FAA starts 'expedited review' of pilot rest rules
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Duxbai
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roadtrip
Spot on, and where the FAA go, the CAA blindly follow. Nothing will change on either side of the pond as it is not in the interests of the companies. The problems are slightly different in the US compared to the UK but in the main, nothing will change.
Bit like the ridiculous state of security screening really. But don't get me started!!!
C'est la vie
Spot on, and where the FAA go, the CAA blindly follow. Nothing will change on either side of the pond as it is not in the interests of the companies. The problems are slightly different in the US compared to the UK but in the main, nothing will change.
Bit like the ridiculous state of security screening really. But don't get me started!!!
C'est la vie
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably a dumb question, but be gentle...
Why are the airlines so opposed to further regulation of duty hours? As it would affect all of them equally, no airline would lose out compared to any other airline, would it? (And if it doesn't affect all equally, why aren't the ones who would benefit from rule changes lobbying for those changes?).
Why are the airlines so opposed to further regulation of duty hours? As it would affect all of them equally, no airline would lose out compared to any other airline, would it? (And if it doesn't affect all equally, why aren't the ones who would benefit from rule changes lobbying for those changes?).
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Duxbai
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, gentle answer forthcoming!!
Lower/ more restrictive duty hours/ practices would mean an increase in the numbers of pilots needed to operate the programme. Therefore there is a cost involved. Therefore it goes against the grain of a commercial operation.
Now I for one like working for my company and want to contribute to it being an efficient operation, HOWEVER certain working practices beggar belief. E.g 3 pilot heavy crew ops without appropriate onboard rest facilities.
So Bryce, whilst I understand your point about all airlines being affected equally, each airline will only ever look at the effect on its' own operation, and any increase in cost is a very big negative.
I hoep that was gentle enough, yet informative!
Lower/ more restrictive duty hours/ practices would mean an increase in the numbers of pilots needed to operate the programme. Therefore there is a cost involved. Therefore it goes against the grain of a commercial operation.
Now I for one like working for my company and want to contribute to it being an efficient operation, HOWEVER certain working practices beggar belief. E.g 3 pilot heavy crew ops without appropriate onboard rest facilities.
So Bryce, whilst I understand your point about all airlines being affected equally, each airline will only ever look at the effect on its' own operation, and any increase in cost is a very big negative.
I hoep that was gentle enough, yet informative!
While I agree with FITS that spending any money brings forth a visceral reaction from management, there are some differences between airlines. Some operate with only the FAA regulations as limitations while others have contractual limits set within the union contract. Those airlines operating at the FAA limit will see their 'advantage' disappear while management at those with a better union deal will worry that at the next round of contract talks it will get even worse since "we have to be better than the FAA minimums."
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: ATL
Age: 67
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The focus will be on the wrong aspect from this crash - crew duty time and red eye flights to work, because that has a personal impact on the pilots. Sure, crew rest might have contributed to being 40 knots low on approach, but the crash occurred due to poor training to stick pusher. Afraid addressing the root of the crash will be lost with everyone hung up on crew rest, and the accident scenario will repeat.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hostage to geographical fortune.
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those stout souls doing the rounds and shaking hands within the beltway report that both Congress and the FAA ( now headed by the ex-chief of ALPA) are falling over themselves in an attempt to preempt regulatory change with reference to duty regs. The Colgan crash has been something of an impetuous. Also in the pipeline is a minimum of 1500 hrs and an A.T.P. requirement to occupy the right seat when operating under FAR 121.
A Republican administration headed by Old Man McCain and Bimbo Palin would most certainly have maintained the less than satisfactory status quo which favored profit over safety (" Well golly" says Sarah. "Gotta protect those share holders even if the passengers do occasionally end up kinda dead. Ya know, I can see Russia from my deck! "). But Republicans are yesterday's news and changes are a coming. There's political capital here, and I both suspect and hope that it's going to be spent.
