Pilots threaten to strike over fatigue concerns - Telegraph
ok - all those using the "F" word - how many have gone fatigued, sent a fatigue report or an MOR in the last year? We are our own worst enemies, always trying to "get the job done" to do the best for our passengers.
Until we start bothering to report and accepting our own physical limitations and saying enough and walking off the aircraft then nothing will change - until a couple of accidents and the insurance companies take an interest.
STOP MOANING AND GET REPORTING!!
Until we start bothering to report and accepting our own physical limitations and saying enough and walking off the aircraft then nothing will change - until a couple of accidents and the insurance companies take an interest.
STOP MOANING AND GET REPORTING!!
Finally someone on his thread with a brain, Willy Miller!
You can bitch and moan all you like on here, and your employers will take ZERO notice.
If you're fatigued or tired or sleepy, then you shouldn't be in the air. Don't work - and start reporting it.
State in your report that you are sending a copy to EASA - and actually do it.
Sit around and bitch on PPrune - nothing happens.
EASA get hundreds of fatigue reports every day for months - something will change.
There's only one reason an operator rosters you to do things at or beyond the limit of human endurance - because you allow them to.
You can bitch and moan all you like on here, and your employers will take ZERO notice.
If you're fatigued or tired or sleepy, then you shouldn't be in the air. Don't work - and start reporting it.
State in your report that you are sending a copy to EASA - and actually do it.
Sit around and bitch on PPrune - nothing happens.
EASA get hundreds of fatigue reports every day for months - something will change.
There's only one reason an operator rosters you to do things at or beyond the limit of human endurance - because you allow them to.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed. Many years ago I was with a fledgling airline that rostered crazy combinations. It was impossible to achieve meaningful sleep between the flights. They also had the policy of being under-crewed (not enough SBY's) to save money, and expected/hoped crews would work a day off. Some misguided fools did so, regularly.
I received one such combination and set out my case to the chief pilot. He agreed with my argument that it was not good. I declared I would do one flight, but not both. I had given 5 days notice of this. The alternative was that, if I did not achieve sufficient sleep before the 2nd duty, I'd declare myself unfit 2 hours before departure. You choose. I was taken off the 2nd flight. My colleagues were amazed such a thing was possible. The floodgates opened.
There were other occasions where I stood firm when others wilted. Eventually things started to change. Indeed, action spoke louder than words.
They were short of crews and as a TC would have hurt to fire me. The subsequent court case would have been enlightening for the local CAA; so we made progress instead.
I received one such combination and set out my case to the chief pilot. He agreed with my argument that it was not good. I declared I would do one flight, but not both. I had given 5 days notice of this. The alternative was that, if I did not achieve sufficient sleep before the 2nd duty, I'd declare myself unfit 2 hours before departure. You choose. I was taken off the 2nd flight. My colleagues were amazed such a thing was possible. The floodgates opened.
There were other occasions where I stood firm when others wilted. Eventually things started to change. Indeed, action spoke louder than words.
They were short of crews and as a TC would have hurt to fire me. The subsequent court case would have been enlightening for the local CAA; so we made progress instead.
ok - all those using the "F" word - how many have gone fatigued, sent a fatigue report or an MOR in the last year? We are our own worst enemies, always trying to "get the job done" to do the best for our passengers.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: A little south of the "Black Sheep" brewery
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread appears to have split into two groups: detached people pontificating and people actually doing it commenting on reality (like the last four posters).
What I think is 'not on' is someone from a state sponsored media agency trying 'dig up the dirt' on an airline safety matter elsewhere when the state that is sponsoring that media outlet has had an appalling airline safety record itself. I would put it on an equivalent of a correspondent from the South African Broadcasting Corporation (and someone has posted a South African connection) trying to 'dig up the dirt' on a road safety issue in Britain with SA having its utterly appalling road safety record.
Back to the topic. The only people who can put things right are those who are getting pushed to being fatigued. The best that any unions can do is back up anyone who feels threatened when those people do put in reports. (Unite appears to be a union that has done everyone a huge disservice by falling for the EU's propaganda on this matter.) What we don't need is some journo using this to cause the travelling public to be whipped up into a fear of using the safest form of transport that exists.
Hmmm, Perhaps I am being naive, (or have misunderstood the post), but I don't know why Trossie is being aggressive towards someone who purports to want to expose the issues?
