Truckflyer, agree with you totally. We tried it in a company I worked for, and suggested that the Rostering Manager (that dreadful title "manager" again) shadowed a crew for a week. By that we meant sitting on the flight-deck, with all the glare, noise etc, not in a passenger seat, and taking in his stride all the changes of hotels, report times etc. However, he "couldn't be spared" from his "managerial" job, so nothing changed.

In another company, we were working multi-sector days right to the limit of duty, and requested that some form of meal be provided. When this was refused, we stopped after the fourth sector and went into the terminal for a cup of tea and a sandwich before sectors five and six. Two crews, two discretion reports a day for two weeks, until crew meals began to be provided.

thanks very much Chatar

Phil Bennion MEP

He is the prime driving force behind the EASA rules, I think he sees it as his Lib Dem 'Gift/Legacy' to Europe.

Obviously he's so fully up to speed on the difficulties of controlling his tractor whilst fatigued that he can be the instigator of telling us it's no problem landing a 200 tonne aircraft, in the dark at 150+ mph whilst fatigued. :ok:

As someone stated above Fatigue is a serious issue brought about by constant disrupted sleep patterns and exacerbated by time zone changes. The affect of fatigue on core decision making skills can be extreme and, in an Australian scientific analysis, can be considered akin to the effects of alcohol in the bloodstream.

More interesting will be the reaction of the FAA and other worldwide aviation departments when they realise that some of the flight crew operating into their airspace might well be labouring under the effects of fatigue due to the idiocy of the EU law making process.

That'll be the FAA that has much less restrictive rules than the proposed EASA ones? :ugh:

Perhaps for regionals and biz jets but not for Long Haul and as it will be the European Long Haul jets landing into the States that's where the problems will come.

Just had a look at the proposals and the FDP table. At the mo, off the top of my head in our outfit, we can do a 4 sector early starting at 0530 with a max FDP of 9 hours. With the new rules we can now do 11 hours 30 minutes?

If that's right... How on earth are these regs safer!! I honestly don't believe these politicians know what the ins & outs are and what it means to us and the passengers!! They must have been voting blind following what the party line was, having not read/understood the nitty gritty! Madness!!

Tick tock, tick tock, tick tock...
 

Madness indeed!

Just like in the early 2000s when totally incompetent, easily manipulated and cheaply bought politicians worldwide removed the safety stops for the financial services sector, they now did the same for aviation! More crashes waiting to happen, but again the politicians and responsible authorities will claim that "they didn't see it coming." :ugh:

truckflyer is spot on IMHO. Under-reporting by already unfit and fatigued pilots is the crux of the matter.

Well the House of Commons have just voted in favour of the FTL's by a majority of 45.

Unless you have flown commercially I don't think you can understand the stress or fatigue crews deal with in the process of their duties, it looks too easy and for far too long our own self depreciation of "ohh it's all the autopilot" has been allowed to creep in to the public psyche. They don't and can't understand. Hence these ridiculous votes.

I have noted once you become Aircrew, you become non-human. Some other species that can fly a plane after 22 + hrs but not drive a car or truck.
Weird or what!

UK Parliament gives nod to new EASA FDTLs.
 

from Hansard on yesterday's vote

[QUOTE]Civil Aviation Safety

That this House takes note of European Union Document No. 12864/13, a draft Commission Regulation (EU) No. .../… of XXX amending Regulation (EU) No. 965/2012 laying down technical requirements and administrative procedures related to air operations pursuant to Regulation (EC) No. 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council; notes that the Government recognises the importance of managing crew fatigue to support civil aviation safety; supports the Government’s view that the measures will establish safety improvements across the European Union and maintain safety in the UK; and further supports the Government’s view that the measures respect subsidiarity principles and help to deliver a level playing field across the EU.—(John Penrose.)

The House divided:

Ayes 272, Noes 227/[QUOTE]

So the new EASA FDTLs have been rubber stamped by the UK Parliament with MPs voting along party lines.
We will look forward to hearing from our colleagues early next year how the new regulations are working.

Phil Bennion MEP is on Twitter. You can make your thoughts clear to him on there.

.....Government’s view that the measures will establish safety improvements across the European Union and maintain safety in the UK; and further supports the Government’s view that the measures respect subsidiarity principles and help to deliver a level playing field across the EU.—(John Penrose.)

