Too little rest....?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: today?
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too little rest....?
Just a few hours after EgyptAir’s A320 with 66 people aboard crashed in the Mediterranean on Thursday, another aircraft narrowly avoided a fatal disaster over Greece.
Delta Air Lines aircraft 767-400, on a charter flight (DL-8957) from Frankfurt Hahn to Kuwait, entered the Athens Flight Information Region(FIR) from southeastern Tirana (Albania) at 7.10pm local time on Thursday without identifying itself and pilots did not respond to repeated calls by controllers from Italy and Greece for at least an hour, an official said on Sunday, confirming Greek media reports.
Because of terrorist attack or hijack fears, the incident was immediately escalated by the Greek Civil Aviation authorities to the Ministry of Defense.
Following military protocol, at 7.49pm two F-16 fighter jets intercepted the Delta plane while it was flying near the Aegean island of Santorini.
F-16 pilots attempted to make visual contact with the passenger jet pilots but reported to the ground their being in normal sitting position but possibly asleep.
One of the F16s flew in front of the passenger plane and with light signals attempted to alert the pilots while the other flying next to the passenger cabin.
Read more: Baby born on flight named after airline
After passengers reported the presence of a military jet to flight attendants, the latter knocked on the cockpit door to wake up pilots.
Pilots then contacted Greek authorities at 7.55pm and exited the Athens FIR at 8.10pm.
Due to its consistent cruising during the no-contact time, the plane is said to be on auto pilot.
Greek authorities have reportedly sent a letter to Delta Air Lines requesting fuel costs and convenience charges paid.
The incident occurred hours after the EgyptAir Airbus A320 carrying 66 people from Paris to Cairo disappeared off radar screens in the early hours of Thursday, without its crew sending a distress signal.
Search vessels have since found human remains and belongings north of the Egyptian port Alexandria but the cause of the crash remains unknown.
Note: The original article said from Paris to Kuwait, as per the information released by Greek officials.
Delta Air Lines aircraft 767-400, on a charter flight (DL-8957) from Frankfurt Hahn to Kuwait, entered the Athens Flight Information Region(FIR) from southeastern Tirana (Albania) at 7.10pm local time on Thursday without identifying itself and pilots did not respond to repeated calls by controllers from Italy and Greece for at least an hour, an official said on Sunday, confirming Greek media reports.
Because of terrorist attack or hijack fears, the incident was immediately escalated by the Greek Civil Aviation authorities to the Ministry of Defense.
Following military protocol, at 7.49pm two F-16 fighter jets intercepted the Delta plane while it was flying near the Aegean island of Santorini.
F-16 pilots attempted to make visual contact with the passenger jet pilots but reported to the ground their being in normal sitting position but possibly asleep.
One of the F16s flew in front of the passenger plane and with light signals attempted to alert the pilots while the other flying next to the passenger cabin.
Read more: Baby born on flight named after airline
After passengers reported the presence of a military jet to flight attendants, the latter knocked on the cockpit door to wake up pilots.
Pilots then contacted Greek authorities at 7.55pm and exited the Athens FIR at 8.10pm.
Due to its consistent cruising during the no-contact time, the plane is said to be on auto pilot.
Greek authorities have reportedly sent a letter to Delta Air Lines requesting fuel costs and convenience charges paid.
The incident occurred hours after the EgyptAir Airbus A320 carrying 66 people from Paris to Cairo disappeared off radar screens in the early hours of Thursday, without its crew sending a distress signal.
Search vessels have since found human remains and belongings north of the Egyptian port Alexandria but the cause of the crash remains unknown.
Note: The original article said from Paris to Kuwait, as per the information released by Greek officials.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: GAFA
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this level of fatigue is all too common on red eye flights. regardless of how well rested we report for duty before 2 sector DAC night turn both pilots are totally shattered by TOD back into HK.
