Pilot-Fatigue Test Lands JetBlue In Hot Water
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Somewhere Over America
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot-Fatigue Test Lands JetBlue In Hot Water
October 21, 2006
PAGE ONE
Pilot-Fatigue Test Lands JetBlue In Hot Water
Airline Pushed FAA Limits
On Cockpit Time but Failed To Tell Passengers on Planes
By: ANDY PASZTOR and SUSAN CAREY
October 21, 2006
Last year, thousands of JetBlue Airways passengers became unwitting participants in a highly unusual test of pilot fatigue.
Without seeking approval from Federal Aviation Administration headquarters, consultants for JetBlue outfitted a small number of pilots with devices to measure alertness. Operating on a green light from lower-level FAA officials, management assigned the crews to work longer shifts in the cockpit -- as many as 10 to 11 hours a day -- than the eight hours the government allows. Their hope: Showing that pilots could safely fly far longer without exhibiting ill effects from fatigue.
The results of the test haven't yet been made public -- they are expected to be published by the end of the year -- and JetBlue executives say even they don't know the findings. But the experiment has landed JetBlue in hot water while fueling a fierce debate within the airline industry about how long pilots should be allowed to stay at the controls.
At a time when every airline is itching to cut costs, squeezing more flying time from pilots has become a huge financial issue for carriers. But it is also a hot topic for regulators: The National Transportation Safety Board has cited pilot fatigue as an increasingly important factor in aviation accidents.
It has been nearly 18 months since the novel experiment, but the test -- along with the FAA's ultimate conclusion that it amounted to a backdoor effort to skirt safety rules -- continues to roil parts of the aviation world. Senior FAA officials, angered by the move, privately say the airline's approach has backfired. Because of heightened emotions about the test, proposals to extend the workday for commercial pilots have been pushed even further down the list of priorities at the FAA, they say.
FAA headquarters heard about the test from pilot-union officials and their supporters. When the head office "became aware that JetBlue operated some domestic flights outside the standard rules, we immediately investigated and took corrective action," said James Ballough, head of flight standards for the agency. Mr. Ballough says officials are "confident that JetBlue's pilots are flying to the FAA's rules" now.
Another high-ranking FAA policy maker expressed his displeasure more bluntly: "We don't allow experiments with passengers on board, period."
The airline says it never intended to mislead anyone at the FAA, and the JetBlue spokeswoman chalked the situation up to "a miscommunication," though, she says, in retrospect the company understands "we have to widen the circle of consultation." JetBlue said: "Safety is our bedrock value. It is the fundamental promise we make, and keep, to our customers and crew members."
The spokeswoman says there were no in-flight emergencies during the test period, and safety was never compromised because a third pilot was always on board to take the controls if needed. The JetBlue pilots who participated in the experiment volunteered for the assignment.
The concept of measuring second-by-second reactions of JetBlue pilots in everyday flight conditions was championed by Mark Rosekind, a well-known sleep researcher who previously has worked as a consultant for a number of large U.S. and foreign carriers.
JetBlue looked to Mr. Rosekind and his Cupertino, Calif., consulting firm, Alertness Solutions, to help sell the data-gathering idea to regulators. The overall plan was laid out in early 2005 for the FAA's district office in New York, which is responsible for overseeing the New York-based carrier's operations and its 1,500 pilots. That office expressed support for the plan.
The two-pilot crews were equipped with specially designed motion detectors on their wrists to measure activity, and participated in tests with hand-held computing devices that issued random prompts and then recorded the speed of responses. All told, JetBlue says 29 pilots, including the backup aviators, participated in more than 50 data-gathering flights during May 2005. All of the flights were domestic, and a big portion were coast-to-coast trips.
The carrier says it proceeded under the assumption that local FAA officials had the power to approve the company's plans under so-called supplemental flight rules. Those rules specify that airlines flying longer distances must have at least one extra pilot on board so no single pilot flies more than eight hours in total. However, in the JetBlue test, even though each flight had a third pilot on board, the original crews stayed at the controls for more than 10 hours a day. None of the reserve pilots ever replaced a regular crew member.
