MORE INSANITY
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MORE INSANITY
The scenario is familiar enough. Less so these days on the Fatbus but it still happens on all fleets.
You pushback, startup then taxi off to the takeoff queue. On the way there is a technical fault which cannot be resolved by maintenance or MEL without going back to the stand - so back you go. This process can take anything from 10 to 50 minutes depending on how far you got, how long maintenance consulted and tried to remedy and how busy the airfield is, and runway in use.
On a long flight, the FTL’s become one of your issues. However apparently if you haven’t taken off you have not done a sector. If a sector has not been done the max flight duty period remains the same.
This doesn’t seem right. After all, everything for a departure and arrival has been done. One could argue the bulk of the work of any flight. Apart from the takeoff and landing it is a complete flight with problems and all the associated workload and its implication on tiredness/fatigue.
Quite often, the crew may be allocated to another aircraft for a shorter flight and begin the whole dispatch and departure preparation again from scratch. They may even be asked to extend the duty. Apparently the previous “sector” has no effect on their fight duty period limitation which remains the same. It normally and sensibly drops with increasing sectors.
And this appears the problem. A review of the company rules define a sector as “The time between when an aeroplane first moves under its own power until it next comes to rest after landing, on the designated parking position.’ So because there has been no landing there has been no sector. It’s convenient but counter intuitive and, IMHO, not in the spirit of the law.
What do the CAR’s say about it?
Definitions: Flight Time: “The total time from the moment an aeroplane first moves for the purpose of taking off until the moment it finally comes to rest at the end of the flight.” No landing required, only intent to fly.
Definitions: Flight Sector: A flight or one of a series of flights which commences at a parking place of the aircraft and terminates at a parking place of the aircraft." This seems rational. Actual flight not required.
And then: Sector: “The time between an aircraft first moving under its own power until it next comes to rest after landing, on the designated parking position.” Is this a mistake?
So there seems to be some contradiction with the CAR’s. It would appear Flight Time has occurred and even a “Flight Sector” but not a Sector. So you can log the time but it’s not a sector for max flight duty period calculations.
That doesn’t sound right, sensible or safe. After all, you are obliged to log this in the sector page of the tech log and your own logbook – as a sector.
In fact the company will give Block Hours for this counting towards your yearly max. It counts as flying to them. BUT they won’t give you any Credit and therefore no flight pay/productivity credit. That sounds wrong. And mean. They treat it as you simply did no work. “You didn’t get airborne! Why should we pay you?” It would almost implies you failed as a pilot!
In fact if we had had the exact scenario as BA had at Vegas, (which by all accounts was a well handled event that could have been extremely nasty) our fatigue and Max FTP would not have been impacted and we would not have received flying pay for the time!
I can just see it: “Chaps the good news is the FAA are happy with your performance. The bad news is you don’t get paid for that time. But chins up, you are still within your single sector FDP limit, so there is still time to get to Dubai with discretion. And Captain you will extend the duty, wont you? Don’t want to draw attention to yourself after something like this. After all, commercial may decide you’ve damaged the brand with your blazing engine. So here’s another plane. Have a good flight!”
A little facetious maybe but you get the gist.
Is this sensible? Safe? Ethical? Do other western airlines do this? I believe it’s another flaw in an already stretched system.
Frankly it looks like more corporate insanity to me.
You pushback, startup then taxi off to the takeoff queue. On the way there is a technical fault which cannot be resolved by maintenance or MEL without going back to the stand - so back you go. This process can take anything from 10 to 50 minutes depending on how far you got, how long maintenance consulted and tried to remedy and how busy the airfield is, and runway in use.
On a long flight, the FTL’s become one of your issues. However apparently if you haven’t taken off you have not done a sector. If a sector has not been done the max flight duty period remains the same.
This doesn’t seem right. After all, everything for a departure and arrival has been done. One could argue the bulk of the work of any flight. Apart from the takeoff and landing it is a complete flight with problems and all the associated workload and its implication on tiredness/fatigue.
Quite often, the crew may be allocated to another aircraft for a shorter flight and begin the whole dispatch and departure preparation again from scratch. They may even be asked to extend the duty. Apparently the previous “sector” has no effect on their fight duty period limitation which remains the same. It normally and sensibly drops with increasing sectors.