Here-in lies the problem. Firstly, the CAA have told UK government that the new EASA rules will not dilute UK safety margins. They didn't say they will not allow more work, as the example of an early start shows. The CAA seems to believe this increase not to be dangerous and the government has swallowed it. Secondly, the EU & UK governments have been told that there are some dodgy FTL's out there and a level playing field will improve safety. If we raise the standard of many FTL's and allow a few to deteriorate the overall average will be an improvement; so that's alright then. Rubber stamp. So many nationals fly on a/c of another state so the level playing field is necessary, but at a high standard not at the commercially driven lower standard.

Ultimately I believe it is down the sharp end drivers. Don't do the roster if you feel the slightest doubt. That is what has been rammed down our throats with all the new TEM stuff. Use it! Don't bleat about it afterwards. I know about the zero-hour contracts; that's another issue all together.

Good luck with that in the increasingly un-unionized world of low-cost airlines! Ignoring the possibility that people on zero hour contracts can be intimidated is simply totally unrealistic!

It's both funny and ironic to see how a lot of Anglo-Irish pilots are now kicking and screaming about the new FTL's, but that it's the same Anglo-Irish mentality that looks down on any pilot union going on strike to defend it's rights.

You can't have it both ways, and relying on regulators and politicians to stand up for you instead of a strong union has been proven to be fatally naive!! :ugh:

All I meant to say is that if you feel sick don't fly. Isn't that what you are supposed to do? If you get utterly stupid combinations that are going to burn you out and put you beyond the edge of your performance boundary then consider it very carefully. If necessary bail out of the 2nd one and perhaps, just perhaps, common sense might prevail making more sensible combinations. Ultimately it is you who decide not the max FTL's. They are written for equal humatons and you are all different.

Well, don't you think we went back to the dark ages?

The low-cost, children of the magenta line generation threw out the baby with the bathwater, and opportunistic airline managers cleverly used this as a fulcrum to get rid of any coherency, professionalism (like the no blame culture) in our profession, whilst loading up on bonuses themselves.

As long as nobody crashes an aircraft then 'all is quiet on the Western front' for as far as any responsible manager/regulator is concerned.

So let's face it: nobody is going to deliberately bend/break/crash an aircraft on his/her watch. We know that, the airline managers know that and the politicians/regulators...they simply don't care. :sad:

...and so we push and push ourselves further and further on adrenaline and coffee, fighting fatigue (both short term and cumulative) and trying to adhere to an ever-increasing jungle of micromanagement rules that the office 'managers' throw at us...and all that on minimum flight plan fuel of course! :ouch:

Tick tock...tick tock...tick tock...tick tock...tick tock...

And collect your P45 at the end of the week.
And collect your repossession notice at the ned of the season.
And collect your divorce papers at the end of the year.

Kerrching .... you have just won the Low Cost Lottery. Well done that man....

I think we need to do much better at marketing the reality of the pilot's job to all but in particular the legislators.

I think BALPA etc have done their best but there is still a long way to go. The reaction of the panel on the BBC Any Questions spoke volumes about our legislators knowledge (or rather ignorance) of the actuality of fatigue and the ramifications for flight safety.

Unfortunately when we 'do' our job the public expects it to be done that way, when we 'don't' do our job then hundreds of people get injured/killed, training is questioned and hours/experience/fatigue are all considered. Look at Colgan and the campaign led BY THE FAMILIES OF THE DECEASED, not the airlines or the insurers!

The sad fact of life is that ticket price is king and the paying public don't care/want to know who is flying them, how fatigued they are or how poorly trained they are as long as ticket A price is less than ticket B price.

Always remember, if we do our job correctly to the limit of our professional ability and contain the problem/emergency/failure then we have done our professional best. But, the public, if we do our job right, will never ever see it and the airlines we work for don't care.

Hence we are in the position we are.

What the public think
 

There have been several posts alluding to public opinion which seem to miss what it is;

The public the press and many "experts" think there is one set of Flight Time rules for all UK airlines. In fact basic guidance is translated into manuals by airlines which are approved by the CAA to grant an AOC. Airlines can then apply to change their manuals in light of their business operation and experience. Over time airlines manuals/rules change so much that it is difficult to believe they have the same origin.