"Passengers would be shocked that this was going on," says David Stempler, president of Air Travelers Association, an advocacy group for travelers. When travelers "buy tickets on commercial flights, they don't expect to be test pilots themselves."
JetBlue isn't unionized, but once preliminary information about the flights started leaking out, pilot union leaders were quick to react. Union supporters complained to FAA headquarters, where red-faced senior officials acknowledged they were never informed about the initiative. As soon as agency leaders understood the significance of the local decision -- and realized some of JetBlue's competitors likely would start jockeying for similar efficiencies and economic benefits -- they hit the roof. An FAA spokeswoman says local FAA managers didn't have any comment.
Airlines often get approval from FAA district offices for various routine matters. But senior agency officials say that both the local office and JetBlue should have known that this was an exception because of the long-running and controversial nature of the issue.
The FAA reprimanded JetBlue, ordered it to clarify procedures as well as flight manuals and Mr. Ballough personally chastised management. But the agency closed its investigation without imposing any monetary fines on the carrier. Since then, FAA officials say headquarters has ordered closer scrutiny by inspectors of all JetBlue operations.
A scheduling breakthrough by JetBlue would set an important precedent, because the current rules have been largely unchanged for decades. While the industry's safety record has improved dramatically over the years, airline executives and pilot union leaders have continued to spar over what regulatory changes are necessary. The process is complicated by dramatic increases in cockpit automation, ever-growing flight lengths and the extra wear on pilots who cross multiple time zones during a single flight.
Mr. Rosekind declined repeated requests for comment about the JetBlue test.
JetBlue and some of its pilots argue that longer flight shifts could actually improve the quality of life for pilots and perhaps enhance their alertness. Flying from New York to California and back in the same workday, they say, would allow crews to sleep in their own beds, enjoy better rest and avoid hotel stays at odd hours that tend to disrupt natural sleep rhythms.
Revised regulations could present JetBlue with economic advantages over carriers such as AMR Corp.'s American Airlines or UAL Corp.'s United Airlines. Those two carriers and other large airlines with long histories are constrained by union contracts sometimes calling for more-restrictive scheduling than what is allowed by the FAA.
JetBlue, which took wing six years ago and expanded rapidly and profitably despite a severe downturn in the overall industry, recently has been brought down to earth by two consecutive quarters of red ink. That prompted the carrier to throttle back its expansion on long-haul routes, add more short flights, beef up its management team and raise its fares. So far, the efforts have returned the company to modest profit, although it is expected to report a break-even third quarter next week. The airline is now the eighth largest in the U.S. by passenger traffic.
Current and former NTSB members say they were told after the fact that JetBlue had done tests on pilot fatigue. But board Chairman Mark Rosenker says he was never told that pilots flew beyond typical FAA limits. Richard Healing, who stepped down from the board last year, says JetBlue's "arguments may have some merit," but "they need to be validated as part of a comprehensive study" on pilot fatigue.
Capt. Dave Bushy, who championed fatigue-reducing programs as vice president of flight operations before leaving the company earlier this month for another carrier, said JetBlue and the rest of the industry "can be a lot smarter when it comes to scheduling and the use of science," instead of just "living with 40-year-old regulations that don't enhance the safety equation."
Write to Andy Pasztor at [email protected]1 and Susan Carey at [email protected]2
Copyright 2006 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
PAGE ONE
Pilot-Fatigue Test Lands JetBlue In Hot Water
Airline Pushed FAA Limits
On Cockpit Time but Failed To Tell Passengers on Planes
By: ANDY PASZTOR and SUSAN CAREY
October 21, 2006
Last year, thousands of JetBlue Airways passengers became unwitting participants in a highly unusual test of pilot fatigue.
Without seeking approval from Federal Aviation Administration headquarters, consultants for JetBlue outfitted a small number of pilots with devices to measure alertness. Operating on a green light from lower-level FAA officials, management assigned the crews to work longer shifts in the cockpit -- as many as 10 to 11 hours a day -- than the eight hours the government allows. Their hope: Showing that pilots could safely fly far longer without exhibiting ill effects from fatigue.
The results of the test haven't yet been made public -- they are expected to be published by the end of the year -- and JetBlue executives say even they don't know the findings. But the experiment has landed JetBlue in hot water while fueling a fierce debate within the airline industry about how long pilots should be allowed to stay at the controls.
