Pilot fatigue grows as problem for airlines
 

Pilot fatigue grows as problem for airlines

As the industry's finances worsen, pilots fret about falling asleep at the controls as flying hours get longer.

By Alexandra Marks | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

NEW YORK – The nation's top airlines are still wallowing in red ink, and their pilots are tired - some literally exhausted.
Or so says Jane Meher. That's not her real name. As a pilot who's not a union official, she says she's forbidden by contract to talk to the press. Still, she was concerned enough about what she sees as a deteriorating safety standard that she came forward. And so did others.

"Every pilot I talk to feels like they're being pushed to the limit," says Captain Meher. "It hasn't created a problem yet, but it could."

Fatigue has long been one of the top problems on the list of "Most Wanted Safety Fixes" from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Since the 2001 recession and Sept. 11 plunged the major airlines into a financial sinkhole, pilots say the fatigue problem has gotten steadily worse. And it's reaching a nadir during this summer's peak travel season, with airline staffing pared down and more Americans returning to the skies.

Part of the problem is that many pilots are flying more hours than ever before because of work-rule concessions they made to try to help the financially strapped carriers. Another factor is what critics call the archaic Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) rules governing how much rest pilots should get between flights. The current ones were developed in 1985, when the airline industry was entirely different. Critics contend that on one hand, they're inadequate in terms of ensuring the pilot gets a good night's rest - and on the other hand, their inflexibility ends up complicating scheduling, which can exacerbate the fatigue problem.

The major airlines and the FAA acknowledge that economic challenges have put new pressures on pilots, but each also insists that safety has not been compromised in any way.

"Our rules set a minimum standard that provides for safe flight in this country," says Alison Duquette, an FAA spokeswoman. "We believe [they are] are still providing for safe flight."

Experts hope Ms. Duquette is right, but they also say the complaints about fatigue reflect a basic problem with carriers like American, United, and Delta: They're operating with unsustainable cost structures and are inherently inefficient. To survive, they'll need to change fundamentally. "I think they finally get it, but I'm not sure they can do it," says Richard Gritta, an aviation expert at the University of Portland in Oregon.

Since 1993, the NTSB has cited fatigue as a contributing factor in three commercial airline accidents. The most recent was the July 2002 crash of a FedEx cargo jet in Tallahassee, Fla. In that case, the pilots were flying on "the backside of the clock" - aviation jargon for a late-night, early-morning shift. Last month the NTSB noted pointedly in findings on the crash that more research needs to be done on such flights.

Pilots whom the Monitor spoke with seconded that, saying that's even more important now that strapped airlines try to cover more flights with fewer flight crews. It's not only that crews are flying more hours, but they're also working far more erratic schedules. One captain of a major airline says he's scheduled to fly for two days, one all-nighter, and then for two days again. "That's when you have the major fatigue problem," says the captain, who didn't want his name used. "Just try sleeping in the middle of the day, particularly in a hotel room. 'Do not disturb' signs don't mean anything to the maids."

A spokesman for the Air Transport Association, the lobbying arm of the major airlines, acknowledges that some carriers are working to increase productivity to keep costs down. "But we adamantly are not going to do that at the cost of safety," says Jack Evans.

But pilots unions aren't satisfied that is the case. They've been pushing the FAA to update fatigue rules since the early 1990s. In 1995, the FAA proposed some changes, but since then the issue has languished in political limbo - because the airlines and pilots can't agree on new rules, and the FAA is reluctant to impose them.

"We're not holding our breath because years ago they were saying that new rules were imminent, and it keeps getting pushed back," says Bill Edmunds, a fatigue specialist at the Allied Pilots Association. "But we're still trying to get some action on it."



LINK

What an interesting and important issue for Professional Pilots.

However, nobody dares to discuss it.

This subject deserves attention and efforts from everybody to fix this problem.

Airlines do not care about duty time regulations or else, just about profits.

Just look around what it is going in several countries with companies forcing their employees to a lower salary to cope with their financial loses.:}

However, the duty time remains the same, but routes expansion keeps going on, to “improve productivity and keep cost down”.:mad:

So in turn, pilots have to work more for a lower salary.:sad:


I hope that we will see some serious and professional discussion on this subject.


Mercurius

May I suggest a simple search of these forums withthe keyword 'fatigue' would produce reams of debate on the subject.