Europe seem to agree by saying that by forcing the worst airlines/countries to improve while allowing the best to slip somewhat there will be an overall safety improvement since it tends to be the bottom of the safety pile who have accidents.

It is of course a basic tennet of the EE ideal that all businesses in all countries compete fairly by operating to the same rules

We at the pointed end want our bit to be the safest but they at the political end want to say that all EU citizens and undertakings are equal

I believe this is also called 'leveling down'.

Is there somewhere a tightening of the rules or is it as suspected a relaxation to standardize on the most lax rules?

Information on augmented crew required
 

At Post #72, there was a quote that said in part:

Apart from the noise about EU voting procedures etc, there was a deafening silence about this part of the quote. :eek: :eek: :eek:

My reading of the Draft CS for flight time specification schemes that accompanied Opinion 04-2012 suggest that this statement is patently untrue. The draft CS states:

Nowhere (that I have seen) has it been suggested that FDPs of greater than 13 hours will require 4 pilots. := :uhoh: :ugh:

Can anyone confirm that the Draft CS has not been further amended from that published on the EASA website?

Just for general interest, and to compare and contrast; Here are the EU rules for truck drivers, (from GOV.UK):-

My emphasis on the last point. And the turnaround is not suitable as the 45 mins rest.

In addition, the Health and Safety Executive specifies that a break of 15/20 mins should be taken after every 2 hours of driving.

Just in case you think this rule is harsh on truck drivers, it is not. It is made for drivers who sleep in the cab, or pull up at a roadside truck-stop where the bedroom is 10 meters from the truck. And having done this, I can honestly say you are fully rested after 9 hours. You have 8 hours asleep in the cab and one hour in the cafe having breakfast and brushing your teeth - and off you go.

It is not the same in commercial aviation.

At the end of a duty pilots have to walk 2 km through the airport because walking is cheaper, fight their way through security, immigration, and customs; wait 45 minutes for the cheaper taxi to arrive, drive 45 minutes to a cheaper hotel; wait an hour for the cheaper room to be made ready; wash, eat and rest - and then fight your way through all that again in reverse order to get back to the cheaper aircraft.

AND DO ALL THIS WITHIN a 10 or 11 hour REST PERIOD.

Its not fun. It is not professional. And it is not safe.

ORO.FTL.235 Rest periods
(b) Minimum rest period away from home base.
The minimum rest period provided before undertaking an FDP starting away from home base shall be at least as long as the preceding duty period, or 10 hours, whichever is greater. This period shall include an 8-hour sleep opportunity in addition to the time for travelling and physiological needs.

Following is from: Certification Specifications for flight time specification schemes. (DRAFT)

AMC1 ORO.FTL.235(b) Rest periods
MINIMUM REST PERIOD AWAY FROM HOME BASE
The time allowed for physiological needs should be 1 hour. Consequently, if the travelling time to the suitable accommodation is more than 30 minutes, the operator should increase the rest period by twice the amount of difference of travelling time above 30 minutes.

Since it is quiet new and not that easy to find, above mentioned AMC might be a wrong document, but it was what i could find.

Any body knows when is the effective date?
It is mentioned:
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from [2 years after its entry into force].

The time allowed for physiological needs should be 1 hour. Consequently, if the travelling time to the suitable accommodation is more than 30 minutes, the operator should increase the rest period by twice the amount of difference of travelling time above 30 minutes.

Do not forget the need to eat, shower, and make a transition from work to sleep. We are not autonomons. And, what do the zero-hour contractors do about this "íncreased "rest peiod?" The policing of it will be up to them and their relaltionship with crewing, should they have been delayed. Success.

I've flown for a regional airline. Always amazed me you could fly all day long with no rest breaks on the turn around. Sure we were given 30 mins 'dinner' on one turn around but absolutely no rest with cleaners, dispatchers, fuelers, crew yacking on. I've also worked as an HGV driver, and that 45 mins break after 4.5 hours driving had to be away from the controls at your leisure and away from any work. A couple of guys were switching their tachos onto rest whilst parked on loading bays at the distribution centres, pulled out after unloading and pulled over by VOSA who were checking drivers weren't claiming rest whilst truck was being unloaded. Guys were fined. A break was just that a break.