Disrupted rosters and redeye flying leads to compromised decision making and eventually a crew will end up flying 3 sectors and exceeding 3 hours discretion without even noticing
Disrupted rosters and redeye flying leads to compromised decision making and eventually a crew will end up flying 3 sectors and exceeding 3 hours discretion without even noticing
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: somewhere above the sea
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Didn't you guys get the memo from corporate safety? They don't get many asr-fs on indias and Perth flights, and therefore nobody is taking controlled rest on them, according to csd.
The fact that everyone who actually operates these flights knows that almost everyone uses CR (because there's just no other way to complete the duty) on them is somehow not relevant. It's the big lie hiding in plain sight.
The fact that everyone who actually operates these flights knows that almost everyone uses CR (because there's just no other way to complete the duty) on them is somehow not relevant. It's the big lie hiding in plain sight.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree Ron...it is a big lie, hiding in plain sight!
It scares the crap out of me!
The term "controlled rest" is a euphemism (it's "controlled" so it must be okay) used to intentionally mask what it really is....
It should rightfully be called "MPR" rest (Maximum Profit Rest).
Or, "It's Legal But Stupid" rest.
Or, "Why have three pilots rostered when two are cheaper" rest.
It scares the crap out of me!
The term "controlled rest" is a euphemism (it's "controlled" so it must be okay) used to intentionally mask what it really is....
It should rightfully be called "MPR" rest (Maximum Profit Rest).
Or, "It's Legal But Stupid" rest.
Or, "Why have three pilots rostered when two are cheaper" rest.
Last edited by raven11; 24th May 2016 at 10:08.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or, "It's okay because some guys will file an ASR-F" rest....
Or, "It's legal because the management FRMSC Committee says it's fine" rest....
Or, "I'm in the pilot's seat but it's legal for me to sleep while I fly" rest.
Or, "It's legal because the management FRMSC Committee says it's fine" rest....
Or, "I'm in the pilot's seat but it's legal for me to sleep while I fly" rest.
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Australia
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couldn't agree more curtain;
Nothing will change when we still have a huge contingent of gutless CNs who will wear red, stamp their feet and then continue to find every conceivable method to extend FDP followed by - "it's only 30 minutes discretion, it'll be okay".
On my last trip I was barely able to provide the minimum 3 hrs relief to extend the captain before I burnt out mid-flight to make a total 3 man 2-sector duty time of 16 hours. Still discretion was required by the CN. My opinion was well known and I remained off the flight deck for the remainder of the flight.
Extenuous circumstances aside, (such as the Almaty incident, which can be argued from both sides) I wish we could all, through the AOA, develop a sensible stance on the use of CD. A recommendation at the very least. Left to our own devices, it doesn't seem most of us are capable of applying common sense in the current rostering environment. Excessive fatigue, controlled rest and ultimately, even more fatiguing rosters are the result of some of our own ill informed decisions.
I'm getting a bit sick to death of all our rhetoric, particularly when it comes to CD, where a lot of guys let their true colours shine. They should not be thinking what the 3rd, 6th, 9th or whatever floor might think of their decision. They should be thinking of what a jury will be thinking of their decision when it all goes south - and management is looking for the closest, biggest bus they can place you infront of.
We are all quick to point the finger at "the union" for not acting forcefully enough, but how can the GC ever hope to have a solid campaign backing when we have union guys who can't say no to a non-jeapordy request (extreme circumstances aside).
It's time to put up or shut up.
For the avoidance of doubt and for those who insist on applying creative licence to terms such as "extreme circumstances", I would categorise non extreme circumstances as;
Gate holds
Flow control
Technical delays
Loading delays
Weather delays
Non life threatening tech-stops
Diversions to destination alternates
Insufficient crewing
And so forth....
Nothing will change when we still have a huge contingent of gutless CNs who will wear red, stamp their feet and then continue to find every conceivable method to extend FDP followed by - "it's only 30 minutes discretion, it'll be okay".