In fact, just CLICK HERE for the results of the search for posts on this topic in just the last year on this forum.

“What an interesting and important issue…” and “…nobody dares to discuss it.” Well of course it has been discussed a lot. This thread started life not far from this thread which touches on the same subject from a different angle.

From many pprune threads to date, there seems to be no doubt that the problem exists. (and is getting worse?) Surely it’s now time for action not discussion? I mentioned in that thread: “You (plural) are not alone. It seems at the moment that crew are waiting for a disaster, to use as evidence to support their case.” Surely that cannot be what anybody wants?

I would happily assist or coordinate some action on this most important issue. I have some ideas about the type of action. Is anybody serious about getting something done, or will this be yet another interesting discussion?

The title of this thread is not totally accurate. It may be a problem for airlines, but they don't see it that way. They see it as a problem of whinging pilots who complain too much when the airlines are working them within the rules as laid down by the world's aviation authorities.

So they see it as they are operating legally and therefore there is not a problem. How many times have you been told when you complain to crewing that: 'it is within the flight crew limitations, it is legal and therefore you can not be tired!'. Clearly being 'legally tired' is somewhat different to the real world.

flap 5,

you wrote:


And that is EXACTLY what my employer's crew sceduler told me YESTERDAY.

Red eye flights virually did not exist 10 years ago when I started at my airline, so the possibility was never taken into account.

I am really looking forward to some sound, scientific and impartial report on crew fatigue.

happy landings,

fox niner

.. The right thing would be to address the regulators, in this case your transport minister and make them aware of the problem.

The only problem is that pilots by the public is regarded as a highly paid group working less than ordinary people .. but today this is no longer the case, compared to the "old" days of aviation..

I think the only person capable of judging their state of fatigue has to be you. Just because some requirements have been met or not met is surely irrelevant? This was discussed to some extent in the other linked thread.

I noticed in a recent accident report that in summarising the various crew (flight deck and CC) on board at the time of the incident, the rest time preceding the flight was recorded, eg: 12hrs rest, more than 2 days off etc. That must mean that it's considered important.

A recent thread (sorry can't immediately locate it) said "just report that you're fatigued and cannot fly". A huge contradiction exists here if you were to feel your job is on the line if you don't fly, but your life (and that of others) is on the line if you do.

Since when has the "Christian Science Monitor" been a credible commentator on fatigue in pilots? Or perhaps they are talking about their own sky-pilots???

Bizarre.

CHIRP
 

Every time I read Chirp it consists of tiredness related
incidents on the backside of the clock.. thats being going
on for years....

The regulatory authorites clearly dont read chirp....

Still trying what? Does anyone know?

Surely this (or something on similar lines) has been done? Can someone comment on what has been said and done? My experience of going this route is that you get simpering letters back from ministry bods attempting to calm your fears but actually doing… nothing. A personal example of this: in the 80s, the DTI (dept trade & industry) had been “managing” talks with the British furniture industry about not manufacturing dangerous bunk-beds that had been killing children. The minister at the time, Michael Howard, when pushed had to admit that “talks with the industry had, after many years, unfortunately broken down…” If these fools can’t get a simple design mod done in the name of safety, then what chance this?

Can it be made a problem for them? I suppose solidarity is the key here. Nowadays there are too many desperate people ready to jump into your shoes if you’re the one prepared to make a stand.

Agaricus bisporus – are you saying that there is no problem? Levity doesn’t really seem appropriate on this subject.

As I’ve already said - is anybody serious about getting something done? A very small group of concerned citizens got something done about the bunk-bed problem. So how do we sensibly approach doing something significant, before these “tiredness related incidents” become something tragic?

Spork


I think that it is not a matter of Solidarity, it much more a matter of UNITY.

Just look on your post reply, so many divergent opinions.

The world it full of fools that think they must bow to the employer.

Moreover, whenever they bow, they think that are doing something magnificent, contributing for the company’s success.

People must stop thinking on this way, and be more professional.:}

It is black and white; they have the ideas, connections and money, and need people to make them work.

There is no glory, or a glorifying need for someone to sacrifice himself for the company, what it is required is professionalism, and to respect the human body’s limits, that is all.

Because, in the end the reality is only one.

