Ah that old chestnut.

I don't know about Trucker but I am contracted to work 39 hours per week - in other words the same as an office worker.

However, even our shortest flying day is the length of a normal office day, and usually we (and the cabin crews) work more like 9-12 hours in one shift - WITH NO BREAKS WHATSOEVER. AND WE EVEN HAVE TO EAT IN OUR SEATS WHILE FLYING THE PLANE.

So folk may think they see us at home more often than an office worker, but what they don't see is us getting up at 0330, or getting home at 0200 day after day and working 9-12 hour shifts. And they probably don't notice us working at weekends and over Christmas either.

I agree that the Unions and us members need to get much much stronger.

Another thought is to invite the CAA to join us in our cockpits for a whole week. Or two. Getting up the same time we do, driving in for briefing, then going through security and doing the whole day on the jumpseat. Then checking out, going home and doing it all again the next day - for a whole week, not just 2 short afternoon sectors. Lets have a couple of guys fly low cost short-haul, both earlies and lates. Another couple of guys fly longhaul bullets, and after a week or two ask them if they really think the FDP's are realistic and safe.....................


And where are Health and Safety - who rightly recommend that truck drivers have a 15-20 minute break every 2 hours? All HSE seem to do for us aircrews is tell us to do our hi-viz jackets up and don't bring yoghurt to work.

OK..I'll bite..

No, not sleepiness (note the spelling)!

We're talking nodding off on the approach. Unable to keep your eyes open mid flight. Multiple time zones in a few days. Disturbed sleep in uncomfortable beds in noisy hotels. Deep night flights. Feeling physically sick with FATIGUE after a flight. 14 hour plus duty periods, with no mandated break. Finishing on lates, starting on earlies...with 2 days off. But 2 days isn't 2 days really..

Not sleepiness.

And 10 days off a month. So 2 more than you...possibly...unless you count bank holidays, which we don't get. But do tell how many nights you spend at home each month?

And what's the worst thing that would happen if you got 'sleepy'? Spilt latte on that report due in next Tuesday week? Or 300 people dead?

I'm not a betting man, but I'd rather bet with you on when the first fatal accident occurs due to fatigue in the EU than when the inevitable 6 earlies in a row comes about!

Edited to add...

The above from Mr Angry in 2003, so it appears I am indeed beating my head against a brick wall! Who can possibly argue with the logic of a roster manager?! :ugh: :}

A simple clause should be added to the 'working hours directive' -

"It should be noted that the hours in this directive are maximum hours and flight crew are not expected to be continually rostered for maximum hours nor expected to work maximum hours continually. If an aircraft accident is investigated by the appropriate accident investigation body and fatigue is found to be a contributory cause, regardless of whether the crew involved reported fatigue, the rostering of the air carrier involved shall also be investigated to assess whether the crew rostering by that air carrier was a contributory cause to the aircraft accident."

Simple allocation of accountability to a beancounter - it works quite well.

Ian W, you are proposing the problem is solved by waiting for the tombstones and then trying to locate the relevant suit who organised/authorised that company's roster?

I thought we as ProfPilots were here to try to stop the accident BEFORE it happens?

The suit concerned will have long departed the location and your promised sanction is as toothless as a Pilots' Union!

Just heard the UK teachers have called off a threatened strike because Ministers are prepared to meet them to discuss their grievances. Does this type of action sound familiar?

Even if they get fobbed off with platitudes, smoke and mirrors, the tactic does seem to be effective.

If even the THREAT of industrial (in)action can achieve this, then what are our toothless ones waiting for??!! :ugh:

On the contrary - the current regulation could be looked at by the beancounters as the rostering target. No downside whatsoever in rostering you for every hour that it allows. If there is an inquiry they will say with an air of injured innocence - "but we rostered precisely what your regulations state!" ---

With the amendment that I propose they cannot use that defence they are obliged to take note of the fatigue effects of the hours they roster. I can assure you for a beancounter being up in front of the leather top desk is something they will avoid far more than over rostering you. They are not used to being held accountable for anything. What the addition does is place a duty of assuring that crew are not fatigued by their rostering - which I thought was the entire point.