On my last trip I was barely able to provide the minimum 3 hrs relief to extend the captain before I burnt out mid-flight to make a total 3 man 2-sector duty time of 16 hours. Still discretion was required by the CN. My opinion was well known and I remained off the flight deck for the remainder of the flight.
Extenuous circumstances aside, (such as the Almaty incident, which can be argued from both sides) I wish we could all, through the AOA, develop a sensible stance on the use of CD. A recommendation at the very least. Left to our own devices, it doesn't seem most of us are capable of applying common sense in the current rostering environment. Excessive fatigue, controlled rest and ultimately, even more fatiguing rosters are the result of some of our own ill informed decisions.
I'm getting a bit sick to death of all our rhetoric, particularly when it comes to CD, where a lot of guys let their true colours shine. They should not be thinking what the 3rd, 6th, 9th or whatever floor might think of their decision. They should be thinking of what a jury will be thinking of their decision when it all goes south - and management is looking for the closest, biggest bus they can place you infront of.
We are all quick to point the finger at "the union" for not acting forcefully enough, but how can the GC ever hope to have a solid campaign backing when we have union guys who can't say no to a non-jeapordy request (extreme circumstances aside).
It's time to put up or shut up.
For the avoidance of doubt and for those who insist on applying creative licence to terms such as "extreme circumstances", I would categorise non extreme circumstances as;
Gate holds
Flow control
Technical delays
Loading delays
Weather delays
Non life threatening tech-stops
Diversions to destination alternates
Insufficient crewing
And so forth....
Last edited by increase.descent; 24th May 2016 at 11:12.
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Australia
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absurd. Correct. This "normalisation of deviance", to play their game, is all too common nowadays.
In my last case, I couldn't pin the burn-out on the CN, it is not yet a deniable request, but the discretion on top of that most certainly was. To add to the humour I was even asked by the CN if I would use discretion on my own duty to provide him with extra inflight rest. Unbelievable.
Needless to say the answer was no and I never returned to the flight deck once I was "free of all in flight duties". I have also unbelievably had strange frowns thrown my way for not returning for landing. 1) It is a contradiction of Ops A for you to continue to take part in the operation. 2) I do not want to be present nor implicated when / if a fatigue related incident occurs. Esp in a case of commanders discretion.
In my last case, I couldn't pin the burn-out on the CN, it is not yet a deniable request, but the discretion on top of that most certainly was. To add to the humour I was even asked by the CN if I would use discretion on my own duty to provide him with extra inflight rest. Unbelievable.
Needless to say the answer was no and I never returned to the flight deck once I was "free of all in flight duties". I have also unbelievably had strange frowns thrown my way for not returning for landing. 1) It is a contradiction of Ops A for you to continue to take part in the operation. 2) I do not want to be present nor implicated when / if a fatigue related incident occurs. Esp in a case of commanders discretion.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: HKG
Age: 54
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget the companies Duty Of Care to ensure its fully burnt out crew can get transport back to their home so they can start rest without possibly killing themselves or the public also sharing the road on the drive home. That issue should be pressed upon. All other reputable carriers provide either: Taxi or transport options home after these fatiguing duties. Or, a Room in Hotel to get rest before driving home. This elephant in the room is being ignored until the first death will force them to acknowledge this responsibility. Like anything nothing changes unless forced.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Commanders discretion is just that the commander gets to decide which in my opinion is wrong
Any commander worth his 4 bars who would like to extend should only do so after consulting his crew.
I have had times when I was happy to extend mainly because I wasn't that tired , but my FO was on a different time zone and he was exhausted
So a quick how do you feel to the FO came back with an I'm really tired
End of discussion! NO extension very sorry
I'm not about to force anyone to extend if they voice any kind of doubts
I don't care what the reason is . He wasn't happy to do so , That's the end of the discussion
Any commander worth his 4 bars who would like to extend should only do so after consulting his crew.