When the last day at work comes up, and the door closes on your back, you going to be quickly forgotten and people will carry on their lives, and the only thing you will have is that is if you have enough cash or pension to survive, that’s all.:{

Do not think that if you go back to the employer and knock the door and tell him, look I sacrificed my self for your company he will give you anything.:E

That is why duty time limitations on this kind of job are extremely important, because if you are tired or stressed and a mistake it is made, the cost is extremely high, not in money, but in lives!

And for sure there is a lot more to talk about this subject.


Mercurius

Non-pilot here: My guess is that pilots are not doing this. From observing the changes in staffing and 'productivity' and persuasion in commerce over the past 15 years, I expect that pilots are sacrificing themselves for themselves and their families.

In commerce (finance/oil/transport/etc) everyone is kow-towing to try and make it better for themselves. The companies know this. Remember that companies will always let things slide until people die AND it can be proved why they died. Then they run around squawking to the TV cameras "We will ensure that this never happens again." That is what they call 'management' these days. Anyone remember when being a manager meant ensuring that it did not go wrong in the first place?

The Unions can no longer help you - however much they might want to, they have to look after the general range of issues. This is a single issue and very well suited to being addressed in the modern style.

The key problem here is the need for anonimity. The reason that The Christian Science Monitor was chosen in the USA is because it is perceived to have authority, more than a commercial newspaper. You need to go further.

Get a grass-roots movement going by setting up a non-profit organisation (run by retired pilots) to get the message across. Get a petition and register your true identities with a Commissioner of Oaths or retired Judge/Chief Constable or some other irreproachable source. Try and get pilots from across the globe (they could register when in London or on-line using a secure website) , then:[list=1][*]State the hours worked from clocking on-clocking off.[*]Show the increase in operating hours in the past ten years.[*]Problems of sitting still and checking instruments.[*]Delays in the day and how they affect you.[*]Get ACCURATE lists of times when people have fallen asleep and it's not been reported due to fear. After all, why are there plans to put video cameras in the flight deck?[*]State that you would prefer to do this in-house and withoyour own names but that the livelihoods of yourselves and your families are at risk if you do so.[*]The more carriers and countries that are represented the greater will be your influence.[*]Cite the crashes where fatigue has already been identified.[*]How many have died thus far?[*]Get Cabin Crew involved - it's their lives too.[*]Get Ground Crew (all areas) as well as office staff of the carriers involved - it's their jobs if the carrier goes out of biz as a result of the crash and it will be their friends (and maybe relatives too) that are in the a/c that crash.[*]What have pilots done to date to highlight the problem?[*]Have your petition delivered to No10 Downing street, The White House and similar President/Prime Minister offices across the world ON THE SAME DAY and AT THE SAME ZULU TIME. This will make more of a splash in the media if folks are delivering petitions at midnight/Four in the Morning etc.[*]Set up a web site where all the information is collated. PPRuNe may be able to help in setting up and supporting an separate (and simple) URL.[*]Show that it is ALL carriers that have this problem, not just short haul LCCs but the new and the long established ones.[*]Prove that pilots have not used their low-cost benefit mileage to take their family on holiday on their own carrier but have gone by car/train/ferry.[/list=1]
Will this make any differance? None ...
Until the next fatigue related crash and then you will be able to get sensible hours.

This will cost you money but it is your lives as well as ours. The website can invite the public to donate in increments of Five Pounds/Dollas/Euros and that will also feed into the loop of how concerned people are.

If you want to see how things get changed in the world these days, look at those single issue groups that have succeeded. If you genuinely believe that lives are at risk, then find a way of complaining that is irreproachable. It's called taking the moral high ground and will cost time and money and a great deal of effort. But it sounds like it might be worth it? Good luck and I'll donate the first Five Pounds.

PAXboy

Good post..

A few years ago Stelios conducted an 'Orange' parade outside the EU offices in Brussels. This was to highlight the apparent unfairness of some rules that resticted the trading of ej. Much high level publicity, and perhaps he won some concessions. Other, equally flamboyant, owners have tried and achieved the same. The consequence has often fallen on the flight crew, who's productivity then rose significantly for little personal gain.

Why do the flight crew community not employ the same tatics? There was a photo, on an earlier thread, about pilots protesting in Brussels. May we have a follow up to that campaign?

A splendid start, but is the momentum still alive?