Back to the topic. The only people who can put things right are those who are getting pushed to being fatigued. The best that any unions can do is back up anyone who feels threatened when those people do put in reports. (Unite appears to be a union that has done everyone a huge disservice by falling for the EU's propaganda on this matter.) What we don't need is some journo using this to cause the travelling public to be whipped up into a fear of using the safest form of transport that exists.
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Centre of Universe
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call me crazy. Call me paranoid or just call me a downright conspiracy theorist but the fact we can now do increased duty times from reports checking in before 06:00 local wouldn't be anything at all to do with the fact that many low cost airlines have schedules with rotations leaving at that kind of time in the morning, would it? Would it?!?
no its because Sub Part Q has allowed this for many years primarily because in states such as Germany they need to depart early to squeeze in rotations and get back for the night jet ban. EASA limits are pretty much like SPQ for 0500-0800 then becomes a lot like CAP371 up the afternoon when it becomes more limiting in some cases, then back to CAP371 limits at night.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
to do with the fact that many low cost airlines have schedules with rotations leaving at that kind of time in the morning, would it?
Having worked in the industry since 70's I've seen the changes in FTL's and have the firm opinion that FTL's have altered to coordinate with a/c performance and technology.
Example. In 70's charter flying was in its infancy. It was still considered a privilege, but was getting cheaper and package holidays were new. Not everyone flitted off to Spain. A single out and back was considered a full working day of 7-8 hours. The early jets could only make it to the Med' anyway. The Canary islands were dots in the ocean and unknown and a/c didn't have the rage from N.Europe. Then more people wanted to fly on holiday and prices became important. Then came the double rotation out/back and the double 'W' pattern. One crew doing twice the work of before; but now the working day was 12 hours. Then came B732's and more range. Then came the Canary islands and the Greek islands, and departures from N.Europe. These were 10-12 hour days; but hey: then airports wanted night curfews so those in normal jobs could get some sleep. Next brilliant idea was to have the a/c flying at night instead of sitting on the ground. The 8hr night became 12hrs. But crews could not fly 5 nights, but had to work 5 days, they would have to have a slipping sleep pattern: start in the morning for 2 days and slowly get later until the end of the block had 2 night flights. Nicely tired for the last longest flight duty and then only 2-3 nights sleep to recover.
All caused by a/c flying longer ranges and pax wanting cheaper prices. FTL's had to accommodate the business model.
Then there was inter-continental. All scheduled flights for the better off. Demand was not so high, yet. B707, DC-8 & VC-10 were the a/c. They had 10hr ranges for N.Atlantic and Africa. If you wanted to go to Aus you bounced off Frankfurt, changed crews in Dubai/Bharain, changed again in Singapore and arrived 36 hours later in Sydney. The a/c couldn't do anymore and crews were working 10 hour duty legs.
Then came B747-200. It could do 13 hours. The days were longer and needed extra crew. So hey, Boeing were great guys and included the crew lounge/rest area in the upper deck. Then came the wise guys (accountants and marketing people) and weak unions. Hey presto, the upper deck became 1st class cocktail lounge. Then came -400 with no FE and a larger upper deck. The range increased considerably and extra crew were still needed, but they overflew the old crew-slip station. The bunk remained in the flight deck and the upper deck became a money making extra business class area. Cabin crew rest areas, if you had a good union, were included and were hot beds in some container down back, under the floor, nicely down wind of the engine noise. Never, ever was the upper deck used for what it was designed for. And hey, the FTL's had crept up so that now crew rest was not needed. A/c could then fly 14 hours so FTL's rose to match. More long-haul flights were at night so let's increase the night FTL's. Crews were compliant because they could enjoy 3 days on 'the beach', or 'shopping'. That was when there were only 2-3 flights each week. Then came the daily schedule and stop-overs reduced in days.
Now there are 16 hour a/c. Costs need to be kept down; crews kept to a minimum. And hey, there is even a shortage of muppets wanting the job. Productivity needs to be increased. All driven by a/c performance. And hey; technology, reliability and automatics have improved so much that the work-load of flying is much less and even 2 pilot a/c can now use 'controlled rest'. How long before the heavy crew is abandoned, the bunk removed, and controlled rest in the flight deck becomes the FTL of the day? Never say never. The FE's said that.
Managers look at profit and not the humane side of things. The only humans that matter are the fat walleted business & 1st class pax. Everything is geared for them. Keep prices down, services up. FTL's are a tool used in the profit game and the lobby of the airline owners is huge and strong; the XAA's are weak, pilots' unions also.
