Silly rest periods in IAH (EK)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to ALL fatigue/safety surveys and studies i have encountered or read in 30 years of aviation/space flight, this pattern simply cannot be safe.
I have done a 24 hour Sao Paulo, which is about on a par, if slightly shorter in flying time, and that was enough for me. I was a shattered wreck for 48 hours after getting home, and I thank God I didn't have to deal with any problem on the trip back, because I'd had little of no meaningful sleep on the turnarou... sorry, layover. (Looking for some silver lining - I actually managed to sleep in the forrard tube of the aft torpedo compartment on the return sector, which was almost a first for me.)
If the people coming up with these ridiculous patterns can't be made to see how bloody dangerous they are, maybe we can appeal to their commercial instincts? Can someone can get the message across to them that the cabin crew simply can't deliver "the product" the company imagines they're selling to the travelling public if they're dragging themselves aroud the cabin in a state of near exhaustion.
Not that it will make much difference, but I've put AVOID IAH into my standing bid with a very high loading. Perhaps if everyone else did the same some inkling of pilot dissatisfaction with this patently silly pattern might begin to seep across the chasm that has replaced an interface between the workforce and management in EK.
How in the world are they going to handle the lawsuits if there is an incident that can be attributed to crew fatigue with all the information just on this thread alone - and now a matter of public record - available for any lawyer to investigate further?.
Interesting reading here if you have a spare few hours.
http://www.smartcockpit.com/pdf/flightops/safety/23
Readers Digest version:
Company should have an educational plan for crew regarding rest/operations/fatigue control/rostering, etc.
Crew rest should include seats.
Dedicated area to get changed for rest.
Toilet that is dedicated to crew in a secure area
It goes on as much as l go off ULR!
halas
PS By the way Ian Hosegood is one of the panel advisors
http://www.smartcockpit.com/pdf/flightops/safety/23
Readers Digest version:
Company should have an educational plan for crew regarding rest/operations/fatigue control/rostering, etc.
Crew rest should include seats.
Dedicated area to get changed for rest.
Toilet that is dedicated to crew in a secure area
It goes on as much as l go off ULR!
halas
PS By the way Ian Hosegood is one of the panel advisors
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Dubai
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only one ASR relating to the 24hr pattern Gulf News because the ASRs only covered the period up to the 2nd Feb.
I will be astonished, and professionally a bit disappointed, if we don't have 7 ASRs a week from that point on about that pattern.
This is definitely one pattern that we should be inviting one of the doctors from the FMRS or FRMS or whatever it's called to come along on.
I know the new NZ Doc at the clinic has just joined the committee. He's very keen to find out about all this stuff, but suspect the company "won't be able to release him from duties" because of the heavy workload there.
I will be astonished, and professionally a bit disappointed, if we don't have 7 ASRs a week from that point on about that pattern.
This is definitely one pattern that we should be inviting one of the doctors from the FMRS or FRMS or whatever it's called to come along on.
I know the new NZ Doc at the clinic has just joined the committee. He's very keen to find out about all this stuff, but suspect the company "won't be able to release him from duties" because of the heavy workload there.
short flights long nights
And Halas, it also says two sleep periods on the layover before the return flight.......
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 543
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find the lack of a seat where I can rest is a pain. Having to climb up into (as someone has so aptly called it) the "torpedo tube" is not ideal. Unless you're no more than 5.1" tall, it's not even possible to sit up on the bunk with your feet out into the aisle. And if there's a spare seat available in the cabin, you're not permitted to sit in it (!) - a rule brought in with about as much thought as went into removing the standard Boeing forward crew rest and putting the pilots as far as it is possible to be from the cockpit.
Departure 9.00am - lie down in a claustrophobic tunnel at 9.30am UND YOU VILL REST!!! (does that sound like anyone we know?) is just not possible.