There has been much blah blah here! I heard it for years in the hotel bars, but never in the management meetings. Is this more of the same, or is there some lead in the pencil?

Fortunately, I personally have never had a problem obtaining adequate rest, especially in hotac, at any time of the day.
Clearly however, others do have problems, and it is high time something was actually done about it.
I certainly don't especially know what the answer is, but suspect it had better come sooner, rather than later.

Accidents are BAD news.

Thanks PAXboy for an excellent and well-written post that obviously took you time. Thanks for being the first to suggest some actions that could take this matter forward. I must admit my thoughts on action were quicker and dirtier. Maybe we shouldn't be so civilised.

For example, how about hiring a coach to use for poster display, (or a "poster lorry") to get our message across to the travelling public. This could be used on key travel times. The M25 links the major London airports quite nicely. I suspect the majority of air travellers don't know about this issue. This could be done on several occasions.

How about exposing a past event/recent event directly to the media, that was a serious fatigue related incident?

We communicated the child safety issue to the public and trade over a period of about one year. We did some rather naughty things, but the media loved that. The reaction of the industry was like kicking a hornet's nest, but guess what – we succeeded where the pathetic Dti had failed!

How about rest in the UK, Europe, Pac Rim and other areas where Pprune members fly?

Do your regulations allow a TOTAL of only eight (8) consecutive hours between engine shutdown and pushback the next morning? This allows, at least in the US (unless two extra hours are added by a typical union contract), for time to walk fast to the airport curbside, ride to the hotel, sleep, shower and return for a busy preflight. Never mind searching for food except for a Hershey's chocalate bar. Some freight, and many passenger airlines have used this minimum rest period, because it is legal.

How about for standby/reserve flightcrews over there? For example, during five solid days on duty, we only have a pre-designated consecutive 8-hours rest period (not just at night...)for each consecutive 24 hours, because of the MD-82 accident in Little Rock, where some passengers and the Captain died.:ugh: Our "friends" at the FAA never would have found motivation for changing the absurd regulations, had the accident aircraft been a freighter. Packages of car parts never make newspaper headlines, unless they fall on lots of people at a high rate of speed.

As for contract rest periods, our managements constantly deny "pattern bargaining", but on the contrary-that is exactly how they compare and compute their goal of operating costs. Monkey see, monkey do. They only fool the flying public, most of whom are total fools anyway, regarding airline Public Relations departments and media sensationalism. For the most part, the ticket price is the only altar where they "worship".:E

Interesting post Ignition Override, until you get to the end where you take an unjustified pop at me and the others who effectively keep your employer in business. The pax can be a great ally to your cause with regard to this fatigue issue. How would you feel if I threw similar insults at you?

The post title is "Pilot fatigue grows as problem for airlines". I would suggest that at the moment it is a problem for airline pilots not airlines. Until enough of us phone in fatigued it will continue to be our problem and not theirs, only when it becomes a problem for airlines will something get done about it.

Yup. Well as I said earlier: "Can it be made a problem for them?"

Another example: The problem experienced by a BA 777 departing LHR with an unsecured fuel cap makes headline news on the BBC tonigh. It does so for the simplest of reasons, it is a mechanical failure that can be identified and someone strung up on the rack.

Fatigue is not like that. It is silent and leaves no marks in the air, although it might leave them elsewhere. I wonder if cameras in the cockpit might just help carriers to see how tired people are?

I'm afraid that not much will be done at all, as most pilots seem to be Aeronautical Prostitutes these days, especially our lot!!

Do more, work for less, my turn for Command, my turn to go on the Jet,etc, etc... Back stab, @rse lick.
Sychophantic heaven for those who want it... eh! Weasel??

When Screwing say "you will go into discretion", most Captains do.
When Screwing say "you will work 5 consecutive earlies", most do.
Even tried to make a Cabin crew No1 work 8 consecutive days just recently, thankfully, a Captain with more MF than most, got her to postion back on last sector as Pax but she still ended up doing it on day 8.


And don't even think about getting me started on our "New 30 minute" turnarounds!!!

There's going to be Carnage Matey...............

'it is within the flight crew limitations, it is legal

if ya dont like it dont do it

whingin pilots

>'it is within the flight crew limitations, it is legal <

opsjockey, not necessarily and that is the essence of what is being said on this thread.