At a time when every airline is itching to cut costs, squeezing more flying time from pilots has become a huge financial issue for carriers. But it is also a hot topic for regulators: The National Transportation Safety Board has cited pilot fatigue as an increasingly important factor in aviation accidents.
It has been nearly 18 months since the novel experiment, but the test -- along with the FAA's ultimate conclusion that it amounted to a backdoor effort to skirt safety rules -- continues to roil parts of the aviation world. Senior FAA officials, angered by the move, privately say the airline's approach has backfired. Because of heightened emotions about the test, proposals to extend the workday for commercial pilots have been pushed even further down the list of priorities at the FAA, they say.
FAA headquarters heard about the test from pilot-union officials and their supporters. When the head office "became aware that JetBlue operated some domestic flights outside the standard rules, we immediately investigated and took corrective action," said James Ballough, head of flight standards for the agency. Mr. Ballough says officials are "confident that JetBlue's pilots are flying to the FAA's rules" now.
Another high-ranking FAA policy maker expressed his displeasure more bluntly: "We don't allow experiments with passengers on board, period."
The airline says it never intended to mislead anyone at the FAA, and the JetBlue spokeswoman chalked the situation up to "a miscommunication," though, she says, in retrospect the company understands "we have to widen the circle of consultation." JetBlue said: "Safety is our bedrock value. It is the fundamental promise we make, and keep, to our customers and crew members."
The spokeswoman says there were no in-flight emergencies during the test period, and safety was never compromised because a third pilot was always on board to take the controls if needed. The JetBlue pilots who participated in the experiment volunteered for the assignment.
The concept of measuring second-by-second reactions of JetBlue pilots in everyday flight conditions was championed by Mark Rosekind, a well-known sleep researcher who previously has worked as a consultant for a number of large U.S. and foreign carriers.
JetBlue looked to Mr. Rosekind and his Cupertino, Calif., consulting firm, Alertness Solutions, to help sell the data-gathering idea to regulators. The overall plan was laid out in early 2005 for the FAA's district office in New York, which is responsible for overseeing the New York-based carrier's operations and its 1,500 pilots. That office expressed support for the plan.
The two-pilot crews were equipped with specially designed motion detectors on their wrists to measure activity, and participated in tests with hand-held computing devices that issued random prompts and then recorded the speed of responses. All told, JetBlue says 29 pilots, including the backup aviators, participated in more than 50 data-gathering flights during May 2005. All of the flights were domestic, and a big portion were coast-to-coast trips.
The carrier says it proceeded under the assumption that local FAA officials had the power to approve the company's plans under so-called supplemental flight rules. Those rules specify that airlines flying longer distances must have at least one extra pilot on board so no single pilot flies more than eight hours in total. However, in the JetBlue test, even though each flight had a third pilot on board, the original crews stayed at the controls for more than 10 hours a day. None of the reserve pilots ever replaced a regular crew member.
"Passengers would be shocked that this was going on," says David Stempler, president of Air Travelers Association, an advocacy group for travelers. When travelers "buy tickets on commercial flights, they don't expect to be test pilots themselves."
JetBlue isn't unionized, but once preliminary information about the flights started leaking out, pilot union leaders were quick to react. Union supporters complained to FAA headquarters, where red-faced senior officials acknowledged they were never informed about the initiative. As soon as agency leaders understood the significance of the local decision -- and realized some of JetBlue's competitors likely would start jockeying for similar efficiencies and economic benefits -- they hit the roof. An FAA spokeswoman says local FAA managers didn't have any comment.
Airlines often get approval from FAA district offices for various routine matters. But senior agency officials say that both the local office and JetBlue should have known that this was an exception because of the long-running and controversial nature of the issue.
The FAA reprimanded JetBlue, ordered it to clarify procedures as well as flight manuals and Mr. Ballough personally chastised management. But the agency closed its investigation without imposing any monetary fines on the carrier. Since then, FAA officials say headquarters has ordered closer scrutiny by inspectors of all JetBlue operations.