Departure 9.00am - lie down in a claustrophobic tunnel at 9.30am UND YOU VILL REST!!! (does that sound like anyone we know?) is just not possible.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Airplane
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EK...IAH ops
Can someone please explain how the return flight from IAH is legal to operate as it is a 16:10 duty period. I must be missing something because I can't see how it is legal.
7
7
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Airplane
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes I see, but what about this? And I quote...
assigned a ULR Standby on the day before the flight.
The last time I looked IAH is more than 2 hours time zone difference from DXB.
7
3.1. The following restrictions are inviolable with regard to the scheduling of Flight
Crew for this plan:
Crew for this plan:
3.1.1 Prior to undertaking a ULR flight, all crew members shall be acclimatized. All crew members scheduled to operate a ULR flight sector with a published Flight Time of 16 hours or more shall be
assigned a ULR Standby on the day before the flight.
The last time I looked IAH is more than 2 hours time zone difference from DXB.
7
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Jew-Buy Mate
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simple. The company interpretation of "flight" is actually "pairing". This is probably a deliberate misinterpretation of the CARS as has happened several times before when they find their backs against the wall. It wouldn't stand up in a court of law but then who is going to challenge on that level ? That is why there is no official definition in the FOM and Ed feels he needs to use acronyms like stage and mission to avoid inadvertently putting something down officially. 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Raincoast
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the flight is viewed as a pairing, beginning with the outbound DXB-IAH sector, the return is a continuation of the pairing, so you only need to be acclimatized ex-DXB, not from IAH...
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Airplane
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I read the rules concerning there are many instances where they talk about a "flight" and a "pairing".
restrictions require an en-route landing on the day of operation.
The point I am making is that they do acknowledge a difference between "pairing" and "flight" in the document. So when they say flight they mean flight.
Gulf News, I think you are correct. It wouldn't stand up in court, which makes me wonder who will be the defendant, the company or the Pilot in Command.
7
1.4 The number of flight sectors within a single pairing is restricted to a maximum
of 4 for planning purposes.1.5 A ULR flight may only be planned as a single flight sector unless operational
restrictions require an en-route landing on the day of operation.
1.7 A maximum of 2 ULR pairings may be awarded or assigned during any calendar month.
2.1. The schedule for an individual ULR pairing and the applicable rest strategy requirements are shown in the applicable Rest Strategy Plan.
The point I am making is that they do acknowledge a difference between "pairing" and "flight" in the document. So when they say flight they mean flight.
Gulf News, I think you are correct. It wouldn't stand up in court, which makes me wonder who will be the defendant, the company or the Pilot in Command.
7
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Raincoast
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
airbus757, Gulf News and uplock
I reckon you're all correct and betwixt ya' the ugly truth is revealed... it's a tough egg ta crack.
Duty of care indeed... comin' from TCAS it has all the sincerity of a television evangelist...
I reckon you're all correct and betwixt ya' the ugly truth is revealed... it's a tough egg ta crack.
Duty of care indeed... comin' from TCAS it has all the sincerity of a television evangelist...
Just remember where you are based. EK dont give a rats arse about any incident or accident , the aircraft are insured so is passenger liability . The FOM is written in a way where the Captain will always take the blame . company collects insurance gets new aircraft life goes on. While a poor crew rots in prison because there is no union and really no legal protection. Its a real longshot that this could happen but the company will always be absolved from blame.
By making unions illegal , it not only stops strikes but also stops protection for workers, ie slaves never had any work protection throughout the centuries.
The quick command sounds great but just think what you are getting yourself into.
The salary at the moment is not worth leaving home for.
By making unions illegal , it not only stops strikes but also stops protection for workers, ie slaves never had any work protection throughout the centuries.
The quick command sounds great but just think what you are getting yourself into.
The salary at the moment is not worth leaving home for.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: sh!# hole
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote the FOM
FOM Chapter 21 page 5:
FTL 1.1
Intent of this Scheme:
In essence the CAR requires that a crew member shall not fly, and an operator shall not require him to fly, if either has a reason to believe that he is suffering or is likely to suffer, while flying from such as fatigue as may endanger the safety of the aircraft or of its occupants.