WELL SAID TRUCKFLYER ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Somewhat more informative and likely to stir the brain cells than proposed clauses tacked onto the looming Eurotrash FTLs.

The beancounters have been operating in this mode for far too long, but do we have to wait for the H F accident with multiple fatalities/injuries and lawyers hovering like flies around a lump of :mad: on a hot summers day?

I fear we will, unless some industrial muscle can be displayed.

C'mon BALPA and ECA and the rest of the subscription farmers, show us what you're made of, or stop wasting members' money and hope ! ! ! ! ! ! ! :ouch:

Definition of fatigued...

If you go to bed dog-tired and hardly able to function properly - have a really good sleep - but wake up dog-tired and hardly able to function properly: then you are fatigued.

BT DT and got several of the T-shirts.

The 'how many days off' question is a complete red herring. It has been said many times by sleep analysts that continued lack of sleep will lead to subtle fatigue; the worse kind. The kind which you may not realise you have, which therefore you can not counter by being extra careful; the kind that can even lead you to believe you are doing a good job when you're not; the kind that lets you think you are bullet proof and an ace. How is this continued loss of sleep achieved? By getting up at 03.30 repeatedly over a few days or going to bed at 01.30 repeatedly over a few days and having the sleep disturbed before it was completed in depth and fully. I.e. good REM sleep. The disturbance is called family life or hotel doors/vacuum cleaners. I once had 5 earlies where the last one was TFS, the longest roster in the network. I think common sense was absent in rostering.
How is this lack of sleep & acute tiredness recovered from? Only by good deep REM sleep. Not cat naps, not siestas. That's what the experts tell us. Days off are supposed to be to create a healthy balance between work & social life, not to sleep and recover from a continual and tiring lack of sleep. The sleep recovery needs to be immediate, so the total days off in a month, quarter or year is totally irrelevant. The blind eye that XAA's and the airlines are turning regarding contract crews commuting on unaccounted for 'rest days' is bordering on negligent and certainly way outside the moral spirit of the rules. There is no 'spirit of the rules'. A/c have limitations and we as pilots use them and so does maintenance. IR's have limitations and the TRE's use them; Ground exams have limitations and XAA's use them. FTL's have limitations and rostering uses them, regularly, but the spirit of those rules is ignored. The XAA's know this because it has been argued about for decades. The limits should be there to allow necessary flexibility in the often disrupted schedule. Discretion should be just that, not expected and subtly planned for; as was the case in 1 of my airlines, and where the XAA was conveniently deaf & blind.
Why not have an FTL limit AND IT IS JUST THAT. Maximum daily rostering is to limit -1.30hrs. Maximum week is limit -5hrs. Monthly is limit - 10hrs. Off duty is minimum +2hrs. Annual stays at 900. Then when the inevitable poo hits the fan the limit comes into play for a one off scenario, not the regular day in day out. The 'spirit' would return. I agree this is more for short haul operations. Long-haul ops, heavy crew with proper rest is another environment and needs its own tailored rules. If you've a bunk then perhaps the difference between 12 & 14hrs is not so great for a single duty. Much will depend on the recovery rest before the next duty.
One set of rules does not suit all. I wonder how much in-depth consultation into FTL's included the crews. It should have been extensive. We should not be arguing about this after the event; we should have been in there at the start of the consultation. If we were excluded, then would have been the time to protest. We live in an environment where proaction is always better than reaction.
Boeing trumpeted that crews had been involved, extensively, in the design of B777. We were going to use it; we knew the problems in earlier designs. Use our knowledge to prevent their re-occurance. Sound common sense. The same should have applied to FTL's. We are orientated to complete the mission. We are success orientated. This is a well known characteristic, not always to the benefit of the operation, but that's being addressed. We are educated and aware of the financial realities of a business in a cut-throat world. To the best of my knowledge no airline has gone bust through direct crew action, but nearly every airline has gone bust through direct management action, or lack of it. Treat us fairly with respect and we'll get the job done. We want to protect our careers and that means keeping the company flying. We are not short-term profit monkeys, we are in it for the long-term. I know of many airlines where crews have taken a reduction in salary & benefits, even job shared, to keep the airline going in rough times and help save jobs. The management doing the same? doubtful.
This whole debate is in great danger of creating a real us & them relationship. Them being company office workers, management, XAA's and the guys at EASA. This is not healthy and needs addressing very quickly. In an industry that screams TEM & CRM why is even EASA flying in the opposite direction? It does make you wonder why their mandatory training subjects are not part of their own philosophy. It's the "don't do what I do, do what I say," syndrome. Unprofessional and not worthy of the overall ruling body.