A scheduling breakthrough by JetBlue would set an important precedent, because the current rules have been largely unchanged for decades. While the industry's safety record has improved dramatically over the years, airline executives and pilot union leaders have continued to spar over what regulatory changes are necessary. The process is complicated by dramatic increases in cockpit automation, ever-growing flight lengths and the extra wear on pilots who cross multiple time zones during a single flight.
Mr. Rosekind declined repeated requests for comment about the JetBlue test.
JetBlue and some of its pilots argue that longer flight shifts could actually improve the quality of life for pilots and perhaps enhance their alertness. Flying from New York to California and back in the same workday, they say, would allow crews to sleep in their own beds, enjoy better rest and avoid hotel stays at odd hours that tend to disrupt natural sleep rhythms.
Revised regulations could present JetBlue with economic advantages over carriers such as AMR Corp.'s American Airlines or UAL Corp.'s United Airlines. Those two carriers and other large airlines with long histories are constrained by union contracts sometimes calling for more-restrictive scheduling than what is allowed by the FAA.
JetBlue, which took wing six years ago and expanded rapidly and profitably despite a severe downturn in the overall industry, recently has been brought down to earth by two consecutive quarters of red ink. That prompted the carrier to throttle back its expansion on long-haul routes, add more short flights, beef up its management team and raise its fares. So far, the efforts have returned the company to modest profit, although it is expected to report a break-even third quarter next week. The airline is now the eighth largest in the U.S. by passenger traffic.
Current and former NTSB members say they were told after the fact that JetBlue had done tests on pilot fatigue. But board Chairman Mark Rosenker says he was never told that pilots flew beyond typical FAA limits. Richard Healing, who stepped down from the board last year, says JetBlue's "arguments may have some merit," but "they need to be validated as part of a comprehensive study" on pilot fatigue.
Capt. Dave Bushy, who championed fatigue-reducing programs as vice president of flight operations before leaving the company earlier this month for another carrier, said JetBlue and the rest of the industry "can be a lot smarter when it comes to scheduling and the use of science," instead of just "living with 40-year-old regulations that don't enhance the safety equation."
Write to Andy Pasztor at [email protected]1 and Susan Carey at [email protected]2
Copyright 2006 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Quote -"Operating on a green light from lower-level FAA officials, management assigned the crews to work longer shifts in the cockpit -- as many as 10 to 11 hours a day -- than the eight hours the government allows."- unquote.
Wow - frightening !! Somebody from Easy or Ryanair (or any British airline for that matter care to comment ?
Will be interesting to see what they come up with after " the tests" too.
Sleeve.
Wow - frightening !! Somebody from Easy or Ryanair (or any British airline for that matter care to comment ?
Will be interesting to see what they come up with after " the tests" too.
Sleeve.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: A25R
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strange how these airlines roll out the glib 'safety is our priority' line every time. As commercial enterprises I think we all know that year on year increasing profits is their number one priority. If eight hours duty time is the norm in Jet Blue, they've got it easy, I am rostered for regular 10 or 11 hour 4 sector days. After six years in low cost I am very very tired. The company I work for based their unpublished fatigue survey on the statistics gleaned from QARs. After the relatively coincidental introduction of QARs, a new aircraft fleet and a new ridiculously fatiguing rostering system, the company decided that fatigue was mitigated by the new rostering system based on a decline in reportable QAR events. The decline of course had nothing to do with fact that we became increasingly skilled at handling the new aircraft and flying within the limits of the QAR triggers. As is usual they prefer to pretend that fatigue is not a potential killer.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They talk of up to 8 hours stick-time (or time on the controls) not duty time. Depending on rostering 8 hours on the controls can mean as much as 13 to 14 hours of duty time.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Unintended consequences,' anyone?
I was a bit puzzled why someone would volunteer for a study meant to make him work longer hours, until I remembered an anecdote a Swedish friend told me.
A regional airline had two pilots working back-to-back, when one would do mornings and the other one afternoons. They got together and decided to instead work alternate weeks, so that one guy did the entire week's flying, exceeding his allowed duty time but then getting the whole next week off, when life was held to be good.
On a bi-weekly average his duty time was within limits, 'only' being exceeded on a weekly basis. This would seem to be the logic behind this latest experiment.