And this appears the problem. A review of the company rules define a sector as “The time between when an aeroplane first moves under its own power until it next comes to rest after landing, on the designated parking position.’ So because there has been no landing there has been no sector. It’s convenient but counter intuitive and, IMHO, not in the spirit of the law.
What do the CAR’s say about it?
Definitions: Flight Time: “The total time from the moment an aeroplane first moves for the purpose of taking off until the moment it finally comes to rest at the end of the flight.” No landing required, only intent to fly.
Definitions: Flight Sector: A flight or one of a series of flights which commences at a parking place of the aircraft and terminates at a parking place of the aircraft." This seems rational. Actual flight not required.
And then: Sector: “The time between an aircraft first moving under its own power until it next comes to rest after landing, on the designated parking position.” Is this a mistake?
So there seems to be some contradiction with the CAR’s. It would appear Flight Time has occurred and even a “Flight Sector” but not a Sector. So you can log the time but it’s not a sector for max flight duty period calculations.
That doesn’t sound right, sensible or safe. After all, you are obliged to log this in the sector page of the tech log and your own logbook – as a sector.
In fact the company will give Block Hours for this counting towards your yearly max. It counts as flying to them. BUT they won’t give you any Credit and therefore no flight pay/productivity credit. That sounds wrong. And mean. They treat it as you simply did no work. “You didn’t get airborne! Why should we pay you?” It would almost implies you failed as a pilot!
In fact if we had had the exact scenario as BA had at Vegas, (which by all accounts was a well handled event that could have been extremely nasty) our fatigue and Max FTP would not have been impacted and we would not have received flying pay for the time!
I can just see it: “Chaps the good news is the FAA are happy with your performance. The bad news is you don’t get paid for that time. But chins up, you are still within your single sector FDP limit, so there is still time to get to Dubai with discretion. And Captain you will extend the duty, wont you? Don’t want to draw attention to yourself after something like this. After all, commercial may decide you’ve damaged the brand with your blazing engine. So here’s another plane. Have a good flight!”
A little facetious maybe but you get the gist.
Is this sensible? Safe? Ethical? Do other western airlines do this? I believe it’s another flaw in an already stretched system.
Frankly it looks like more corporate insanity to me.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: earth
Posts: 1,098
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I get your point. However it seems like splitting hair to a certain extent.
If it would count as a sector, your duty limit might decrease, so i can understand the companies not wanting to count this as a sector.
Just stay within the intended limits!
They may, but that's when you have to politely say no. Definitely! Too many guys still don't. It really and sincerely eludes me why .....
There has been a dude lately that effectively agreed to do the ORD-DXB sector with 3, after his fellow skipper reported sick.
Imagine this, after a ULR and only 24 hours rest!!!
This is the real self inflicted MORE INSANITY.
If a sector has not been done the max flight duty period remains the same
Just stay within the intended limits!
They may even be asked to extend the duty
There has been a dude lately that effectively agreed to do the ORD-DXB sector with 3, after his fellow skipper reported sick.
Imagine this, after a ULR and only 24 hours rest!!!
This is the real self inflicted MORE INSANITY.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The dark side of the moon
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Haha... Of course western airlines do the same.
Yes you are right about the flight time. You can log it if you return to stand due ANY issue. This is to cover the push and park in case of slots, plus stops guys building hours by running an engine and just sitting there to clock hours.
The sector issue, is it really that hard to complete a before takeoff checklist then an after landing checklist, then setup pretty much the same config and brief "As before"? What's really changed, what if you had to hold at the runway for two hours due wx and ATC delays? When does that become another sector?
I've been a commercial pilot for 15 years and still amazed how some people will try to get out of any extension of the day. There was one time we didn't exercise captain's discretion, it involved a bad day for wx, back of the clock flying and no cabin conditioning on the ground, which made it very hot and fatiguing. When we called a stop and explained to ops, the answer was "No worries understood, we'll sort the hotel.". This was purely down to safety as we had good reasons. Sometimes I think some are too quick to call fatigue or wolf, this then results in ops learning to push back, understandably so. There is a big difference between "I don't want to" and "I'm really shattered".