After thirty seven years of flying and thirty five being paid to do so, I am coming to the end of my busiest ever year in terms of hours flown. Quite frankly I am somewhat tired at the moment what with the endless changes from early starts to late finishes, shorthaul to medium to longhaul, hotels, time zones, delays, slots, tech issues and the like. I do not burn my candle at both ends, no smoking, no drinking, a bit of exercise from time to time, so I do try to manage my life accordingly.

Now some of the rules are now to be relaxed having been voted in by European politicians with no understanding of the aviation business. All airlines will take the first opportunity fo use these changes to their best advantage as one would expect.

To paraphrase the late lamented Peter Cook;

' Perkins, we need someone to make a futile sacrifice........'

Another tack on the fatigue issue is the long term effects on health caused by constant long duty periods which disrupt the normal sleeping pattern etc.

I suspect in the years to come we will see more and more pilots losing their medicals or having to retire early due to health issues. And that's before we mention the affliction which is rarely mentioned viz. mental illness.

I see the convergence of many factors in the airline industry and the debilitating effects of constant and never ending disruptive work patterns is certainly one of them.

Perhaps, but are they flying an aircraft in 3 dimensions at 500mph with 200-400 pax on board? And having no breaks at all for up to 13 hours, let alone after every 2 hours that is recommended by HSE when driving a vehicle, or 4.5 hours that is MANDATED when driving a truck???

The point here is that our job is potentially extremely dangerous with a significant risk to life if we get it wrong.

Therefore, it should be ensured that pilots and cabin crew are most definitely properly rested before their duties.

How many more accidents will it take for this simple fact to sink in?

Q. "How many more accidents will it take for this simple fact to sink in?"

A. Lots, or until the CEOs and others high in the food chain are seen on TV/press being led off to prison in handcuffs and their homes and assets seized following a successful quick prosecution for corporate manslaughter.

Meantime I will follow the high-speed taxying trials prior to the first solo pig flight with great interest and a few Euros on which will happen first..............:rolleyes:


From this clip we are told the NTSB looks at the last 72 hours of an accident crew's time before the accident. I presume their scheduling folks and higher suits are worried about what may crawl out of the woodwork?


But why only 72 hours if there is an attempt to ELIMINATE FATIGUE as a contributory cause??

Another tack on the fatigue issue is the long term effects on health caused by constant long duty periods which disrupt the normal sleeping pattern etc.

I suspect in the years to come we will see more and more pilots losing their medicals or having to retire early due to health issues. And that's before we mention the affliction which is rarely mentioned viz. mental illness.

I see the convergence of many factors in the airline industry and the debilitating effects of constant and never ending disruptive work patterns is certainly one of them.

This will be an interesting one. Years ago there was a perception that pilots died young. We all knew of guys who croaked in mid-60's. It was conjectured that pressurisation, radiation, sleep disturbance, lack of exercise while at work, disrupted eating habits, bad or no balance between work & social life etc.We wondered why guys with a medical every 6/12 months then keeled over quite soon after retiring; and this was for guys who retried at 55-ish who should have looked forward to a reasonable life style & pension. Are some investigation we were told the death age amongst retired pilots was national average.

Now, with guys working quite a different life style, flying until 65, retiring to a hopefully reasonable life style, but with no or very little company pension, it will be interesting to see if the death ages change. Too early yet, but no question the strain of the working life is far greater than it ever was, and more much longer.

Anyone in the know?
 

At Post #150, I asked for any insight that any of you may have about the state of the proposed Certification Specifications for flight time specification schemes.