It's probably because the general public see the big nasty trucks every day in close proximity and can worry about what happens if one careens off the motorway in front of them.

Our profession is not so much in the general publics view and we have been very successful at hiding the effects of fatigue for so long that it is not a concern except to a small minority.

This industry is run by the bean counters, to them we are indeed automatons.

R1 Pilot still waiting for the CS specs to be officially published. Personally dont see any UK in a rush to adopt EASA FTL I even think some might wait until they are told to by the CAA (there will be a gradual rollout towards the deadline)
10Hrs rest away from base is the current minimum in Europe whereas in the UK its 11. If the spec comes in it will be assessed under FRMS by the Airline.
So is there a difference between the requirement of 10 hours during the night vv the day?. What is the reward vv what is the risk, the risks might outweigh the reward given most airlines desire for OTP. If so what will be the mitigation.

:\

Silverstrata, and Truckflyer; I completely agree with you.

I find it very curious that pilots do not have the same duty and rest limitations as truck drivers - in fact we should have more stringent limitations than them, since what we are doing is far more potentially dangerous; at much higher speeds, in 3 dimensions, in the part of the atmosphere where humans cannot survive*:-

A truck driver smells smoke, so he pulls onto the hard shoulder, turns off the engine and gets out.

Two pilots are in their 9th duty hour and are over the ocean at 40,000'. They smell smoke as one engine catches fire...............


Over to the Union(s).........

(*There are no hard shoulders at 40,000' ! Humans cannot breath outside at 40,000'. And the temperature is -56 centigrade or lower)

(By the way, in case I fall foul of 'office worker-gate' again, may I make it clear that I totally support truckers and agree that they absolutely should have proper rest and breaks :ok:).

I don't think the tacho rules are so strict to appease the public. Most of the public have little idea of how strict or not they are and how they are enforced. The rules are enforced with a pedantic viciousness by the regulator, VOSA (known with fear as 'the ministry!'). An infringement of even a few minutes into a rest period or break can result with a fine. Fiddle your hours and you're looking at prison. it used to be more common to find unscrupulous transport firms encouraging 'running bent' by fudging records. Recent changes to technology of recording hours and increased enforcement has eaten away at this. The aviation system is archaic and slack in comparison.

Getting down to brass tacks how can operating one bit of heavy machinery require you take take a rest away from ALL duty after 4.5 hours yet another bit of heavy machinery affecting public safety is ok to operate all day long with no proper breaks.?

In a 12 -13 hour duty day, with 4 or more sectors, there is no dedicated break period, where pilot's are not working, where they are from from any flight related duty.

I discussed this with a friend of mine who is a doctor, and he was appalled by this, however unless people unite, it is hard to see how it will improve.


Years ago, when Niel Kinnock was EU commissioner for transport, and the new EU workers' directive came in, he assured there would be a transition period for public transport workers. I watched the office at my airline transform. Perviously, in the open-plan space, there had often been 3or 4 people to one large desk/table. Paper everywhere and tempers frayed. Now with the 45cubic meter rule each office worker had their own desk and peace and harmony. And their break every 2.5hrs etc. and lunch break in the fresh air.
We wondered about the 12 hours 2 of us spent cooped up in 6 cubic meters with no room to stand up and none of the other 'workers' directive' goodies.

(This includes a consideration for the working conditions of the cabin crew. Compare their environment to that of a shop or restaurant worker. Way below with no privacy or break, especially in a LoCo cabin. Don't even think about the appalling conditions on a night flight.)

Kinnock acknowledged you couldn't redesign a/c overnight and some form of compensation arrangement should be devised. Over time a better more comparable set of T's & C's would be introduced so public transport workers were not disadvantaged under the EU workers' directive.

Sounded good, but look what has happened in reality; quite the opposite. Who allowed that to happen? Both politicians, having their strings pulled by the money people, the XAA's for the same reason, and the workers/unions for not standing up and being firm and holding the politicians to their promises.

That's where we are today. And think about how bad it could really be if there were no FTL rules. As a/c performance/endurance has extended so have the FTL's. The money people hold sway and the safety margins and acceptable way of life are both eroded to the very edge.

This whole debacle is a direct result of the fact that we Flightcrew are not behaving as Officers but as greedy selfish children, noth worthy of our stripes, especially those "collegues" who allow pay to fly on their flightdeck.