I've had a double hydraulic failure just after gear up on a 320 once, we returned. Got another aircraft and continued on our long day. I didn't feel particularly stressed by it, captain asked if I was good to go and honestly I was.
I'm sure there will be other opinions
Yes you are right about the flight time. You can log it if you return to stand due ANY issue. This is to cover the push and park in case of slots, plus stops guys building hours by running an engine and just sitting there to clock hours.
The sector issue, is it really that hard to complete a before takeoff checklist then an after landing checklist, then setup pretty much the same config and brief "As before"? What's really changed, what if you had to hold at the runway for two hours due wx and ATC delays? When does that become another sector?
I've been a commercial pilot for 15 years and still amazed how some people will try to get out of any extension of the day. There was one time we didn't exercise captain's discretion, it involved a bad day for wx, back of the clock flying and no cabin conditioning on the ground, which made it very hot and fatiguing. When we called a stop and explained to ops, the answer was "No worries understood, we'll sort the hotel.". This was purely down to safety as we had good reasons. Sometimes I think some are too quick to call fatigue or wolf, this then results in ops learning to push back, understandably so. There is a big difference between "I don't want to" and "I'm really shattered".
I've had a double hydraulic failure just after gear up on a 320 once, we returned. Got another aircraft and continued on our long day. I didn't feel particularly stressed by it, captain asked if I was good to go and honestly I was.
I'm sure there will be other opinions
Touch old chap, you were looking for a flight training school 13 years ago. So not really 15years a pilot is it?
I love A320 waries. Can we have some more? You are so brave and so smart etc etc etc..
I love A320 waries. Can we have some more? You are so brave and so smart etc etc etc..
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T'n'O I would have to disagree.
Push and park and hour building are both well covered by the definition of Flight time: In neither case did the aircraft move for the "purpose of taking off" or in other jargon "with the intention of flight". I.e. no sector.
What's changed for the next attempted departure? Possibly not much but in many cases a great deal: completely different flight, briefing package, aircraft, MEL's, weather, runway in use. You could argue what changes from one flight to another. We still takeoff and land. Do we remove the sector idea completely?
Your example of takeoff, hydraulic failure land is not relevant. Your FDP had reduced because that was a sector. And correctly so.
In my mind if you taxi out with the intention of flight, find you cannot depart so taxi back, a sector has reasonably occurred and should be counted from every aspect.
Its not about not wanting to. Professionals want to keep the show on the road but sensible and fair play are the issues here.
Push and park and hour building are both well covered by the definition of Flight time: In neither case did the aircraft move for the "purpose of taking off" or in other jargon "with the intention of flight". I.e. no sector.
What's changed for the next attempted departure? Possibly not much but in many cases a great deal: completely different flight, briefing package, aircraft, MEL's, weather, runway in use. You could argue what changes from one flight to another. We still takeoff and land. Do we remove the sector idea completely?
Your example of takeoff, hydraulic failure land is not relevant. Your FDP had reduced because that was a sector. And correctly so.
In my mind if you taxi out with the intention of flight, find you cannot depart so taxi back, a sector has reasonably occurred and should be counted from every aspect.
Its not about not wanting to. Professionals want to keep the show on the road but sensible and fair play are the issues here.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: South of North
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Touchnoops---good for you. If you feel fine then operate. But please don't tell the rest of us that if we decline discretion we are, essentially, being lazy.
Captains at EK have been flying 90 plus hours a month for 4 years now. If I refuse discretion it is because I believe the operation is pushing the bounds of safety. I NEVER use discretion on a night flight. Not out of spite but because I know that myself, and most pilots/crew, are pushing the limits. Especially considering the fact that the duty limits are generous to begin with!
Ops can push back all they want - not that I have ever seen them push back at EK. In the end, it is the captain that is responsible and will be held accountable.
My favorite was the captain in CRM who got all high and mighty about how it was HIS discretion and that the rest of the crew would follow his lead with no discussion. One of these pilots will, one day, be involved in an incident and, when it is discovered that they did not ENSURE that each and every crew member was fit to go into discretion he will be held accountable. Quite rightly so. Depending on where it happens he may well end up in jail or facing a civil suit where he loses his life savings.