Can anyone update me on this technical stuff rather than the political stuff, please? :ok:

4 Dogs - to my knowledge not published yet.
Here's a re-print from the Daily Mail of today
" A fifth nod off at the wheel"
Almost one in five drivers have dozed off at the wheel according to a report. Of them, three in ten did so on the motorway while doing up to 70 mph. The study found a quarter of men have fallen asleep while driving, twice as likely as women (13%)
The study looked at how often tiredness or lack of concentration caused accidents. 3 in ten drivers have experienced an accident because of a lapse in concentration from just missing a pedestrian to hitting another vehicle. Drivers are advised to take a 15 min break every two hours. However a third are so eager to reach their destination they will ignore feelings of fatigue

So truck driver, you feel tired your 6th early, absolutely agree. Where's the danger though - on the aircraft, two Pilots, automation, Atc, quick nap in the cruise (or break perhaps Uplinker), or when your driving home.
And why not email your Chief Pilot than the Rosterer????

Lastly - why if there is all this fatigue out there - EU FTL under SPQ has been out ther a long time now - why no accidents?

As I've said before, nobody wants to crash voluntarily in order to make a point, and the constant FDM and Stasi culture in most airline these days make sure that the adrenaline flows generously during approaches.

The fact that you die a few years earlier from all this stress, fatigue and adrenaline is only a plus in the eyes of the politicians/regulators and management because the government (i.e. politicians and regulators) no longer has to pay you a pension and the management can replace you with someone cheaper. :}

Think I'm cynical, funny or paranoid? Just look at how most airline are run by beancounters these days. They don't give a rat's @ss about you, your health, your private life or your family.

Also our bodies are working quite hard during flight. (Not physically) due the cabin alt + dry air that in most pilots homes is not the case. Also lots of liquids drunk & most of it breathed out not pee'd out. So outside body thinks ah desert conserve water. Inside streuth it's a flood.
Funny how it is only after you have done the job for a while you realise how "knackering" it can be.

Wrong Metrics
 

The issue here is that the measures of fatigue are incorrect. It is extremely simple to measure just duty hours and hours off - but that is just an indicator of potential fatigue. All hours are not equal. If flights are difficult with multiple changes and replans in poor weather with challenging landings then the fatigue will build up faster; then add early starts or late finishes or time zone changes which all exacerbate the problems. But the nice simple hours on hours off metrics do not account for that.

I am not sure how the problem will be solved. Ideally there needs to be some kind of fatigue scale that actually measures fatigue.

Luck, largely.

CAP 371 was supposed to represent absolute limits on rostering. However what is happening now - to save money - is that rosters are being routinely brought right up to the limits of CAP 371 on a regular basis. This means that airlines need employ fewer pilots (and cabin crew), but it also means that we are getting more and more knackered, because we are hitting the limits on a regular basis, instead of only now and then as it used to be.

Our maximum annual airborne hours are limited to 900, (this does not include traveling to work, pre-flight briefing, going through security, walking out to the plane, preparing the plane for flight, the turnaround at the destination or the post flight duties). I did 870 one year, doing 4 sector days and 6 on 2 off duties, and I was like a zombie.

We are trying to point this out BEFORE another accident occurs. It is about safety, pure and simple.

Why are ATCO hours different to pilots
 

I'm curious given that the CAA regulates air traffic controllers why they think an air traffic controller can only work an hour or two without a break, why their shifts are limited to 6 hours and why they must have an hour break for lunch etc and yet the same CAA think it's quite safe for a pilot to work 11-12 hours continuously with no breaks and no lunch hour in a pressurised tube breathing thin air???

Is it as we always suspected that pilots are actually supermen compared to mere mortals, criss crossing the globe and rising before dawn day after day with barely a trace of a yawn...

I think not - hypocrisy - that's what it is and a complete lack of concern for either the welfare of staff or the safety of the travelling public by the airlines, the regulators and the politicians.

I spent over ten years as a manager in a very large UK company running multi-million pound projects and never did I feel as completely tired as I have done many times while at the controls of an airliner...

The simple reality is that as a pilot you just never get into a routine of sleep the way you can as an office worker and therein lies the problem...