I have friends who fly a Europe - Far East route. They hate Far East. They fly double crew and have 3 days off to acclimatise before returning, and then have another minimum 4 days off to re-acclimatise and enjoy home; more likely 6 days off after a 6 day duty and <30hrs flying. Not very productive, 30 hrs in 12 days, but great for per diems. How soon before that is a 1 day turn-round with 2 extra days off at home?
There was talk of one EU operator that was considering flights to USA east coast. One crew flies out with the return crew resting in the back. A smart turnaround and the crews swap over. This would be a 16hr day. The return crew reports 15 mins before departure and flies only a single sector, for which there would be dispensation as they had 'controlled rest' immediately before their flight. It hasn't happened, yet, and may never, but the idea has been contemplated.
I've experienced many occasions where rosters, schedules, FTL's were manipulated for business reasons and XAA's had given dispensations. One major problem, and I don't know if EASA has this conflict of interest, is that XAA's were over-seers of safety compliance and financial survival of their airlines, who also paid the XXA's. Strict enforcement of ALL rules might impact negatively on some struggling operators. What to do? I thought the FAA had been exposed to this conflict and the responsibilities had been separated. Is that correct?
Meanwhile FTL's will continue to be flexible and malleable, pressurised by the airline lobby, until the crews say enough.
Where was ECA in the discussions with EASA. The stable door is open and the horse has bolted. The toothpaste is out of the tube and the eggs are broken.
Having worked in the industry since 70's I've seen the changes in FTL's and have the firm opinion that FTL's have altered to coordinate with a/c performance and technology.
Example. In 70's charter flying was in its infancy. It was still considered a privilege, but was getting cheaper and package holidays were new. Not everyone flitted off to Spain. A single out and back was considered a full working day of 7-8 hours. The early jets could only make it to the Med' anyway. The Canary islands were dots in the ocean and unknown and a/c didn't have the rage from N.Europe. Then more people wanted to fly on holiday and prices became important. Then came the double rotation out/back and the double 'W' pattern. One crew doing twice the work of before; but now the working day was 12 hours. Then came B732's and more range. Then came the Canary islands and the Greek islands, and departures from N.Europe. These were 10-12 hour days; but hey: then airports wanted night curfews so those in normal jobs could get some sleep. Next brilliant idea was to have the a/c flying at night instead of sitting on the ground. The 8hr night became 12hrs. But crews could not fly 5 nights, but had to work 5 days, they would have to have a slipping sleep pattern: start in the morning for 2 days and slowly get later until the end of the block had 2 night flights. Nicely tired for the last longest flight duty and then only 2-3 nights sleep to recover.
All caused by a/c flying longer ranges and pax wanting cheaper prices. FTL's had to accommodate the business model.
Then there was inter-continental. All scheduled flights for the better off. Demand was not so high, yet. B707, DC-8 & VC-10 were the a/c. They had 10hr ranges for N.Atlantic and Africa. If you wanted to go to Aus you bounced off Frankfurt, changed crews in Dubai/Bharain, changed again in Singapore and arrived 36 hours later in Sydney. The a/c couldn't do anymore and crews were working 10 hour duty legs.
Then came B747-200. It could do 13 hours. The days were longer and needed extra crew. So hey, Boeing were great guys and included the crew lounge/rest area in the upper deck. Then came the wise guys (accountants and marketing people) and weak unions. Hey presto, the upper deck became 1st class cocktail lounge. Then came -400 with no FE and a larger upper deck. The range increased considerably and extra crew were still needed, but they overflew the old crew-slip station. The bunk remained in the flight deck and the upper deck became a money making extra business class area. Cabin crew rest areas, if you had a good union, were included and were hot beds in some container down back, under the floor, nicely down wind of the engine noise. Never, ever was the upper deck used for what it was designed for. And hey, the FTL's had crept up so that now crew rest was not needed. A/c could then fly 14 hours so FTL's rose to match. More long-haul flights were at night so let's increase the night FTL's. Crews were compliant because they could enjoy 3 days on 'the beach', or 'shopping'. That was when there were only 2-3 flights each week. Then came the daily schedule and stop-overs reduced in days.
