FZ 981 crashes in Rostov on Don Russia
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: UAE
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Twiglet, you contradict yourself. You admit that only a couple of weeks of roster were visible (and what a roster it was for those two weeks!) so you can't say if fatigue was a factor or not. Then you go on to say it most likely wasn't.
The pilots (as opposed to the management trolls) posting on here from Fly Dubai and the other airline across the airport are flying these rosters month in, month out. Trust me, they know the difference between "sleepy" and "fatigued".
The pilots (as opposed to the management trolls) posting on here from Fly Dubai and the other airline across the airport are flying these rosters month in, month out. Trust me, they know the difference between "sleepy" and "fatigued".
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: South of North
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The pilot had resigned stating FATIGUE. One roster is not enough to determine that but, Twiggy, you don't know the full story either so don't presume it NOT to be fatigue.
short flights long nights
Twig, you have absoloutly no idea if the crew were fatigued or not. There is no way you can make that call with the available information.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uae
Posts: 2,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fly Dubai will hide under the GCAA FTLs and claim it's the pilots responsibility to book off if not fit( fatigued) . If a pilot says he's fatigued (unfit) he is then required not to fly.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwixt and between
Posts: 666
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The horrible thing about chronic fatigue, is that you don't realise how chronically fatigued you are. Bad judgement is often the result of fatigue. Bad judgement like "I feel good enough to fly". Acute fatigue is easy to self assess, I am sure most experienced pilots at some time or another have felt a line has been crossed and called in unfit to fly.
Are we talking about long term chronic fatigue or acute short term went to bed too late had a bad night fatigue?
Are we talking about long term chronic fatigue or acute short term went to bed too late had a bad night fatigue?
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: on earth
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call it the way you want , we are not doctor or health expert...
Call it unfit to fly if you prefer BUT it happen too many times that pilots are flying when not enough rested to perform as they should in an emergency or difficult condition.
The main reason being that the roster is design for single pilot with a maid to do all their cleaning shopping etc... to allow the pilot to just fly , eat and sleep
Only then , their published roster is "duable" without being "tired" , "fatigue" or "unfit" as you prefer to call it.
Call it unfit to fly if you prefer BUT it happen too many times that pilots are flying when not enough rested to perform as they should in an emergency or difficult condition.
The main reason being that the roster is design for single pilot with a maid to do all their cleaning shopping etc... to allow the pilot to just fly , eat and sleep
Only then , their published roster is "duable" without being "tired" , "fatigue" or "unfit" as you prefer to call it.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yes there is a difference between "fatigue" and "tiredness", but the result is the same: you aren't fit to fly. I don't give a **** what the definition is, you shouldn't be at the controls. When I am tired, due to boredom or whatever reason, I can't keep my eyes open. When I am fatigued, I might feel OK but I make mistakes sometimes without even detecting them.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwixt and between
Posts: 666
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But as you say atlas, the crucial difference is one is obvious to you (acute fatigue, short term, feeling tired, obvious when you shouldn't fly) and chronic fatigue (feel maybe a bit fed up, irritable, no obvious stand out red flags). But with chronic fatigue, when the workload ramps up, fixation occurs, things get missed and the wrong decision is likely.
It is no good airlines saying 'pilots should not report if unfit' when the schedules drive people into chronic fatigue scenarios a pilot may feel in all honesty they they are not at their peak, but otherwise OK. This is why we have FTLs. This is what SMS is meant to prevent. To prevent company induced chronic fatigue.
If the only real line of defence is an individual crew member's judgement as to whether they are fit to fly, then the airline in question is more concerned with how blame can be effectively apportioned to the crew and has no real interest in safety. That much is clear.
It is no good airlines saying 'pilots should not report if unfit' when the schedules drive people into chronic fatigue scenarios a pilot may feel in all honesty they they are not at their peak, but otherwise OK. This is why we have FTLs. This is what SMS is meant to prevent. To prevent company induced chronic fatigue.
If the only real line of defence is an individual crew member's judgement as to whether they are fit to fly, then the airline in question is more concerned with how blame can be effectively apportioned to the crew and has no real interest in safety. That much is clear.
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Austria
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Clipperton island
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
except that the somato-something (how literate to the audience - and to ourselves - do we all look when using this term..) could and used to happen in, say a Skyraider or a Hawker Hunter in darkness, single-pilot and poor instrument design from decades ago, unreliable ADI and so, but not on elaborate two-pilots airliners of modern times with beautifully designed cockpit instruments ..... or there is really a problem somewhere.