I have had times when I was happy to extend mainly because I wasn't that tired , but my FO was on a different time zone and he was exhausted
So a quick how do you feel to the FO came back with an I'm really tired
End of discussion! NO extension very sorry
I'm not about to force anyone to extend if they voice any kind of doubts
I don't care what the reason is . He wasn't happy to do so , That's the end of the discussion
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How is CD worded / handled in Europe, Australia & North America I wonder???
Unless ALL individual pilot operating crew members, regardless of rank, agree to extend into discretion then the aircraft will not be continuing. (Just to be clear...if ANY SINGLE ONE of the pilots does not feel "fit" to extend their duty into the discretionary period then its game over and time to head back to the hotel/home.
All in...or none in.
Safest way to go IMHO.
PG
In Hong Kong, it's the Commander's discretion. However, it's illegal under the Hong Kong ANO to order someone to operate if they tell you that they are fatigued, or will become fatigued over the course of the duty. If you tell a crew member to operate having been told that, you are breaking the law. So it's same same.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: home
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No one has the courage to stand up to the Commanders at "The CPG". If the flight does not go into discretion, the MLO will call the crew directly and demand that the crew go into discretion (legal or not legal, we don't care. It's our train set). This will usually scare the Commander to use discretion.
If the Commander decides to go against the MLO's demand, the Whole Crew will be called into the office (in separate rooms, just as the police force would do) and questioned why discretion was not used.
The lower ranks will be threatened with termination and sent back to his/her home country in shame if they don't say which crew member did not want to use discretion. This usually is enough to single out the crew. The question would be asked if that crew member or members were militant in their decision. The lower ranks would be asked what was the conversation on the flight deck before the decision was made. Did any of the crew have a militant attitude at anytime during the flight?
It is amazing to see how quickly the Flight Crew will turn on each other when threatened.
When the crew members are identified, those crew members will be questioned by FOP Management to determine the next course of action and that may vary from termination, demotion, letter on P file, etc. Either way the lower ranks will be Cat "B" for a much longer period when their Command comes due if they don’t single out other crew members.
The Ops Manual is there for Guidelines to the Flight Crew and not "The CPG" FOP Management. The statement that says "The Commanders decision is final and unquestioned" means nothing to us. If the MLO's threats will not convince the Commander or crew to continue with the flight, it will be unquestioned at THAT TIME but when they arrive back at "The CPG" Headquarters, there will be explaining to do and consequences faced by the crew.
Make your decision wisely, your career at "The CPG" may depend on it.
And if you don't like it, inform the CAD. We will sort them out.
To My Bonus,
The Management.
If the Commander decides to go against the MLO's demand, the Whole Crew will be called into the office (in separate rooms, just as the police force would do) and questioned why discretion was not used.
The lower ranks will be threatened with termination and sent back to his/her home country in shame if they don't say which crew member did not want to use discretion. This usually is enough to single out the crew. The question would be asked if that crew member or members were militant in their decision. The lower ranks would be asked what was the conversation on the flight deck before the decision was made. Did any of the crew have a militant attitude at anytime during the flight?
It is amazing to see how quickly the Flight Crew will turn on each other when threatened.
When the crew members are identified, those crew members will be questioned by FOP Management to determine the next course of action and that may vary from termination, demotion, letter on P file, etc. Either way the lower ranks will be Cat "B" for a much longer period when their Command comes due if they don’t single out other crew members.
The Ops Manual is there for Guidelines to the Flight Crew and not "The CPG" FOP Management. The statement that says "The Commanders decision is final and unquestioned" means nothing to us. If the MLO's threats will not convince the Commander or crew to continue with the flight, it will be unquestioned at THAT TIME but when they arrive back at "The CPG" Headquarters, there will be explaining to do and consequences faced by the crew.
Make your decision wisely, your career at "The CPG" may depend on it.
And if you don't like it, inform the CAD. We will sort them out.
To My Bonus,
The Management.