You can operate a duty in the strict sense that it is within the FTL rules but if before doing so an individual crewmember feels too fatigued to operate safely he/she is LEGALLY obliged not to do so.

However, many companies frown on an individual crewmember declining a duty because of fatigue and many take the easy option (no pun intended) by simply going sick.

The FTL scheme can never cover every situation because pilots are human beings and not machines and it always amuses me that there is an assumption that you can automatically "switch off" during a minimum rest period and sleep. In most other walks of life there is time for some recreation as well as sleep in order that one can return for work in a refreshed state.

My view is that it is just a matter of time before we see a fatigue induced accident. Accidents are always caused by a combination of factors and that is part of the challenge in the context of fatigue. If, in the case of the B777 with the fuel leak, the a/c had speared in because the crew had fouled things up as a result of fatigue that might have made a more impressive headline. (This comment is not to imply that the crew where fatigued but just to paint the picture of what might have happened if they were!)

Hello Spork. No insult was intended. My over-generalizations and insensitive remarks failed to address the fact that many passengers are polite, well-read or knowledgeable, or all of the above, possibly also aware of the huge gap between quotes in the media and the various real situations. But based on some recent observations made by US airline Marketing departments, maybe it is the other very large sector/group which "worships" only the cheapest price possible, and little else. We also need their business, but maybe three or four of their ticket fares equal one average 'business fare'. As Pprune was created by pilots, and the forums inspire the "insiders" to contribute, please allow me to qualify my crude remarks in a realistic context.

Nothing personal was intended against the courteous travelers out there who are at least vaguely aware of how much work and dedication, despite many fatigueing days, go into our profession. Here are some of the pitfalls: high adrenaline during the last approach onto a slippery runway in gusting winds at eleven pm, followed by minimum rest at a fairly noisy hotel-never mind difficult training and challenging sim. checkrides etc. I can't speak for other pilots, but here are just some of my impressions about much of the flying public: based on their behavior at these same noisy hotels and indifferent attitudes towards our best efforts to get them quickly and safely to their destination around thunderstorms, even without any distracting systems abnormalities (after 12 consecutive hours of duty, now on the fifth flight of the day, but with no "flightdeck" automation...), never mind their unwillingness to comprehend why a flight can be delayed the next morning because the crew arrived much later (the previous night) than planned and takes its minimum rest as defined in the contract, which is not all that much, maybe eight hours at the hotel.

Our working environment can breed a little resentment from time to time. But maybe most others do. We try to avoid thinking about bankruptcy judges or one's employer being able to dissolve most of one's retirement at a whim after working 20-25 years, a topic now seen quite often in the US newspapers' business sections.:ugh:

I agree absolutely with Ignition Overrides comment that most customers consider price first and foremost. Safety and security are a given.

I think the problem with the regulation of flying hours is that in the company I work it seems that up to five years ago there was enough staff and enough money to give people an easy life and to require a lot less from each employee. The regulatory authorities seemed to have a set of rules that had never been tested as nobody's roster came close.

In these days of bottom lines, cost cutting and business survival many of these limits are being taken as operational limits and not absolute limits.

I imagine it like a car engine, the red line on the rev counter is a limit. You only run the engine up to that limit very occasionally or it IS going to break.

I'm tired of this topic.


(Levity-it's maybe the most important safety issue in aviation today, along with training and standards of 3rd world carriers)

Hi Folks,

Let’s go back to the basis.

Duty time limitation it is imposed “ and negotiated” by Airlines.:}

As example look what happened to the JAA proposed duty time limitations, based on a scientifically research.

It was removed!:mad:

Why, because it was inconvenient for the airlines, they should hire more crew:
Therefore, airlines lobbied with ministers and PMs to have it removed.

Now, using a real example:

The next day this happened QR who had “legally adopted JAA rules” began with a new duty time “interpretation” .:{

Crew arriving from a long haul flight early in the morning, were rostered to proceed in another long haul departing exactly ten to eleven hours after chocks time.
In other words, if they have already spent a sleepless night, they had to spend another sleepless night in the cockpit.

To make it more clear:

Some people arriving from Europe early in the morning and after a long sleepless night , were rostered to fly on the same night to South East Asia!

Moreover, rostered to fly the next day early morning local time to another much East destination, without time to adapt his Cicardian cycle, or even rest properly.