The arrangement between the two pilots worked just fine until someone back at base noticed that the same name appeared in the tech log all day long. There were repercussions such that two pilots re-entered the job market, unrecognised pioneers of the air.
A regional airline had two pilots working back-to-back, when one would do mornings and the other one afternoons. They got together and decided to instead work alternate weeks, so that one guy did the entire week's flying, exceeding his allowed duty time but then getting the whole next week off, when life was held to be good.
On a bi-weekly average his duty time was within limits, 'only' being exceeded on a weekly basis. This would seem to be the logic behind this latest experiment.
The arrangement between the two pilots worked just fine until someone back at base noticed that the same name appeared in the tech log all day long. There were repercussions such that two pilots re-entered the job market, unrecognised pioneers of the air.
Everything is under control.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPRUNE and copyright
Did the Wall Street Journal grant written permission to reproduce an entire article from its paid-subscription web site? If not, please delete the full-text of the article and, instead, use a brief excerpt followed by a link to the article.
Last edited by Eboy; 22nd Oct 2006 at 11:21. Reason: typos
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Baile Átha Cliath, Éire
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paxing All Over The World
If the situation ias as described - then this sounds like the best news that commercial pilots have had in years.
It sounds as if the proof that you say you know by the seat of your pants has now been carefully and scientifically gathered for you by the FAA and Jet Blue. Must be time for a party.
From a pax perspective - this sounds like the best news that comemrcial pax have had in years.
It sounds as if the proof that you say you know by the seat of your pants has now been carefully and scientifically gathered for you by the FAA and Jet Blue. Must be time for a party.
From a pax perspective - this sounds like the best news that comemrcial pax have had in years.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the risk of starting a lower case argument, maybe Ryanair could be described as a british airline or maybe BrIrish. 
But joking aside, a survey like this could be good news if there was scientific evidence of fatigue rather than anecodotal. It could once and for all knock on the head any notions that you can increase duty hours without causing increased fatigue.
It might shut up the head of Ryanair once and for all. Intuitively we all know that is a good idea.
But joking aside, a survey like this could be good news if there was scientific evidence of fatigue rather than anecodotal. It could once and for all knock on the head any notions that you can increase duty hours without causing increased fatigue.
It might shut up the head of Ryanair once and for all. Intuitively we all know that is a good idea.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is someone suggesting that a flight crew operated outride the law as an experiment, and only with the permission of a lowly official? Would the same have applied to someone driving at 65 instead of 55 on a US freeway, just to test traffic flow and accident statistics? How can anyone operate outside the law, in their normal capacity at work, without some higher authorisation? Beggars belief!
What is sad/scary is that the test was trying to make things worse than they all ready are, not better!
What is sad/scary is that the test was trying to make things worse than they all ready are, not better!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
411a
I must agree with you about scheduling...
I much prefer to fly every other day about 5 hours or so...with delays and BS it comes out to about 80 a month...close enough for me.
I love flying with guys who are sick, who don't call in sick, 'cuz they need to save that sick time for vacations or problems commuting.
oh well
j
I must agree with you about scheduling...
I much prefer to fly every other day about 5 hours or so...with delays and BS it comes out to about 80 a month...close enough for me.
I love flying with guys who are sick, who don't call in sick, 'cuz they need to save that sick time for vacations or problems commuting.
oh well
j
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But joking aside, a survey like this could be good news if there was scientific evidence of fatigue rather than anecodotal. It could once and for all knock on the head any notions that you can increase duty hours without causing increased fatigue.
It might shut up the head of Ryanair once and for all. Intuitively we all know that is a good idea.
It might shut up the head of Ryanair once and for all. Intuitively we all know that is a good idea.
The preliminary reports have been prepared and according to the CASA person I heard this from, they show some massive problems with fatigue that go way beyond what anyone suspected.