No its not my opinion Trucky its the view of sleep scientists. I was trying to highlight that Pilots always go for the F word rather than the S word.
Having a dig at the average scheduler on 16k-18k a year doesnt stack up either, they are guided by prescriptive rules. EASA FTL in the UK will be prescriptive rules morphed with FRMS so in my view (bearing in mind the title of the discussion) fatigue (sleepyness) levels will not increase. Thats my own view and a UK AOC pilots can only be perceived at this time. If we don't switch to EASA FTL I can't see another medium sized UK AOC ever again, something the bean counters (who i can assure you do care about their staff and put in more time than any pilot does) do care about. :\

Yeah, look, don't have a go at the planners or the rosterers - they are just doing what they are told.

It is the bosses and the system that is wrong. And these are driven by "market forces", (in other words, making as much profit as possible).

Why don't we complain about fatigue? Well we do, but the system is geared up against us. They might look into a fatigue report, but we cannot have a national or pan-European pilot's strike because the law prohibits it. So we are in a situation that we know is not right, but we cannot do much about it. The system is skewed to save money by having as few pilots and cabin crew as they can get away with. This means we are rostered up to the max and we are getting tired. As has been said, why are truck drivers mandated to stop after 4.5 hours (and have to prove it with their tachograph), and why must ATC have regular breaks? because everyone knows that the human brain cannot concentrate reliably for more than a few hours without having regular breaks.

But it's not necessarily fatigue. How on earth did a BA jet get airborne with both its engine cowls undone? About five different people (including the pilots) missed the fact they were unlatched. That was probably not fatigue as such, but sheer pressure of work.

In addition to this, flight crews spend a lot of their time in a dry atmosphere at 8,000' altitude. Any program one sees of mountain climbers can appreciate how much strain that puts on the human body. 1 hour at 8,000' is probably equivalent to 2 or more hours at ground level.

Pilots and cabin crew have slipped through the net. But in the old days, a crew might fly LGW to PMI then get off and night stop ! Now somehow, that has become LGW-PMI-LGW and do it all again for the next 5 days, starting at Oh dark o'clock, thank you very much.

The CAA seems to have completely missed the change in our situation. They come and sit on our jump seat for one afternoon on two short sectors and have a nice day, soaking up some of the "glamour", and drinking coffee. What we really need to happen is for the CAA to spend a couple of weeks sitting on the jump seat doing low cost short haul rosters - getting up at 0330 every day for 6 days doing four sector days, and another couple of weeks doing long haul bullets. Then let them say to us what they think of the hours we work and the lack of breaks we have.

The CAA in Gatwick work office hours in lovely offices. They get up at sensible times and go home at sensible times. They have regular rosters - they have weekends off. They have a lovely (subsidised) canteen with wholesome food, and lovely quiet surroundings. I do not begrudge them any of this, but I wish they would realise that our jobs are not like they used to be, and that in todays low cost environment; flight crews now need more protection, not less.

Amen! An excellent synopsis of the predicament we're in and one of the best posts I've seen on PPRuNE for a loooong time! :ok:

?? Who ever told you that?

BOAC - Probably the same crew that said we never did LGW-TLV-LGW...

Ah yes - those were the days - running out of discretion report forms...........................

I have heard of people doing Cologne to Palma and back three times in a day in previous times! That people night stopped due to curfews etc. is correct. But it is also true that it sometimes involved sitting for a few hours on the plane! Avoiding this kind of thing is exactly why sensible FTLs are needed.

That things were not always rosy in the past does not however excuse the farce that occurred in Brussels with the recent vote. I was also surprised to learn that the regulations do not come into force for a couple of years.

FTL
 

CAP371: limits are not the asymptotes that the regulator assumes them to be... They naturally become targets. As the cost-benefit of pushing your luck is a system that has catastrophic but infrequent/exceptional events, then the fact that the companies, CAA's, passengers and crew "get away" with risky processes is a reinforcement of the assumption that all is well. Coupled with inherently dysfunctional reporting systems, that is endemic at all levels of society, (messengers are a, er, um, "target" audience.... ) in all countries... The people who can end up bleeding from the immediate consequences continue to be the bastions of operational safety, with minimal support.