Now there are 16 hour a/c. Costs need to be kept down; crews kept to a minimum. And hey, there is even a shortage of muppets wanting the job. Productivity needs to be increased. All driven by a/c performance. And hey; technology, reliability and automatics have improved so much that the work-load of flying is much less and even 2 pilot a/c can now use 'controlled rest'. How long before the heavy crew is abandoned, the bunk removed, and controlled rest in the flight deck becomes the FTL of the day? Never say never. The FE's said that.
Managers look at profit and not the humane side of things. The only humans that matter are the fat walleted business & 1st class pax. Everything is geared for them. Keep prices down, services up. FTL's are a tool used in the profit game and the lobby of the airline owners is huge and strong; the XAA's are weak, pilots' unions also.
I have friends who fly a Europe - Far East route. They hate Far East. They fly double crew and have 3 days off to acclimatise before returning, and then have another minimum 4 days off to re-acclimatise and enjoy home; more likely 6 days off after a 6 day duty and <30hrs flying. Not very productive, 30 hrs in 12 days, but great for per diems. How soon before that is a 1 day turn-round with 2 extra days off at home?
There was talk of one EU operator that was considering flights to USA east coast. One crew flies out with the return crew resting in the back. A smart turnaround and the crews swap over. This would be a 16hr day. The return crew reports 15 mins before departure and flies only a single sector, for which there would be dispensation as they had 'controlled rest' immediately before their flight. It hasn't happened, yet, and may never, but the idea has been contemplated.
I've experienced many occasions where rosters, schedules, FTL's were manipulated for business reasons and XAA's had given dispensations. One major problem, and I don't know if EASA has this conflict of interest, is that XAA's were over-seers of safety compliance and financial survival of their airlines, who also paid the XXA's. Strict enforcement of ALL rules might impact negatively on some struggling operators. What to do? I thought the FAA had been exposed to this conflict and the responsibilities had been separated. Is that correct?
Meanwhile FTL's will continue to be flexible and malleable, pressurised by the airline lobby, until the crews say enough.
Where was ECA in the discussions with EASA. The stable door is open and the horse has bolted. The toothpaste is out of the tube and the eggs are broken.
i saw how fatigue is a factor on holiday charters and this quite a few years back - I worked in the mostly IT aviation sector since 1972 in ops control and traffic with abit of crewing now and again
a LGW-Dalaman- LGW charter scheduled to go out about 1940L with both FD crew on their roster where the previous trips had been 2 night flights and their first day a pre 0600 report a 3 sector flight LGW-MYK-ATH-LGW (with this DLM being the longest night)
the DLM flight was delayed for 2 hours due ATC and wx concerns of TS activity at DLM-
sure enough at DLM they had to hold for a while then suffered a GA
delayed again on departure out of DLM due TS then coming back to LGW due fog there and they came back into LGW about 9.30 next morning flying IMC
a/c on ILS drifted left of centre line on short final and PIC did not GA but applied some bank which scraped the RH wing tip on the concrete - it was a Mad Dog83 so the wings are low to the ground - most pax did not know about it
a LGW-Dalaman- LGW charter scheduled to go out about 1940L with both FD crew on their roster where the previous trips had been 2 night flights and their first day a pre 0600 report a 3 sector flight LGW-MYK-ATH-LGW (with this DLM being the longest night)
the DLM flight was delayed for 2 hours due ATC and wx concerns of TS activity at DLM-
sure enough at DLM they had to hold for a while then suffered a GA
delayed again on departure out of DLM due TS then coming back to LGW due fog there and they came back into LGW about 9.30 next morning flying IMC
a/c on ILS drifted left of centre line on short final and PIC did not GA but applied some bank which scraped the RH wing tip on the concrete - it was a Mad Dog83 so the wings are low to the ground - most pax did not know about it
Last edited by rog747; 13th Jul 2016 at 22:07.
Is there really a discussion to be had reference BALPA encouraging a strike over safety?
The day this happens on the subject of fatigue, I will give everyone on PPRUNE £100.
Unions: wonderful concept. BALPA going on strike - "smell the coffee".
Really!!
The day this happens on the subject of fatigue, I will give everyone on PPRUNE £100.
Unions: wonderful concept. BALPA going on strike - "smell the coffee".
Really!!
Join Date: May 2010
Location: The blasted heath
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There used to be a saying at one very large American Airline that pilots would do anything for money.
It seems now they do everything, but the money questions isn't there anymore.
It seems now they do everything, but the money questions isn't there anymore.