In addition, some crew used to fly the other way around.

And not enough, their “days off” in the hotel room, not at home base.

I think this is a good example.

It is obvious that who pays bills and salaries are passengers.

If they keep flying, airlines keep cashing more and more.

Now, let us make few questions:

a- Do passengers have any knowledge about the nature and stresses imposed in our profession?

b- Are passengers aware about the danger whenever flying with tired and stressed crew?


It is obvious that the answer is NO; eventually only very few people within millions who fly daily are aware, or have a minor awareness about the aspects of this profession, and their repercussion on air safety.

It is normal people taking things for granted.

The airline media it is so massive and well tailored, that whenever passengers board the aircraft they do believe everything is fine with the equipment, crew are well trained, happy, making a good salary, etc.

The reality is that, they do not have a real idea of what it is going in this industry.

To finalize, it is my view that Airline Pilot Associations, Unions, should start enlightening programs to allow the public to have access to several safety concerns we all are expressing on this thread.

As Airlines produce documentaries about their history, or the “fantastic maintenance” installations, catering and how much they “care” for their passengers, the same Pilots organizations could do, the same showing how is the real life of an aviator, and cabin crew.

Mercurius

Thank you for your clarification Ignition Override. It certainly looks then, like this is a global problem.

In the UK we’ve had a problem for decades which was junior doctors working excessive hours. Finally, today, the regs come in that give them (and us patients) some protection. Some interesting comments in the news, mainly along the lines of “now you’re gonna have to wait longer…” but also, an administrator comments: “standards of care will be increased…”. Funny how for many many years this overwork and fatigue was apparently quite acceptable to those same authorities as regards standards of care.

The best comment from a BBC news item was “"You wouldn't want to be in a plane flown by a pilot who hadn't slept for two days. Why would you want to be looked after by a doctor who hadn't slept for a similar period?".

We need to get on with this enlightening process don’t we?

Just an example for those of you reading who may not be aware of the subtleties that are used by airline commercial departments you may want to consider the following:

I have just been rostered the following duties:

Day 1: Report at 1950 local for a 2 sector night duty scheduled to end on blocks at 0555 local the next morning. Actual off duty was 0645 local. Total allowed flight duty (from report to on-blocks last sector) was 11:15. Actual flight duty was 10:30 + 0:30 = 11:00 total duty. No problem there. Next duty scheduled for 2040 local report same day gives 13:50 rest.

Day 2: Report at 2040 local for a 3 sector night scheduled to end on blocks at 0705 local the next morning. Actual off duty was 0820 local. Total allowed flight duty was 10:30. Actual flight duty was 11:10 + 0:30 = 11:40 total duty. 0:40 discretion allowed. No problem there. Next duty scheduled for 0505 local report next morning gives 20:45 rest.

Day 3: Report at 0500 local for a 2 sector day flight scheduled to end on blocks at 1400 local the same day.

Day 4: Report at 0530 local for a 2 sector day flight scheduled to end on blocks at 1455 local the same day.

Day 5: Report 0510 local for a 2 sector day flight scheduled to end on blocks at 1515 local the same day.

This type of schedule, whilst not appearing unduly busy and perfectly legal allows a crew member to report for 2 night duties followed by three early duties. How is the crew member supposed to get home after the duty on day 2, sleep for 7 or 8 hours, get up in the afternoon and then get adequate sleep before an early report the next morning? It makes a mockery of the system where at least 12 hours rest are the legal minimum but no allowance is made for sensible time to readjust from nights into earlies. This causes fatigue, the CAA know it does and yet they do nothing about it.

The other problem is that companies add sectors to duties for various reasons but suddenly the original turn around times are and sector times are somehow reduced so that the new limiting flight duty time is just within 5 minutes of discretion. In reality, the turn arounds are impossible and the the duty ends up going into discretion. The company claims it never rostered the duty into discretion, which is true but they knew full well that the revised times were unrealistic and were confident enough that the crew would go into discretion for up to an hour just so that they could get home.

How little the public now about the fact that the European Working Time Directive does not apply to aircrew. This is the amount of duty hours pilots can do in the UK:

The maximum duty hours for flight crew will not exceed: 55 hours in 1 week, but this figure can be increased to 60 hours when a rostered duty covering a series of duty periods has commenced and is subject to unforeseen delays or 95 hours in any 2 consecutive weeks or 190 hours in any 4 consecutive weeks.