There is a difference between 'getting the job done' or 'working with the company' and making a decision about fatigue and discretion. The problem is that fatigue is insidious and, 99.9% of the time, we get away with flying without an incident. So we do it again.
Captains at EK have been flying 90 plus hours a month for 4 years now. If I refuse discretion it is because I believe the operation is pushing the bounds of safety. I NEVER use discretion on a night flight. Not out of spite but because I know that myself, and most pilots/crew, are pushing the limits. Especially considering the fact that the duty limits are generous to begin with!
Ops can push back all they want - not that I have ever seen them push back at EK. In the end, it is the captain that is responsible and will be held accountable.
My favorite was the captain in CRM who got all high and mighty about how it was HIS discretion and that the rest of the crew would follow his lead with no discussion. One of these pilots will, one day, be involved in an incident and, when it is discovered that they did not ENSURE that each and every crew member was fit to go into discretion he will be held accountable. Quite rightly so. Depending on where it happens he may well end up in jail or facing a civil suit where he loses his life savings.
There is a difference between 'getting the job done' or 'working with the company' and making a decision about fatigue and discretion. The problem is that fatigue is insidious and, 99.9% of the time, we get away with flying without an incident. So we do it again.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The dark side of the moon
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
donpizmeov: haha... You're right, it was just a poor attempt to keep some anonymity. 
Pixy:
I totally agree with you on the Flight Time. I think we have said the same thing, but worded differently.
Btw, on average for every additional sector FTL falls by 3/4 of an hour, but yet we still have an additional 3 hours if it is a single sector or final sector. 3/4 ain't much in the scheme of things. It represents roughly 2.5% drop in FTLs on a 2 sector day.
Carrying on, FTLs can't cover all circumstances and that is why there is that additional bit of wording saying that the commander has to take into account the circumstances of the crew. So it covers the turfing of a drunk, which is easy enough to an engine fire on ground. I agree if you had the latter it would be fair enough to call it quits for the day, doubt ops would call anyone on it.
I have had a cabin crew member say she didn't want to go into discretion after a tire change in Tenerife, something tells me there was a bit of motivation to stay a day in a sunny hotel rather than return to the pissing rain in England.
Trader:
I was merely trying to address those who abuse the spirit the FTL was written under. I know guys who wouldn't go into discretion to spite the company (These tend to be miserable buggers to fly with) and yes ops can be pushy. Additionally, if I thought any of the crew had been strung out then lets hit the hotel. This also includes those who are flying back to back night turns. I would go to bat for crew who have been worked into the ground, but I'd make sure I had a firm ground to fight my position if required.
I think this conversation draws parallels with the Fuel debate. Some guys always carry extra "For the grandkids" and that's bull. But, then I fly with someone who wants to take nothing extra during the time of year TSRA is highly likely to kick off, just asking for a diversion or the sweats. In these discussions there are always going to be those at the extremes who don't understand that no two flights are the same and common sense takes a back seat.
So to try and make heads or tails out of this. Would anyone argue to count the sector so to spill into discretion on a tight FTL day, so they can find a reason to call stop over 45 minutes (2.5% of the day)? However If it meant pushing the crew over the 3 hour mark, I wouldn't care because if I was pushing the 3 hour mark I would already be very ready to call it a day.
Pixy:
I totally agree with you on the Flight Time. I think we have said the same thing, but worded differently.
Btw, on average for every additional sector FTL falls by 3/4 of an hour, but yet we still have an additional 3 hours if it is a single sector or final sector. 3/4 ain't much in the scheme of things. It represents roughly 2.5% drop in FTLs on a 2 sector day.
Carrying on, FTLs can't cover all circumstances and that is why there is that additional bit of wording saying that the commander has to take into account the circumstances of the crew. So it covers the turfing of a drunk, which is easy enough to an engine fire on ground. I agree if you had the latter it would be fair enough to call it quits for the day, doubt ops would call anyone on it.
