Pilot-Fatigue Test Lands JetBlue In Hot Water

[GlueBall]

The Jet Blues

No doubt, JetBlue is a pompous self appointed experimental aviation "pioneer;" ...previously the company had also been creative in secretly forking over passenger name records to a private security research firm.

[West Coast]

"I was a bit puzzled why someone would volunteer for a study meant to make him work longer hours"

A number of months ago a friend there mentioned JB was trying to petition the FAA to exceed the 8 in 24 rule. As it was explained to him, JB wanted to be able to crew two transcons with one crew. As in JFK to LGB (socal airport JB uses) and back to JFK. The carrot dangled was a two day work week instead of the usual 3 (and on occasion 4) day trip. 2 on, 5 off sounds good on paper. I talked to him after this broke. He had thought this had died as he hadn't heard much about it. He was wrong I guess.

[LCA Bound]

In the EC lorry drivers (for non-exempt road vehicles over 3.5 tonnes) are only allowed up to 4.5 hours continuous driving time without a break, up to 9 hrs in one day. This is presumably to prevent fatigue causing accidents. British domestic law I think allows up to 10 hours driving where the EC law doesn't cover, with a total of 11 hours "on duty",

And arent we advised not to drive for more than 2 hr without a break and thats in your avrage 90 bhp saloon car

[Roadtrip]

The low-level FAA person that illegally granted the waiver should be investigated, as should the JetBlue executives that should have, or DID know, that he did not have the authority to grant such a waiver.

The JetBlue pilots that participated in "test piloting" the study have something personally to gain from it. They want to be able to fly back-to-back transcons and put more flight hours in a shorter period of time. Work two days a week (10 hour transcon RT x 8 times a month). They obviously don't give a rats-butt about what such rule changes could be used and abused by unscrupulous airline managements to further push pilots.

[ezy_3]

PLovett: no worries mate, hope you found it useful!

For others interested, some of the Qantas results were presented today at the flight safety meeting in Paris and they were very interesting... I would thoroughly recommend people contact their flight safety departments for further info (where applicable)

There certainly seeemed to be no intention to "cover up" the results...and the research methodology was clearly described...

[Halfnut]

Originally Posted by PAXboy

In the long run, being known as the company that investigated this problem and set the benchmark will be worth millions in simple advertising.

Hey PAXboy,

You have a great idea turning this into an advertising campaign! Here are a few more:

“Three Mile Island was before Starbucks! Fly jetBlue”

“jetBlue where we experiment on you!”

“jetBlue you snooze and we snooze too!”

[jondc9]

hey halfnut

<“Three Mile Island was before Starbucks! Fly jetBlue”>

the other ones were great, but I didn't quite get the above.

[PAXboy]

Halfnut I was referring to the Qantas link with a University, rather than the JetBlue episode. So I'm not sure if you are taking a shot at me, or just being humorous?

If JetBlue have broken the regulations then they - and any FAA people involved - will face the consequences.

[Xploy Ted]

Fatigue Study

The European Transport Safety Council conducted a study on pilot fatigue 2 or 3 years ago. It represented "the concensus of scientific opinion in Europe". It also shows that the Sub part Q, about to become law, allows exccessive fatigue.

It is extremely thorough and has similar findings to the Aussie study mentioned earlier -as you would expect from science. Both have prodeced a fatigue/alcohol relativity scale.

The ETSC invited a wide audience to attend an analysis and discussion forum of the report. None of the invited airlines came but the regulators did - including the CAA.

So, it is not knowledge about fatigue that is the problem. It is now possible to produce regulations based on Science.

However, the findings are inconvenient for the airlines and the industry funded CAA have taken no action and the politicianbs will vote in ignorance or indifference.

[er340790]

So what's next.....?

Let's see, from 8 hours to 11 hours = a 37.5% increase. So how about an airline raising the pilot blood / alcohol limit by 37.5% in the interests of research without FAA approval?

Rules and limits exist for a reason. Imagine the fall-out if a fatal accident had occured during this 'experiment'.