Now is the time for a general and complete strike over the whole of Easa land, but again, most "collegues" are afraid, and do not have the slightest bit of Commander responsibility to act against a potential danger.

We as Officers have the DUTY to respond in SUCH A WAY THAT WILL INSURE SAFER REGULATIONS.

The ONLY WAY to do this is a GENERAL STRIKE.
Do not come up,with exuses like " but we are not allowed to strike in our company". :mad:. Every employee within the EU has the right to strike. Yes, also in the UK.

I guarantee that only the threat of a complete stop of aviation will ensure a new and this time proper look at the regulations.

Well said. To add another long forgotten snippet that illustrates the way in which the incumbents in the piloting profession started to allow conditions to deteriorate, for what ever the reason, is the upper deck B747-200. Remember this took place in the world's major legacy carriers who were all heavily unionised, as well; so I suspect financial gain had something to do with it. (Wide-body pay and all that guff at the same time; and later on the release to paster of the FE. More dosh solved many a thorny problem.)
The B707 had a reasonable range for a full crew on a single duty. B747 was designed to fly longer and crew needed some rest. The upper deck was so designed by the manufacturer and I assume authorised by the XAA's. It never happened, so ask yourselves why? Did the XAA's decide belatedly that it was not necessary and extended FTL's to suit the a/c, or did cash change hands with the crews? I don't know but I suspect.Whatever; the slippery slope was trodden upon and we've been sliding ever since. Is the bottom in sight? Not yet.

Chances are those planners are not trained in anything other than putting bums in the seats at the lowest possible cost while maximizing their use of the rules to their advantage.

Sad to say but it sure looks like this is a done deal. The economics of it mean that the companies will lay on the full court press to get it through.

Every significant positive flight safety initiative has been the result of one or more smoking holes full of dead bodies. I don't see how forcing the adoption of sensible FTL's will be any different

Consider what the salary bill is for a large airline with 3000 pilots & 6000 C/A's. The bosses are in it to make maximum profit, not run a quality public service. They've established what the pax is prepared to pay and we see the subsequent profits. Imagine if they could get rid of 1 pilot: well a real qualified pilot. There have been, and continue to be, significant techno improvements and reliability enhancements that the chance of total failures is small. One pilot will be able to handle all the routine tasks of programming a computer. Taxi-takeoff- connect Autopilot-land, disconnect and taxi in. All with back up systems after back-up systems. You can fly a small jet with only 1 pilot, so why not a bigger one? The bag carrying apprentice will work for peanuts and keep an eye open.
Then the pax can take on board their own refreshments, self study the safety procedures before booking and sign a 'conditions acceptance' disclaimer. Then there only need be 1 C/A to smile and keep everyone happy.
The salary bill saving and increased profit - at the same ticket price - would be enormous; for the successful airlines. If the XAA's could be persuaded that there was not a safety consequence and it was necessary for the survival of the airline companies, the not so successful ones, and because there has become a shortage of numpties wanting to be pilots and C/A's, then it might just happen.

Tongue in cheek of course:

but I have worked for airlines where the FTL's were very flexible because the survival of the airline was more important than rigid compliance with the rules and blind eyes were turned. This is only the beginning of a thin wedge.

Captaintcas, I share your sentiments.

Or just work strictly to rule - NO discretion, NO accepting of deferred defects, fly the full procedure irrespective, or even go sick when you are not fit to fly.

Either way this is the only way to get the message across, apart from a few smoking holes in the ground maybe.

Please push your local Pilot Union to work together with ECA, the European Cockpit Association, to work out a EASA wide action-plan to counteract and eliminate the threat of diminished safety due to Eurocrat and EASA incompetence.

Now is the time to act if you have ANY sense of responsibility and pride for your profession.
Those willing to accept these crimes against safety are simply not worth the stripes on their uniform and have no place on a flightdeck.

Sorry to sound harsh, but imminent threats need positive and effective action.

Trucker
Fatigued, you mean tired perhaps or suffer some sleepyness. Then how many days off do you get in the year. How much leave then we can make a judgement on fatigue. Don't just give us the nasty bits.
And which airline in the UK does 6 earlies in the row - which airline in the UK will do 6 earlies in a row when EASA FTL arrives. Want to have a bet with me? :\