I have had a cabin crew member say she didn't want to go into discretion after a tire change in Tenerife, something tells me there was a bit of motivation to stay a day in a sunny hotel rather than return to the pissing rain in England.
Trader:
I was merely trying to address those who abuse the spirit the FTL was written under. I know guys who wouldn't go into discretion to spite the company (These tend to be miserable buggers to fly with) and yes ops can be pushy. Additionally, if I thought any of the crew had been strung out then lets hit the hotel. This also includes those who are flying back to back night turns. I would go to bat for crew who have been worked into the ground, but I'd make sure I had a firm ground to fight my position if required.
I think this conversation draws parallels with the Fuel debate. Some guys always carry extra "For the grandkids" and that's bull. But, then I fly with someone who wants to take nothing extra during the time of year TSRA is highly likely to kick off, just asking for a diversion or the sweats. In these discussions there are always going to be those at the extremes who don't understand that no two flights are the same and common sense takes a back seat.
So to try and make heads or tails out of this. Would anyone argue to count the sector so to spill into discretion on a tight FTL day, so they can find a reason to call stop over 45 minutes (2.5% of the day)? However If it meant pushing the crew over the 3 hour mark, I wouldn't care because if I was pushing the 3 hour mark I would already be very ready to call it a day.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The issue is not discretion. For that normal rules and sensibility can apply.
The question is simply: If you taxi out with intention to take off then have to come back should it not be a sector?
If you chose to extend you need to know what to extend upon. Depending on time of day, location, previous duty and what actually took place on the day I may not extend or give full extension. But this is not the issue.
The other aspect is the pay issue: You could extend the duty but the flying time could be less if they change you to another destination and recrew the original flight. This often happens as time has been lost so original destination may be unrealistic.
Now you've done an extra sector that has not been counted, possibly extended the duty and wind up getting paid less for your efforts.
That's not right. I'm back to the old argument that fatigue and pay should be related to duty not flight time. Sectors should simply limit the duty time.
If you work you get tired. If you work you should be paid.
The question is simply: If you taxi out with intention to take off then have to come back should it not be a sector?
If you chose to extend you need to know what to extend upon. Depending on time of day, location, previous duty and what actually took place on the day I may not extend or give full extension. But this is not the issue.
The other aspect is the pay issue: You could extend the duty but the flying time could be less if they change you to another destination and recrew the original flight. This often happens as time has been lost so original destination may be unrealistic.
Now you've done an extra sector that has not been counted, possibly extended the duty and wind up getting paid less for your efforts.
That's not right. I'm back to the old argument that fatigue and pay should be related to duty not flight time. Sectors should simply limit the duty time.
If you work you get tired. If you work you should be paid.
FTPs commence 1 hour before push back yet we are briefing the cabin crew at t-83 mins? How does that work?
On the 330 I was averaging 13 (17 was my record) turns a month that's a lot of duty times but never came close to the overtime limit. Was getting paid way less then 777/380 drivers for way more work.
Certain ULR flights like Boston and Toronto are being manned 3 crew yet programmed as ULR. Under the ftp with 3 pilots ops with discretion you can do 18 hrs. With a stroke of the pen it is branded as ULR and you can now do 22 hrs.
How does that work?
On the 330 I was averaging 13 (17 was my record) turns a month that's a lot of duty times but never came close to the overtime limit. Was getting paid way less then 777/380 drivers for way more work.
Certain ULR flights like Boston and Toronto are being manned 3 crew yet programmed as ULR. Under the ftp with 3 pilots ops with discretion you can do 18 hrs. With a stroke of the pen it is branded as ULR and you can now do 22 hrs.
How does that work?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Standby, Resyncing other FMC...
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capn Rex
I understand that you are picked up about 2:15 before departure? Look at all the guys in Europe and US who are commuting. Many of them leave home a lot earlier and arrive hours before report. That never counts as duty. Or the guys living far from the airport. I flew with a guy the other day that had a three hour drive to get to work. With a report time of 0530 for a 9 hour 5 sector day you can imagine his level of fatigue in the end.
From a legal standpoint EK:s practice is definitely questionable. However, when it comes to fatigue I think the "commuting problem" in the west is worse. Remember Colgan Air.