However, this information cannot be publicly obtained yet as QANTAS is claiming intellectual copyright. It argues that as it provided the money for the study it would be giving its competition a free serve if the results were to be released. CASA and the university want to publish because of the ground-breaking results. The difference in opinion is yet to be sorted.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Somewhere Over America
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone can find the exact FAR but in brief it says, “No pilot can accept nor can a company schedule a pilot over eight hours.” I will be curious to see if the upper FAA issues “Get Out of Jail Free” cards to those who were a part of the “study.” The waver came from middle management who might not have authority to issue such a waver.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PLovett, it was a division of the University of South Australia, which is developing a reputation for being a leader in this research field and it seems as though results from the Qantas tests are going to be released at the International Flight Safety seminar in Paris this week;
http://www.flightsafety.org/pdf/iass06_preagenda.pdf
There is a host of information on Fatigue and a proposed alternative to entirely prescriptive FTL's on the CASA website:
http://www.casa.gov.au/aoc/fatigue/
Also, NASA has produced lots of valuable information on studies which have been conducted in-flight, with a number or major carriers:
http://human-factors.arc.nasa.gov/zt...ame.intro.html
Hope this is informing for those interested!
ezy_3
http://www.flightsafety.org/pdf/iass06_preagenda.pdf
There is a host of information on Fatigue and a proposed alternative to entirely prescriptive FTL's on the CASA website:
http://www.casa.gov.au/aoc/fatigue/
Also, NASA has produced lots of valuable information on studies which have been conducted in-flight, with a number or major carriers:
http://human-factors.arc.nasa.gov/zt...ame.intro.html
Hope this is informing for those interested!
ezy_3
Paxing All Over The World
Halfnut
That would indicate that the FAA people are for the high jump. The pilots and JetBlue might be censured but their attorney could argue that they had every reason to believe that they were veing given lawful instructions. Leastways, the attorneys will hope that they have the chance to debate this in court. 
The CASA + Qantas study sounds most encouraging. They could certainly sell the detailed report for thousands of dollars each to the rest of the biz and ensure that their name and reputation for safety is stamped through every page. They can then sanction a book and documentary etc. etc.
In the long run, being known as the company that investigated this problem and set the benchmark will be worth millions in simple advertising.
I will be curious to see if the upper FAA issues “Get Out of Jail Free” cards to those who were a part of the “study.” The waver came from middle management who might not have authority to issue such a waver.
The CASA + Qantas study sounds most encouraging. They could certainly sell the detailed report for thousands of dollars each to the rest of the biz and ensure that their name and reputation for safety is stamped through every page. They can then sanction a book and documentary etc. etc.
In the long run, being known as the company that investigated this problem and set the benchmark will be worth millions in simple advertising.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Robin Hood country.
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The virtual millions to be made by selling the report pales in comparison to the very many actual millions it will cost to mitigate the effects of fatigue by reducing crew duty times and hiring additional flight crew members to compensate for the productivity shortfall. Reputation and safety are both number one on the to-do list until money enters the equation. Once it does, the back peddling begins.
The original Jet Blue experiment was obviously an attempt to show how flying more didn't result in fatigue by playing with loaded dice and using distorted logic to reach a conclusion, one which I'll bet didn't include a realistic cap on duty time.
The original Jet Blue experiment was obviously an attempt to show how flying more didn't result in fatigue by playing with loaded dice and using distorted logic to reach a conclusion, one which I'll bet didn't include a realistic cap on duty time.
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", i.e. one hour not driving.
With this in mind, why would anyone experiment with hours longer than these in commercial aircraft?
Why weren't these fatigue tests done in the sim? Safer, but considerably more expensive I suppose...
B&t
With this in mind, why would anyone experiment with hours longer than these in commercial aircraft?
Why weren't these fatigue tests done in the sim? Safer, but considerably more expensive I suppose...
B&t
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ezy 3
Thank you for the update.
I have to admit that when I decided to go to the CASA seminar I was doing it as a favour to the people hosting the seminar but I was glad that I did. Some of the information coming out of the research was mind bending.
The one that really got my attention was the group of teenagers, half of whom were deprived of one hours sleep a night. Within weeks they were starting to show the preliminary onset signs of diabetes.
Very scary stuff. 
Thank you for the update.
I have to admit that when I decided to go to the CASA seminar I was doing it as a favour to the people hosting the seminar but I was glad that I did. Some of the information coming out of the research was mind bending.
The one that really got my attention was the group of teenagers, half of whom were deprived of one hours sleep a night. Within weeks they were starting to show the preliminary onset signs of diabetes.
Very scary stuff.