How many companies give operational risk management, CRM, HF training to the CEO, managers, rostering staff etc? When did any of the EASA/EC senior management undertake same? Invariably, the bleeding edge manager, the pilot, is left to make the decision that the wheels have come off the wagon, with the mute, but imposing and menacing presence of the corporation, and with the indifference of the regulator. Passengers vote with their wallets, as do share holders, and the immediate, non lethal outcomes that "normally" occur are resented, yet, the pilot will be held solely accountable post disaster as not having the fortitude to prevail, and for being fallible. After all, the PIC is "in command".

FTL is an issue, but it is only one of the symptoms of a seriously flawed system. Keeping on topic, fatigue results in damage and losses, on a relatively routine basis. Back when I cared about such things, I recall 2 events of severe structural damage done in flight that were, factually, directly attributable to the crews fatigue, and additional high headcount fatalities where fatigue should have been held as the primary contributory factor, not further down the lists. In these cases, the forces of darkness failed to accept moral responsibility, or modify their practices to reduce their exposure to operational risk.

The industry relies on the boy scout mentality of the flight crew, with the added incentive of punitive sanctions applied outside of the stated policies, (in contravention of the policies and in breach of the obligations of post holders duty of care). Nothing wrong with being boy (girl) scouts, but if you take a stand, be prepared for the outrageous fortune that may result, recall that "Unity" may sound like a group ideal of cohesiveness, but also means "One".

Having been threatened personally by an AOC postholder for a company that has a global public reputation for doing better, "if you put in [a] safety report, "we" will get you...", I am under no illusions as to the nature of our industry. Truckflyer's post on the state of the union I am sadly in concurrence

It was written rather optimistically

"Though the vicious can sometimes pour affliction upon the good, their power is transient and their punishment certain; and that innocence, though oppressed by injustice, shall, supported by patience, finally triumph over misfortune!" Ann Radcliffe

Which is a good bed time tale, great fodder for subjugation, unsubstantiated by recorded history.... A salve to fears and a carrot to righteous behavior, it is, however, wrong. Even Burke was overly optimistic and simplistic, with "for evil to triumph... ", as "The end excuses any evil" Sophocles said, and, Steinem contends, "Evil is obvious only in retrospect."

Each one of us that assume the mantle of professionalism in this industry are individually and collectively, held responsible for a safety outcome that is compromised by the regulator and the operator to a significant extent. How we manage that may end up defining us. At the end of the day, you all get to look in the mirror and can see whether the decisions that are made are those that you are either proud of, or not. I can personally say that standing up for your beliefs will always come at a cost, but it is far less than being a statistic, or losing your self respect.

One prime minister of a land down-under once described pilots as "bus drivers", and he was wrong; bus drivers have more public interest in their welfare and that of the general travelling public than pilots have.


"Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, and knowledge without integrity is dangerous and dreadful". Samuel Johnson

UpL
As has been said before ATC and truck driver are one man band. If you need a break ask your colleague to look after shop for you, isn't that called CRM?

Um - not sure too many charter airlines do 4 sector days, so which airline is left that does mixed short haul and long haul......

As i've said before hadn't EU FTL come in I would hav bet there would be no other medium sized AOC in the UK. You also fail to highlight that for example under EASA FTL the FDP for example in the afternoon is less. You also fail to mention that most medium / large sized UK AOC have Union agreements and are heavily investing in FRMS.
Yes, it is all hard work these days, if you dont like it go work for the CAA as an IOA

Um - not sure too many charter airlines do 4 sector days, so which airline is left that does mixed short haul and long haul......

RYR are now going to operate Canaries to Sweden. That is going to be >6.00 each way. The next day you could do the more normal multi-short sector day. !2 hours in an aluminium tube with no exercise, not even standing up, except for 5 minutes on the turn-round, seems like arduous long-haul to me. Proper single sector long-haul a/c have a cockpit big enough to stand up and stretch in. IMHO using short haul a/c for long-haul trips is not the most healthy of daily occupations. Been there, done that, in both types of a/c and so have much personal knowledge; before the usual slagging off along the lines of if you don't like then quit. I didn't & I have.