[taildrag]

There was a study by US NASA, I think in the 1960s, of pilot fatigue on short haul operations. They sent observers to accompany pilots. The pilots were wired up to record certain functions, and notes were taken on duty times, sleep times, meals, etc.
The subjects flew for two or three airlines operating up and down the US east coast.
Films were made of some of the trips. (These remarks are from my fading memory, numbers may not be exact.) On one, the observer is standing in the cockpit behind two flying pilots. He remarks on camera that "Both of these guys know I'm here. This guy (points to the F/O) just fell asleep for 1 1/2 minutes! That guy (points to captain) fell asleep earlier for 2 minutes!"

And this under then-current flight and duty time rules! And short haul!

I'll try to locate the study and provide details.

Jet Blue pilots should have known what the consequences might be. Does anyone believe the consultant who abetted them in the "experiments" will conclude present flight and duty time rules are not strict enough?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ! HUNH?

[jondc9]

Tail Drag:

I flew for one of the east coast airlines that participated in the study. While I started there some 20 years after the study, older pilots still talked about it.

You have all the ideas right.

I hope you will send the details if you find them to me at: [email protected]

or post them here for us all

regards

jon

PS: I do think credit for takeoff/landing cycles should be part of any change in flight time regs. while cruising for 5 hours is all well and good, the work is landing (though it does wake u up a bit).


IF JETBLUE wanted its pilots to be home in their own bed each night, they would create a pilot rest area aboard their planes and use an augmented crew and do it like the intercontinental range airlines do.

What jet blue wanted was to save money.

A pilot can respond to all sorts of tests, but it is the last minute of the flight in which the most danger presents itself and when fatigue will creep into your eyes.

[taildrag]

short haul operations

Here's the short-haul summary. It doesn't have as much impact as the film, and results of the recommendations are not detailed.

http://human-factors.arc.nasa.gov/zt...ory-shaul.html

[jondc9]

TAIL DRAG


thanks for the URL, it is very interesting reading. certainly the film would be interesting, but to ANY pilot doing this type of flying...he or she has seeen it LIVE, from both sides of the eyelids!

jon

[gearsupflapsupteasup]

What about the British charter market!!!

We operate down to luxor and back in a day! It accumulates to nearly 11 hrs flying, and you get back at 2am!

[Rhiannon]

As someone intimately familiar with the workings of HF research at NASA and in the private sector, I'd be careful about assumptions that the research done at JB will be unbiased and show the true effects of fatigue. While Rosekind has done unimpeachable work in the past, when one gets paid for their research the "buyer" of that research often wants the answer they believe they are paying for. A lot comes down to the integrity of the researcher. I would like to believe in this case, being familiar with the parties, that the results will be presented unvarnished and JB will have to accept them (though have the right not to publicize them),

I also would be careful about assuming what, if any, "penalties" will be meted out to JB.

[Rhiannon]

taildrag, the earlier study you refer to was in fact conducted by the same person doing the current JB study.

[taildrag]

Rhiannon,

Thanks for the info. Is Dr.(I presume) Rosekind the man in the film remarking about the pilots falling asleep? I was greatly appreciative of finding this study, and put highlights from it in our pilots' union newslettera couple of years ago.

Do you know where I can obtain a copy of the film? I would like to investigate recommendations and any follow up from this study, which was some time ago.

I hope NASA gets continued funding for studies like this!

What is your background, in physiology/human factors? I find this field of study fascinating.

Thanks again.

[Algy]

That Australian research

Here's a quick report on the Australian findings reported in Paris.

And here's some comment.

[RAT 5]

Someone mentioned that the findings were inconvenient for the airlines. If so, this will not be the first such data that has proved a thorn in the side of the bean counters. We have seen how the managament of the industry has reacted to 'inconvenient data' and chosen to ignore it until circumstances have forced their hand. Meanwhile the usual Blah Blah about standards, quality & saftey are trotted out for gulible press consumption.

I do not wish to hi-jack the issue of FTL's, as it is high on my gripe list, but remember that it has be a festering topic for over 30 years, and look where the industry is; worse than ever. It has been the same with high flight level radiation research and data. All the research I've read, including that by a combined German/Italian pilots' union and their emminent local professors, has been brushed under the carpet. Now the same will happen to all this fatigue research.

Does it not seem a strange world where the same people who trumpet safety for the pax, and quality of life to attract the few pilots out there to join airline AA instean of BB, are at the same time attempting to roster crews on the edge of fatigue. This really is a constant 'pound of flesh' attitude and at the first drop of blood they will run for cover blaming the authorities and their legal limits. Ostrich management by everyone including the politicians.