Pixy
In my company (European major) sector in relation to FTL "includes a take off and landing". I believe that is straight from Subpart Q.
I understand that you are picked up about 2:15 before departure? Look at all the guys in Europe and US who are commuting. Many of them leave home a lot earlier and arrive hours before report. That never counts as duty. Or the guys living far from the airport. I flew with a guy the other day that had a three hour drive to get to work. With a report time of 0530 for a 9 hour 5 sector day you can imagine his level of fatigue in the end.
From a legal standpoint EK:s practice is definitely questionable. However, when it comes to fatigue I think the "commuting problem" in the west is worse. Remember Colgan Air.
Pixy
In my company (European major) sector in relation to FTL "includes a take off and landing". I believe that is straight from Subpart Q.
Expat-
I'm not talking about the pick up time. I'm talking that for the purposes of ftp - one uses 1 hour before push back. Yet we are doing company work ie briefings etc 1 hr 30 plus b4 work. That is wrong and illegal.
I'm not talking about the pick up time. I'm talking that for the purposes of ftp - one uses 1 hour before push back. Yet we are doing company work ie briefings etc 1 hr 30 plus b4 work. That is wrong and illegal.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Post-Pit and Lovin' It.
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They may, but that's when you have to politely say no. Definitely! Too many guys still don't. It really and sincerely eludes me why .....
There has been a dude lately that effectively agreed to do the ORD-DXB sector with 3, after his fellow skipper reported sick.
Imagine this, after a ULR and only 24 hours rest!!!
This is the real self inflicted MORE INSANITY.
There has been a dude lately that effectively agreed to do the ORD-DXB sector with 3, after his fellow skipper reported sick.
Imagine this, after a ULR and only 24 hours rest!!!
This is the real self inflicted MORE INSANITY.
I think the whole point of operating with reduced augment is to save it for situations such as a sick crewmember: irregular ops, which - after careful consideration of all factors - can be completed safely.
The problem is, EK rosters to the limit of discretion, only considering what is considered (by their cozily related regulator) legal, not what is safe. And THAT is when guys have to push back.
Or just leave and go somewhere sane.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Standby, Resyncing other FMC...
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capn Rex
"That is wrong and illegal."
If you read my post again you can see that I agree with you. I was talking about fatigue as a consequence of that practice.
"That is wrong and illegal."
If you read my post again you can see that I agree with you. I was talking about fatigue as a consequence of that practice.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: earth
Posts: 1,098
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nolimit
I don't know how many times you operated such flights. Certainly, EK tried 3 man ops on JFK and BOS, but was confronted with too many fatigue reports. (YYZ is 48h i guess?).
ORD is different because you have an additional time zone and still only some 24h rest. Those who have done it know that it makes a difference.....
We are struggling with fatiguing rosters. Stunts with 3 men had to be abandoned due to fatigue. People fly 90h+, not the case when above stunts were tried. ORD has the most fatigue reports, closely followed by JFK due to the bunk position (gets slowly solved, thks).
Looking at the whole situation it is not very wise, politely put, to agree to go on 3 men. The slightest mistake gives any authority a blank check to blame the skipper having gone over the limits and pretending he shouldn't have, pointing to all the points i have listed.
Just think about it! No one, especially nobody from the company will come to your rescue.
I don't know how many times you operated such flights. Certainly, EK tried 3 man ops on JFK and BOS, but was confronted with too many fatigue reports. (YYZ is 48h i guess?).
ORD is different because you have an additional time zone and still only some 24h rest. Those who have done it know that it makes a difference.....
We are struggling with fatiguing rosters. Stunts with 3 men had to be abandoned due to fatigue. People fly 90h+, not the case when above stunts were tried. ORD has the most fatigue reports, closely followed by JFK due to the bunk position (gets slowly solved, thks).
Looking at the whole situation it is not very wise, politely put, to agree to go on 3 men. The slightest mistake gives any authority a blank check to blame the skipper having gone over the limits and pretending he shouldn't have, pointing to all the points i have listed.
Just think about it! No one, especially nobody from the company will come to your rescue.