The government and the public are worried about junior doctors working more than 48 hours in a week. If a fatigued doctor makes a mistake, maybe one persons life is at risk. If we make a serious mistake the number of lives at risk is exponentially higher. So, the comment by a doctor "You wouldn't want to be in a plane flown by a pilot who hadn't slept for two days. Why would you want to be looked after by a doctor who hadn't slept for a similar period?" should be turned around and used by our unions who are at the forefront of the battle against duty time limitations that are little more than limited protection for us and very much designed to smooth the way for the airline businesses.

At least we can be thankful here in the UK that we don't have the Italians or the Americans setting our duty time limitations. Mind you, it may only be a matter of time!

Excellent points there CCC. I've had to work similar shift patterns and then had days off where my body just cannot get realigned to "normal" time. What happens next? Of course it all happens over and over again, with minor variations in the detail. The key difference being I'm not responsible for hundreds of lives.

The news report mentions quite early on: "Trainee doctors should no longer be working more than 58 hours a week under European regulations." The authorities apparently consider a 50% loading versus the normal working week quite acceptable. We should all bear in mind this is an "improvement" for them...

Hear, hear.
To add to that, where is the life-work balance? After a run of duties like that you spend your two days off recovering and getting back onto a normal time scale, whilst totally knackered. Often the last thing you want to do is go out for the day or for a night out with friends. Or if you do you are too knackered for the next set of duties. When it is continuously like that, especially when working 6 or 7-on, 2-off it gradually gets more tiring as time goes on.

Ladies an gentleman,

I hope that you are not limiting this discussion only to UK pilots.

We cannot forget that, there are hundreds or more European pilots holders of a “might full” JAR licence working abroad, and operating flights to European destinations.

Please use as reference the example given on my post reply on this subject.

Several countries are adopting JAR rules, simply because they are the most convenient of all as far duty time limitations concern.

It is becoming a norm in several airlines to change the length time of a sector and arriving time on the individual crew rosters, knowing in advance that they will not be able to complete the flight within duty time “limits”.:}

Leaving the decision to captain’s discretion. We all know what will be the result if someone dares to delay or even interrupt a flight for this reason.

Quote:

We need to get on with this enlightening process don’t we?

Dear Spork, the answer is YES obviously , it is one of the ways for us to make things to move on.

However, if we want to have this issue moving, we have to start proposing this to our Associations, but for this to take effect needs to be supported by a majority of pilots.

In addition, be aware, do not get surprised if you discover within your association some people fiercely opposing to the idea in dealing with this issue.

Another quote:


At least we can be thankful here in the UK that we don't have the Italians or the Americans setting our duty time limitations. Mind you, it may only be a matter of time!

Have no doubts CCC !

Safe flying to all.

Mercurius

I think that is why you should consider "quick and dirty" action instead of discussions with others, who then need to go and have discussions with others, etc.

Does anybody feel direct action is appropriate? That's what we used in the child safety issue and it achieved results within 12 months. I thought that was slow...

Maybe it's not that important to you?

Perhaps we should adopt the following slogan:

You wouldn't want to be looked after by a doctor who hadn't slept for two days. Why would you want to be flown by a pilot who hadn't slept for a similar period?

:zzz:

spork - I quite agree, it's time to stop pussy-footing and waiting for all the machinations of various committees and government departments, etc and take action to bring this matter clearly to the attention of the travelling public before it's too late.

Chattanooga Choo Choo - nice one - see that slogan splashed on the pages of a few daily nationals might change the political aspect, eh?

Hear hear - it must surely be time for action on this? But what is it that we can do?

The answer, MT, is nothing.

This has been an issue since Pontious was a Pilot, and nothing has been done since then, and I doubt if anything will ever be done, not while the likes of MOL are out there.

Sorry to be such a pessimist.

CCC
I could be reading your example wrongly at this time of day
(my first night so i'm knackered) but if your saying you operated 2 nights followed by 3 earlies with 0500 Local Time reports its not legal within CAP371. You can only op 3 then you need a break to stop the consecutive rule. As you only had 24 hrs its not legal...
Which Airline do you work for if not too personal??