Did those pilots pay for their training originally, years ago ? passengers and the general public should be informed of that
Did those pilots pay for their training originally, years ago ? passengers and the general public should be informed of that
Somotogravic illusion happens. It can happen in a piston twin, it can happen in a 737. If you are well rested you can process the information being presented to you by the instruments effectively which helps you to recognise that you need to maintain the correct attitude on the pfd. If you are processing visual information slowly due to fatigue or distraction you are less likely to make appropriate control inputs in a timely fashion. When you do make inputs they may be more course than is desireable.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Dubai
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Recceguy you clearly have no idea what you're talking about, and therefore you represent the exact problem the industry has in dealing with this serious threat.
This is the exact same scenario as the Tarastan Airlines 737 crash in 2103. Almost exactly the same flight profile.
Here's a simple explanation of the illusion caused by confusing signals to the Otolith organs in our ears;
In aviation we are faced with the combination of rapid acceleration and reduced/no visual cues (i.e. IMC and/or night flying). As we no longer have the benefit of our visual system to resolve the ambiguity, our brain uses the signals it is receiving and interprets them as a ‘tilt’. The net result is a tilt back (i.e. pitching up) sensation under acceleration, and a tilting forward (i.e. pitching down) sensation under deceleration.
Typically this occurs during the missed approach or go-around segment of a flight at night or in IMC. Speed is slow, power is rapidly applied and the aircraft then accelerates rapidly. As no visual cues exist, this generates a strong ‘tilt back’ sensation which the pilot interprets (incorrectly) as a rapid pitching up sensation. Despite this perception the aircraft may still actually be in a level attitude or only a slight climb. This is the somatogravic illusion. The pilot will then push forward on the control column to control this (imaginary) climb thinking they are lowering the aircraft nose back to level flight, when in actual fact they are lowering the nose into a dive. As the aircraft nose lowers, the aircraft continues to accelerate, generating additional pitch up sensations, causing the pilot to lower the nose even further. Tragically, this illusion normal ends with the pilot commanding the aircraft into a high speed steep dive and contact with the ground quickly ensues.
You can't train for this "sensation experience" of this event in a simulator. The only time you'll experience it is in the real aircraft, in a very dangerous situation.
What we have to do to recognise, train for, and mitigate this particular threat is;
1. Teach crews the awareness of the effect, and when it's going to be a threat.
2. Make sure that crews brief this as a threat, (night, IMC, tired) and what they're going to do about it.
3. Use the autopilot to maximum effect during approach AND PARTICULARLY in the event of a missed approach.
4. Brief to rely on the instruments and ignore the sickening feeling of being 70+ degs nose up.
We've identified in the industry that two engine go-arounds are actually a risky manoeuvre if not managed properly. Teaching crew to hand-fly these manoeuvres is essential, but it's led crew to tend to disconnect the AP when they sense things are going wrong. In this case, they ABSOLUTELY need to rely on the autopilot (if it's working) under these circumstances.
This is the exact same scenario as the Tarastan Airlines 737 crash in 2103. Almost exactly the same flight profile.
Here's a simple explanation of the illusion caused by confusing signals to the Otolith organs in our ears;
In aviation we are faced with the combination of rapid acceleration and reduced/no visual cues (i.e. IMC and/or night flying). As we no longer have the benefit of our visual system to resolve the ambiguity, our brain uses the signals it is receiving and interprets them as a ‘tilt’. The net result is a tilt back (i.e. pitching up) sensation under acceleration, and a tilting forward (i.e. pitching down) sensation under deceleration.
Typically this occurs during the missed approach or go-around segment of a flight at night or in IMC. Speed is slow, power is rapidly applied and the aircraft then accelerates rapidly. As no visual cues exist, this generates a strong ‘tilt back’ sensation which the pilot interprets (incorrectly) as a rapid pitching up sensation. Despite this perception the aircraft may still actually be in a level attitude or only a slight climb. This is the somatogravic illusion. The pilot will then push forward on the control column to control this (imaginary) climb thinking they are lowering the aircraft nose back to level flight, when in actual fact they are lowering the nose into a dive. As the aircraft nose lowers, the aircraft continues to accelerate, generating additional pitch up sensations, causing the pilot to lower the nose even further. Tragically, this illusion normal ends with the pilot commanding the aircraft into a high speed steep dive and contact with the ground quickly ensues.
You can't train for this "sensation experience" of this event in a simulator. The only time you'll experience it is in the real aircraft, in a very dangerous situation.
What we have to do to recognise, train for, and mitigate this particular threat is;
1. Teach crews the awareness of the effect, and when it's going to be a threat.
2. Make sure that crews brief this as a threat, (night, IMC, tired) and what they're going to do about it.
3. Use the autopilot to maximum effect during approach AND PARTICULARLY in the event of a missed approach.
4. Brief to rely on the instruments and ignore the sickening feeling of being 70+ degs nose up.
We've identified in the industry that two engine go-arounds are actually a risky manoeuvre if not managed properly. Teaching crew to hand-fly these manoeuvres is essential, but it's led crew to tend to disconnect the AP when they sense things are going wrong. In this case, they ABSOLUTELY need to rely on the autopilot (if it's working) under these circumstances.
