Hi Nikita,

I'm not management, that I can assure you.

If english is not the first language of the f/a speaking on the video, I think it is up to the journalist to ensure that the message that comes across is correct, not just taking it at face value.
I don't know if you work for the carrier in question,but if you do, you know we are not sleeping during landing. I've been here long enough and haven't that happen to me yet.
Perhaps I'm in for a surprise on my next flight!!

As for my comment on reporting the truth, I more often than not, find that the great majority of reporting about aviation tends to exagerate on the sensational side.
As for the comment about the american news channel I mentioned, just because it is an american news network, doesn't make it any better or worse than the one that is doing this investigation.

All I'm saying is that what is posted for the world to see should be less sensational and rating driven.

BTW, not trying to undermine the US networks. I carry the blue passport.
It is my first post, but been on PP for years. Only my 2 cents.

All the best.

I guess that additional question from the journalist would have resolved this confusion, but it's too late now.

Regarding my two cents, I really don't think that it is sensationalism, just a misunderstanding due to language barrier. Why? Because I also participated in one of the RT articles in the "pilot fatigue" series. I gave many answers to many questions. This time they chose ones which concern pilots (they wanted to know my opinion on why EK pilots say they live in a golden cage). And few others (wordpress and my warning) just to paint the picture.
They really didn't mess up my answers and I am satisfied with my participation. I have to admit that I don't like talking to journalists precisely because they tend to exaggerate things and always look for THE story, but this time they were very professional. Maybe because the truth is already sensational enough.

All the best to you too, 800Sr.

Aiza, News reports I read suggest Captain slept 110 minutes before the event. They also suggest FO's voice can be heard along with Captain's snoring. Unless you have CAA final report suggests PF(Captain) slept during descent/landing it is probably media mix up.

I doubt any AI Pilot puts as many hours as EK/FZ, doesn't mean they won't complain, don't want to repeat union dog jokes.

No I do not have an IX or AI roster ...

The IX Captain had to shuttle on another Air India from Mumbai to Mangalore the previous night, and crew had sufficient rest for their layover in Dubai before starting the night flight back from DXB. There is nothing exactly about fatigue in the report but pilot error and wrong judgement.

The Captain had a previous report on him about a hard landing in Trivandrum a flight he was in charge of from Muscat the very same year

Sky7

I am able to access the AIX812(DXB-IXE) final report.

Captain had 54 hrs local rest at IXE prior to AIX 811 (IXE-DXB)
FO had 82 hrs of local rest at IXE prior to AIX 811 (IXE-DXB)

Captain was on 14 day time off until May 18, 2010. He reached IXE on May 19, 2010 for local rest. May 21, 2010 night AIX 811 was his first flight.

Sure investigators looked into fatigue issue because even though roster had enough rest, Captain slept on the that flight until 21 minutes before landing and sleep inertia could be one reasons.

Even though the term fatigue is used loosely, it was not management/roster induced fatigue.

So bringing AIX812, US regionals or EU LCCs in to this discussion is just to throw it off track.

That video is absolute bs! Thanks for the good laugh.

If you'll indulge a couple of questions from a casual observer, now that this media "investigation" has perhaps made John Q. Public aware of the fatigue issue in the ME, what can logically be expected to happen as a result ?

None of this information is news to airlines or their government overseers (they largely appear to have engineered it). If they intended to do anything about the issue, they'd have done it by now.

So now it's up to John Q. ? What is he expected to do that materially betters the situation ?

bafanguy

Thanks for your contribution, your question asked is extremely important! Your displayed awareness is the best start.

It's always up to John Q. He is purchasing the ticket that makes the airline's profit and pays my salary. But he is not the one that has to act directly. He voted in a representative, who appointed a regulator, to do this for him.

What we expect of John Q. though, is to realise that his representative is not doing his job, is not acting as promised, because he covers the interest of the greedy industry and not the safety of his voters. So think hard the next time you vote.
What we expect of John Q., is to realise that there are regions where the dictator is the industry, the self appointed representative and the regulator all in one. So think hard the next time you buy a ticket.