I think that the above (for us crew members) applies to us pretty much all of the time!
The words "require" "shall not" "suffering" "likely to suffer" "endager the safety" as above means that we should be not fit to fly on the majority of sectors which we do. However we do.
Maybe it's time to follow the rules as they are laid down and then wait to see what happens.
Oz
FTL 1.1
Intent of this Scheme:
In essence the CAR requires that a crew member shall not fly, and an operator shall not require him to fly, if either has a reason to believe that he is suffering or is likely to suffer, while flying from such as fatigue as may endanger the safety of the aircraft or of its occupants.
I think that the above (for us crew members) applies to us pretty much all of the time!
The words "require" "shall not" "suffering" "likely to suffer" "endager the safety" as above means that we should be not fit to fly on the majority of sectors which we do. However we do.
Maybe it's time to follow the rules as they are laid down and then wait to see what happens.
Oz
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oz is not refering at day flights, is talking about all the rest (approx75%) of ugly night excursions.
The very subject of the thread is the ULR's, and I agree that if you think you gonna be too fatigue to safely operate the flight...You shouldn't operate.
The very subject of the thread is the ULR's, and I agree that if you think you gonna be too fatigue to safely operate the flight...You shouldn't operate.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Fawlty Towers-Torquay
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fatigue Lead To A Fatal Error
You can not keep ignoring the DVT and UV light long term exposures factor. The fact that you are in a pressurised cabin for all that time regardless whether you are flying or not the effect is the same. You are in it. Pilots are not supermen or immune form such occurrences nor the long term effect from these exposures.
Airlines management need to fly on a regular basis with the aircraft like the crew to see how would it feel after an ULR flight. I guarantee you they will rethink again.
Airline management in that part of the world especially were there are no unions in place to protect them will always continue to stretch the rules to suit their profit operation without due care or the impact that could have on your health.
Before you know it your layover will be considered part of your annual leave. As long as you let them get away with it they (the airlines) will continue doing it.
Airlines has no loyalty regardless of how brilliant you are or how long you have served with them. The late Captain Raad of GF airline is a classic example of the way an airline reward their employee after 30 years service.
As for an ASR reaction, the airline will only react seriously when a serious accident take place, look at the airline in turkey that recently suffered a fatal accident on one of their aircraft. I believe they fired the entire management and so they should after the loss of over 100 people.
DO NOT KID YOUR SELF FATIGUE LEAD TO A FATAL ERROR
.happy & Safe flying to all from Sybil, Polly and Manuel!
BF
Guest
Posts: n/a
Seaman Staynes....
While not with Delta, I was with a comparable company flying 777's. The schedule for that was this...
Anything over 8 hours required 3rd crew. Over 12 hours required 4th crew.
Their schedule was quite nice actually. They flew 2 six day trips per month for about 76 hours of flying. That means 12 days flying and 18 off. One of the best rosters I've ever seen at an airline. Needless to say I was envious!!
Crew rest for that type flying was keen as well.... Bunk was right behind the flight deck and crew also had reserved first class seat blocked off for use if he chose not to use bunk during rest break.
Doesn't seem EK has quite that nice a roster, eh?
K
While not with Delta, I was with a comparable company flying 777's. The schedule for that was this...
Anything over 8 hours required 3rd crew. Over 12 hours required 4th crew.
Their schedule was quite nice actually. They flew 2 six day trips per month for about 76 hours of flying. That means 12 days flying and 18 off. One of the best rosters I've ever seen at an airline. Needless to say I was envious!!
Crew rest for that type flying was keen as well.... Bunk was right behind the flight deck and crew also had reserved first class seat blocked off for use if he chose not to use bunk during rest break.
Doesn't seem EK has quite that nice a roster, eh?
K