My last couple of days consisted of 23 hours duty, nearly 15 hours block, eight sectors. A six hour single canaries leg sounds pretty good as the rules current or future would not allow a return. (Two five hours sectors are of course another matter particularly when scheduled through the night as they frequently are.)

Nothing stops you from standing up, getting out of your seat and walk around the cabin every hour or so. I would even call this practice a necessity for your own, and thus your crew' and passenger's health and wellbeing.

Six hour sectors are possible actually. 45 Minutes report time, 12 hours flight, 30 minutes turn around. Works like a charm in the RYR world. However it is only possible twice within seven days.

But there are still those airlines out there that fly a mix of long and shorthaul, air berlin for example does it on the MFF fleet (A330/A320).

Thanks for the correction Denti, I think they actually manage 25 minute turnarounds by the way! I personally would still prefer six or seven days of that and the rest of the month free. But I guess the grass is always greener.

lederhosen & denti, you are both correct it seems on turnaround times.
RYR seems to adopt turnaround time in excess of 25 minutes where required, even up to 45 minutes in IBZ in summer on some flights.

look at their schedule in Canaries and compare arrival from and departure to any of their bases, e.g. flights flown by crew from that base, and you will see a mix of 25/30/35...

Nothing stops you from standing up, getting out of your seat and walk around the cabin every hour or so. I would even call this practice a necessity for your own, and thus your crew' and passenger's health and wellbeing.

Since locked cockpit doors all the airlines I've flown for this is an absolute No NO. So forget about crew's well-being. No sure how the pilot strolling around then cabin helps with pax well-being. The captain strolling around the cabin on long-haul flights and shaking hands with all and sundry has been a thing of the past for many years in the EU world and USA I suspect.

Amazingly, speaking to mates in various airlines, a B737 crew can do Canaries - Scandinavia up and back with only 2 pilots locked in their box for >6.00hrs before a very short leg stretch and then a repeat performance. Same is true for flights from N.Europe to Egypt or Gambia. Meanwhile a long-haul carrier from the national carriers, with an a/c designed for the job and thus large cockpit, does a 12.00hr single sector with 3 pilots and bunks, even down to S.Africa with no time change. Go figure.

A very good post by fdr at 308, I think. There is a complacency in the media and public that aviation is regulated to the highest standards and is safe, and so swallow the bait when any CEO trots out the line that the company operates to the legal criteria. I too have faced the wrath of a Chief Pilot when I was grounded by a doctor for chronic fatigue and refused to let crewing sign me of as sick instead of fatigued. The industry will punish those who do the right thing in this instance, and the authorities are wilfully turning a blind eye.

The authorities don't seem interested that limits are now targets, and that there are many ingenious re(mis)-interpretations or subtle floutings of regulations. Look at the disinterested replies in Chirp to see the casual disregard for safety by the authorities... No wonder fatigue events are rarely reported, with disdain form the authorities and punishment from management, why would anyone put their neck on the block with no chance of positive change and every chance of retribution?

The FTL schemes also seem to have been written with long haul in mind and provide little protection for multi-sector days, especially in airlines who give little ground support to their crews at ill-equipped minor airports.

Hi Mr Angry;

I wasn't talking about just a single airline. As far as I know, Flybe and easyJet do 4 sector days, and Virgin and BA do long haul bullets, don't they?

What I meant was to put observers on each of those flight decks for a couple of weeks following a crew's roster, not just a single afternoon 'jolly'.

This way might convey the cumulative fatigue/tiredness that we experience?

Rat5,

Why then am I doing this every flight?:}

It is not a NO NO at all! How do you use the lavatories?! Do you claim you never go and have a chat with the CC in the forward or rear galley?!
You should mate!

C'acas. It is not a NO NO at all! How do you use the lavatories?! Do you claim you never go and have a chat with the CC in the forward or rear galley?!
You should mate!

Because in the airlines I've flown for since 9/11 it is an absolute NO NO in the company orders. There were special security procedures in place for pee-time. Even if there was a pax disturbance in the cabin the pilots were forbidden to leave the cockpit. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with said orders, only that they were in force. Your company has different philosophies. However, I thought this NO NO order was EU wide. Perhaps you are somewhere else.