening whilst the passengers are doing battle with the overhead lockers."

I was trying to be subtle. By 0500 not being a normal start to the day, I meant that if a person signed on at 5AM, allowances should be made to that and future duties with the understanding that the person probably didn't get all the sleep that he or she would have liked the night before. You shouldn't be allowed to sign on at 5AM five days in a row. My comment about 30 minute sign ons was supposed to point out that people with 30 minute sign ons still arrive at work an hour early. The post heading still stands. The CAO48 exemption reduced my quality of life. Any further changes to Flight and Duty times will undoubtedly reduce my lifestyle further. As to the safety of the flight, if I am less rested, then the safety of the flight is reduced but the company will only ever roster to the limits imposed by the regulator. Companies are in the business of making money. They need overseers to stop them from exploiting pilots. Regulators and unions are the overseers.