We all know that "cheap" and "profit" is sexy. But it brought us foul horse-meat in lasagne, plastic in marsbars and fatigued pilots, all of this threatening our wellbeing.

bafanguy

99.999% passengers care only about inside cabin (food/IFE, how young and good looking are FAs). No one cares about pilot fatigue.

In fact, an airline can gain reputation by forcing a fatigued crew fly than cancelling a flight due to FDTL limitations.

This investigation is already on wrong track,
RT + 90 Pilots say fatigue is an issue at EK/FZ.
Unionized airline workers jump on the fatigue bandwagon.
EK claims no fault because every other airline union saying the same.
Laziest union bunch will bargain for even less work
EK/FZ pilots will continue to work at same level or even more.

What would be the right track, then?

One possible solution would be by getting the regulators to change the goal posts. The current FTL rules are truly outdated and designed for the B707, DC8 era when aircraft range was limited and the airline commercial environment was not so competitive. Whilst terrain avoidance, collision avoidance, air to ground comms, navigation etc... have developed significantly since those glory days, the FTL rules have stayed much the same.

In addition to this, it seem the regulators whether GCAA, CAA, FAA EASA etc... do not really scrutinise or challenge the operators when they apply for variations to this original scheme to make it fit longer flight times, more time zones etc... The old rules obviously don't fit, so rewrite the whole book instead of adding this patchwork fixes, take into account all this data we have collected, and then make the companies adhere.

If the FTL scheme was a terminal designed for B707/DC8, it would have been torn down years ago to cater for the B777/A380/A340.

It's not about the rules, when everyone go's to the same Majlis, everything is negotiable and optimizable!

It is about the rules. Airlines will always try to maximise efficiency right up to the rules. Unless the rules shift, nothing will change.
The buck stops with the rules.

Unfortunately the buck makes the rules!

Agree absolutely Glo.

Sure, but how to get them to change the rules in circumstances where buck makes the rules?

glofish et al,

Just a bit against my better judgement, I'll add one additional thought...OK, maybe a few additional thoughts.

In the US, we, as airline pilots represented by a union, have seen this idea of appealing to the public (expecting positive, tangible results) put forth many times...and it's been done many times.

From watching this for ~ 4 decades, I've come to this conclusion: the public doesn't give so much as a rat's secondary orifice about airline pilots and their issues...none of their issues! You can talk safety if you wish but they don't believe for one nanosecond that THEY will be personally, individually affected by something like fatigued pilots...they just don't believe it. I'll avoid going off into the weeds postulating about why that is.

[I walked the picket line with the EAL pilots as they circled the drain...a VERY educating experience. We were invisible to John Q.]

The only thing the public are even LESS motivated about is appealing to their elected representatives...on behalf of airline pilots.

And since elected officials are arguably complicit in the effects of their appointees' actions (I suppose that point could be debated), they're unlikely very motivated to admit even being at secondhand fault. And if they should rarely, actually pretend to do something to fix the situation, it's likely to be little more than cosmetic...or maybe even make it worse.

Just some thoughts...that's all. I'M ON YOUR SIDE IN THIS. Good luck...your options are limited.

Regulators (not GCAA) do take action when there are enough complaints. Consider recent FAA investigation and conclusion that UA has system wide issue with its schedule. How did FAA arrive at the conclusion, union complained to FAA about every minor discretionary flight.

AI's Australia route is another well know example where regulator/airline gave in to union complaints. AI had a tag in Australia which required two landings in 11-12 hrs. Over 7-8 months AI operated this tag, union crew lodged 185 complaints. DGCA/AI couldn't take any more and dropped the tag.

And of course AF unions need no introduction.

Guess who uses news like these for their own benefit, EK.

Change can be applied through public sentiment only when it begins to effect the bottom line.

Unfortunately real change in this industry seems to happens when the " Tombstone Factor" has been applied.

This process is slowed further in the Middle East because the regulators and owners both have there hands on the controls.