A Republican administration headed by Old Man McCain and Bimbo Palin would most certainly have maintained the less than satisfactory status quo which favored profit over safety (" Well golly" says Sarah. "Gotta protect those share holders even if the passengers do occasionally end up kinda dead. Ya know, I can see Russia from my deck! "). But Republicans are yesterday's news and changes are a coming. There's political capital here, and I both suspect and hope that it's going to be spent.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the replies, FITS/Marker. This is more or less what I assumed; but I still find it odd that the airlines who perceive themselves as being undercut by the shadier operators who work only at FAA minimums don't try to increase the burden on those competitors (by lobbying for shorter duty hours). But evidently, they don't, so what the hell do I know. (...blah blah blah game theory blah blah blah prisoner's dilemma blah blah blah...).
CC - To be fair, the review is supposed to be of training as well as fatigue, and the PIC's failure of several (4 or 5, from memory) reviews seems likely to be examined.
I know this probably sounds hopelessly naive, but there's no evidence right now that the new head of the FAA is doing this for anything but the right reasons...
CC - To be fair, the review is supposed to be of training as well as fatigue, and the PIC's failure of several (4 or 5, from memory) reviews seems likely to be examined.
I know this probably sounds hopelessly naive, but there's no evidence right now that the new head of the FAA is doing this for anything but the right reasons...
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do love your logic Bryce!
The problem is that the FAA in common with all regulators worldwide is having to look over its shoulder and make sure that any rules they implement will not adversely affect their national airlines in competition with the foreign operators!
Someone, sometime has to take the lead and I don't expect it to be the FAA, but hope to be proven wrong!
The problem is that the FAA in common with all regulators worldwide is having to look over its shoulder and make sure that any rules they implement will not adversely affect their national airlines in competition with the foreign operators!
Someone, sometime has to take the lead and I don't expect it to be the FAA, but hope to be proven wrong!
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: 14 days away 14 at home
Posts: 699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem is that the FAA in common with all regulators worldwide is having to look over its shoulder and make sure that any rules they implement will not adversely affect their national airlines in competition with the foreign operators!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Time Time Time
The issues of traveling into a trip, for our friends across the pond, is due to the less than permanent nature of bases for crew. Relocation is almost never compensated for by your employer. If it is done, it is nowhere near enough to cover actual costs. The regionals will open or close a base just on the whiff of a contract. Using Colgan Air, feeder for US Airways, United and Continental, as an example. The list that follows is example of their numerous pilot bases:
Aircraft Type: S340B:
ALB
ABE
BGM
BHB
BUF
CRW
CHO
IAD
IAH
ITH
LGA
PQI
MHT
TYR
SCE
SYR
Aircraft type: Q400:
EWR
ALB
ORF
This carrier has listed a total of 50 aircraft! The mainline carriers, over the years, have had bases open and close, as well.
There is a dirty little secret about our supplemental carriers. For international operations, there is no duty limitation, per day! The only restriction is for one 24 continuous period free of duty in the past 7 days! Think about how long a heavy freighter crew has been up with one or two stops for freight and fuel and have a total block time of 11:30 for the day. It can be well over the teens and into the twenties. For domestic operations, you are required to have 8 hours off of duty in 24, but there is no requirement that they have to be consecutive. Travel time to the hotel is not duty time and thus, may get taken out of the eight. Legal is not necessarily safe!
As far as the the captain in Buffalo, he may have been a great guy, but with 4-5 busts in his history, someone should have counseled him to do something else. If he had pulled back to fight the stick pusher, he missed the relationship of swapping altitude for airspeed. That is PPL material and should be instinct for any pilot.
The hens have come home to roost, since the deregulation of the US aviation industry many years ago. Scope clauses have become a joke and the mainline carrier management has outsourced safety to the lowest bidder. They in turn, hire the cheapest labor they can get.
Plumber out!