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To Kamelchaser's observation "You can't train for this "sensation experience" of this event in a simulator. The only time you'll experience it is in the real aircraft..."
Well, that's not entirely true. Firstly, the RAF and RN pilots were taught about somatogravic illusions in rigs specifically design to create them, and very strongly so the lesson of trusting instruments over feel could be emphasised. You can even do it with an office chair - get someone to spin you fast and then put your ear on your shoulder! Secondly, full motion simulators such as those used in flight training and fair ground rides rely entirely on somatogravic illusion to create the impression of acceleration in each axis.
The effect is very strong, and most pilots will suffer it from time to time. US Navy fast jet pilots have to do carrier catapult launches hands-off purely because of so many pitching down into the sea as they accelerated.
Well, that's not entirely true. Firstly, the RAF and RN pilots were taught about somatogravic illusions in rigs specifically design to create them, and very strongly so the lesson of trusting instruments over feel could be emphasised. You can even do it with an office chair - get someone to spin you fast and then put your ear on your shoulder! Secondly, full motion simulators such as those used in flight training and fair ground rides rely entirely on somatogravic illusion to create the impression of acceleration in each axis.
The effect is very strong, and most pilots will suffer it from time to time. US Navy fast jet pilots have to do carrier catapult launches hands-off purely because of so many pitching down into the sea as they accelerated.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
obviously it isnt rocket science when you are sitting comfortably typing on your computer with all your wits about you. tired, exhausted, in the middle of the night, bad weather, financial pressure, company pressure...and it all becomes not so obviously rocket science.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: MIDDLE EAST
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aluminium shuffler
That's not entirely true either. The sim uses the principle but in reverse. The simulator can't actually accelerate very far as it has limited movement due to it's fixed position so it recreates the 'acceleration' sensation buy tilting back.
If you were to watch a sim from the outside during a 'take off', you'd see the initial tilt increasing (quite large) which represents the setting of take off power. However, this tilt then slowly reduces as the 'aircraft' accelerates down the runway as we wouldn't continue to feel the acceleration in the real World. (our ears are now compensating for this). This allows the simulator to settle to a near horizontal position ready for another tilt to replicate the lift off sensation.
As for recceguy's comments, maybe some research through recent accidents might be advisable. Air Afrique 330 dawn arrival into Tripoli. Gulf Air 072 night arrival into Bahrain. Both of these accidents had the same primary cause. Both of these aircraft also had the same 'beautifully designed cockpit instruments'. There are others too. Perhaps what he's insinuating is that despite these modern cockpits overcoming the errors of previous aircraft and their more basic and less reliable instruments, crew are still succumbing to this phenomenon.
....and that, my fellow aviators, is where fatigue does enter the equation!
Harry
That's not entirely true either. The sim uses the principle but in reverse. The simulator can't actually accelerate very far as it has limited movement due to it's fixed position so it recreates the 'acceleration' sensation buy tilting back.
If you were to watch a sim from the outside during a 'take off', you'd see the initial tilt increasing (quite large) which represents the setting of take off power. However, this tilt then slowly reduces as the 'aircraft' accelerates down the runway as we wouldn't continue to feel the acceleration in the real World. (our ears are now compensating for this). This allows the simulator to settle to a near horizontal position ready for another tilt to replicate the lift off sensation.
As for recceguy's comments, maybe some research through recent accidents might be advisable. Air Afrique 330 dawn arrival into Tripoli. Gulf Air 072 night arrival into Bahrain. Both of these accidents had the same primary cause. Both of these aircraft also had the same 'beautifully designed cockpit instruments'. There are others too. Perhaps what he's insinuating is that despite these modern cockpits overcoming the errors of previous aircraft and their more basic and less reliable instruments, crew are still succumbing to this phenomenon.
....and that, my fellow aviators, is where fatigue does enter the equation!
Harry
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Clipperton island
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kamelchaser ....
You speak like the expert. Tell me, how many barrel rolls did you do in the clouds, flying on instruments ? how much close formation also in the clouds, turning and descending, crossing cloud layers, day or night ? how much low level out at sea - 150 ft, 500 ft - with a gray horizon, turning at 60° bank without climbing ? how many desert landings at night with NVG ? how many loops just after take-off ? so who talks about vertigoes and illusions ?
You speak like the expert. Tell me, how many barrel rolls did you do in the clouds, flying on instruments ? how much close formation also in the clouds, turning and descending, crossing cloud layers, day or night ? how much low level out at sea - 150 ft, 500 ft - with a gray horizon, turning at 60° bank without climbing ? how many desert landings at night with NVG ? how many loops just after take-off ? so who talks about vertigoes and illusions ?