Aircraft Type: S340B:
ALB
ABE
BGM
BHB
BUF
CRW
CHO
IAD
IAH
ITH
LGA
PQI
MHT
TYR
SCE
SYR
Aircraft type: Q400:
EWR
ALB
ORF
This carrier has listed a total of 50 aircraft! The mainline carriers, over the years, have had bases open and close, as well.
There is a dirty little secret about our supplemental carriers. For international operations, there is no duty limitation, per day! The only restriction is for one 24 continuous period free of duty in the past 7 days! Think about how long a heavy freighter crew has been up with one or two stops for freight and fuel and have a total block time of 11:30 for the day. It can be well over the teens and into the twenties. For domestic operations, you are required to have 8 hours off of duty in 24, but there is no requirement that they have to be consecutive. Travel time to the hotel is not duty time and thus, may get taken out of the eight. Legal is not necessarily safe!
As far as the the captain in Buffalo, he may have been a great guy, but with 4-5 busts in his history, someone should have counseled him to do something else. If he had pulled back to fight the stick pusher, he missed the relationship of swapping altitude for airspeed. That is PPL material and should be instinct for any pilot.
The hens have come home to roost, since the deregulation of the US aviation industry many years ago. Scope clauses have become a joke and the mainline carrier management has outsourced safety to the lowest bidder. They in turn, hire the cheapest labor they can get.
Plumber out!
In the case of living in Washington State and needing to commute ovenight by FedEx via Memphis for an operation based in Newark, you have to wonder what the Colgan HR recruitment people were thinking of. Which I am sure the enquiry will ask them.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where to live as a flyer.
WHBM,
The simple way to explain the situation is to ask non-industry types, Would they live in the parking garage or lot where they work. They commute to work via, foot, personal vehicle or public transportation. If their employer transferred them to another location in the area, would they move? What if their current employer shut down or they were redundant? Would they shoulder the expense to move 30-40 km, just to be at the new company estate? I think not. They would extend their commute. In the US we never had a cadet scheme for airline pilots. You get your primary training and experience elsewhere. As long as you do not miss a flight or training due to your commute, most airlines do not care where you live.
The rule for aircrew in the US is, find a place you want to live and commute. Airlines and bases change, your family hopefully won't. I know people who moved to Atlanta for Delta Airlines. They were assigned Salt Lake City after initial training!
The other issue is airline mergers and acquisitions. American bought TWA. The St. Louis operation was home for TWA. When all of the big jets went away, the crew that survived the redundancies, got sent elsewhere.
I have experienced multiple assigned bases in one year. There were hundreds of miles separating them. I received US$180 for my troubles. I had my home, that never changed, but had rented accommodations at each location. Air crew eat those costs to work. The pay for the regionals have those people paying out of savings to get experience to get their, hopefully better paying, next job.
Some young pilots and flight attendants will actually live with family, due to the lack of pay. Others will live like university students with 4-6 people sharing a one bedroom flat. In the Colgan Air example, the F/O made US$19,152, before taxes and adjustments. So, her net pay may not have broken US$1,250 per month, for her first year. She would have a hard time finding a place to live at any of the bases. Then to have the possibility of a base change or get reduced. Why do it?
When the supply of young pilots willing to take the abuse declines significantly, then and only then will conditions and pay get better.
The simple way to explain the situation is to ask non-industry types, Would they live in the parking garage or lot where they work. They commute to work via, foot, personal vehicle or public transportation. If their employer transferred them to another location in the area, would they move? What if their current employer shut down or they were redundant? Would they shoulder the expense to move 30-40 km, just to be at the new company estate? I think not. They would extend their commute. In the US we never had a cadet scheme for airline pilots. You get your primary training and experience elsewhere. As long as you do not miss a flight or training due to your commute, most airlines do not care where you live.
The rule for aircrew in the US is, find a place you want to live and commute. Airlines and bases change, your family hopefully won't. I know people who moved to Atlanta for Delta Airlines. They were assigned Salt Lake City after initial training!
The other issue is airline mergers and acquisitions. American bought TWA. The St. Louis operation was home for TWA. When all of the big jets went away, the crew that survived the redundancies, got sent elsewhere.
I have experienced multiple assigned bases in one year. There were hundreds of miles separating them. I received US$180 for my troubles. I had my home, that never changed, but had rented accommodations at each location. Air crew eat those costs to work. The pay for the regionals have those people paying out of savings to get experience to get their, hopefully better paying, next job.
Some young pilots and flight attendants will actually live with family, due to the lack of pay. Others will live like university students with 4-6 people sharing a one bedroom flat. In the Colgan Air example, the F/O made US$19,152, before taxes and adjustments. So, her net pay may not have broken US$1,250 per month, for her first year. She would have a hard time finding a place to live at any of the bases. Then to have the possibility of a base change or get reduced. Why do it?
When the supply of young pilots willing to take the abuse declines significantly, then and only then will conditions and pay get better.
Flint4xx. A pretty dumb comment, I feel. What is at issue here is the condition in which you present yourself for work as an airline pilot. If you've been travelling all night, you'll probably be tired. If you've been drinking all night, you'll probably be drunk. If you don't want that to be subject to scrutiny & regulation, go find another job. What you do after work is your own concern.
Longtimelurker
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: killington Vt
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Max, That's not how we think here. 99% of the folks show up for work rested and ready to go and we are not about to stand by and let the 1% rule. Ever hear of the tail waging the dog....
Paxing All Over The World
[UK pax here]
That'll be a doozy to bring in. No sweat. Any corporate can adopt 'meaningful initiatives'.
Nothing will change because, as yet, not enough people have died. It is true that some folks really want to improve things and this first example where fatigue appears to be part of the problem (I have read the whole thread) is a wonderful warning. But, and I apologise for my cynicism, nothing will change - yet.
"Safety remains the airlines' top priority," Air Transport Assn. President and CEO James May said yesterday, adding that Babbitt's statement "reflects our shared commitment to adopt meaningful safety initiatives on an aggressive timeline."
Nothing will change because, as yet, not enough people have died. It is true that some folks really want to improve things and this first example where fatigue appears to be part of the problem (I have read the whole thread) is a wonderful warning. But, and I apologise for my cynicism, nothing will change - yet.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Babbitt, formerly president of the Air Line Pilots Assn. and an Eastern Airlines pilot for more than 25 years, signaled last week that the agency this summer would tackle aggressively issues surrounding pilot training and fatigue and rest rules"
You are wrong this time..... Babbitt won't cave!
You are wrong this time..... Babbitt won't cave!
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I started flying military in '69, and was appalled at the flying duty time required for MAC. When I went to my airline in '78, I was ready for 'civilized' flying, with reasonable duty and rest periods. HA! At least the military required a 12-hour dedicated pre-departure rest period. The airline (in my case) cared not a whit...I could be on standby for 24 hours, then be assigned for a 24 hour duty day, and that happened (3-pilot crew). That happened, because the companies want it to happen, and CORPORATIONS RUN THE UNITED STATES (except for those not politically connected). The Dems have their favourite contributors, as well as the Republicans, as far as airlines are concerned. I am 'retired' (no pension, so I must work). But, don't expect any change in duty requirements from the political FAA. Ain't in the cards.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
filejw- So you'd be perfectly comfortably commuting on a flight being piloted by two people who fall in that other one percent?
As a passenger, I'd prefer that 100% of pilots for the flights I'm taking show up well rested and ready to go.
As a passenger, I'd prefer that 100% of pilots for the flights I'm taking show up well rested and ready to go.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fly
In post #11, you assume all commutes by UK based pilots will be within the UK.
This is simply not the case. Many UK based LH live in Europe, and several as far away as Australia, and commute from there on a regular basis.
In post #11, you assume all commutes by UK based pilots will be within the UK.
This is simply not the case. Many UK based LH live in Europe, and several as far away as Australia, and commute from there on a regular basis.