Fatigue?
 

Fatigue is not a problem, it is the pilots responsibility to report when fatigued. This is the safety net, you have the ultimate responsibility not us. When a pilot reports fatigued then it shows his life is interfering with his work. This is a simply pilot problem and not an airline problem. There are plenty of pilots who want these jobs, so reporting fatigued just means that you should consider a career change to something better suited to you.

Fatigue is not a problem, it is the pilots responsibility to report when fatigued.

I report for work feeling fine, I think. 14 hours later, just before TOD, I'm knackered and hallucinating and seeing double & trying to stay awake because I'm fatigued. How do I report that?

Flying fatigue
 

With the intro of long range flights reaching some 15 hours plus with multi crews, one would think that gives enough rest to the non flying crew members having a bunk to sleep. But will they sleep as if at home ? Does their mind not stop being concerned with the state of the flight ? And what are the real effects of time zone differences (jet lag) in the cumulative when scheduled on long haul routes with few days off in between ? Legal ..... sure....................but I am just saying !;)

5 on 4 off, no night stops, month off, 5 on 13 off part time if you can afford it.

Ok 5 earlies on multi sector days can be tough but finishing early followed by 4 days off then going back on lates so nearly 5 days off, its bearable.

Ryanair have got lots of things wrong in the past but roster isn't one of them.

Standing by for the incoming!!

IS FATIGUE A PROBLEM....


hahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahhaahaha

HELL YES IT IS!!

Yankee whiskey....the crew may sleep properly if the crew rest was as designed by the manufacturer, not some cobbled together thing designed by the airline not for the crew's comfort and benifet, but the passengers.

Even with a perfect rest area -and as you rightly point out many are pretty poor, meaningful rest often is impossible as they're by a busy galley with trolleys and canisters bashing against the bulkhead

With the intro of long range flights reaching some 15 hours plus with multi crews, one would think that gives enough rest to the non flying crew members having a bunk to sleep.

I think 12 hours (2 crew) in the seat is a longtime. Trouble is that can be split into 2 x 5.45 sectors. The 30min turnaround means 1 of you is in the seat for 20 mins of that, and you were in the seat 20mins before departure. So how is the 'rest' accomplished? The new concept of 'controlled cockpit rest'. Joke. 12 hours with an aluminium tube strapped to your backside and no room to stretch your leg, all starting at 05.30 on day 5. Good game.

RAT, (European) regulator shares your view. Assuming your/worst conditions - reduced 45 minutes reporting time, 30 min turnaround - the maximum "strapped to aluminium" period is 10:45 with crew check-in at 0530L. Long day nevertheless.

Yip, long day, especially when it is your fifth in a row after years of it. As soon as my mortgage hits a certain ( pre determined) level I'm out for fear of dying young.

On comparisons between railways and the airlines I believe I am right in saying that a lot of the modern human factors research came out of Australia following numerous incidents on long distance road and railway routes. This was highlighted at an aviation human factors conference held at Bentley Priory a number of years ago. The key speaker being an Australian consultant who was excellent.

I remember reading more than 20 years ago about a research done by NASA about the effects of fatigue on airline pilots and what the FTL's should be. I remember it saying that
max duty should be 10 hrs. extended to 12, but no more. Never saw it again.
The limit for me was 12 hrs., after that it was when I started feeling real
tired.

[QUOTE]The key speaker being an Australian consultant who was excellent.[QUOTE]
Ericferret: yep, that's where a lot of this started and that's who we hired. Folks can PM me if they want more, including the refs to the oil industry stuff.

I agree with Range, 12 hours is also my limit. If the company asks me to extend further, the answer is always NO. I have done approaches with my eyeballs dangling on the floor and it isn't a good feeling, I will never do it again if possible.

Fatigue is a problem every where.

Apart from the obvious down grade of performance, extreme fatigue or the effects of it can, in some cases cause a "micro blackout". A lot of people are not aware of this.

Yes, it definitely is.
Flying 100 hours every month, flying west, east, north, south, morning, afternoon, evening, night flights all mixed up takes its toll! This has never been done before. Also, there is obviously not enough recovery time. Even some in house doctors somehow recognise it is becoming too much.
What is also a problem is the cumulative effects of all those tiring flights and the lack of recovery time over a longer period. It would be ok to fly 100 hours/month once a year maybe, but doing it month in month out is not good.
Over the last few months, I have seen guys showing significant signs of fatigue. I am slowly becoming one of them myself.
The rosters are legal, sure, but extremely fatiguing nonetheless.
So is fatigue an issue? Yes it is...

"legal" ...... makes me shiver! Means zilch around here.

In some parts of the ME it is legal to stone women.

@Desert Camel 'In-House Doctor's recognise it'

So, the long and short is that the Companies don't give a f*ck about safety and pay lip service to it and have it in place to satisfy the regulatory requirements.

Thing is, though, are the in-house Dr's being reckless/negligent by not reporting this or doing anything about it? Or is it thought of separating from big-bucks overseas contract that puts them off? Or perhaps, nasty airline who will ignore just culture and give them the flick at the first sign of not towing the line......is this the same case for the pilots?

Obviously, a lot of pilots have shown their cards by 'voting with their feet' BUT are those that stay and accept these conditions also negligent? (Ref: James Reason) And again, what is the motivational factor for so-called 'professional' pilots to accept a working in environment that they know to be fundamentally unsafe? (especially given that they may be the next pilots involved in the incident/accident which may result in their own death) Is it money/contract/bond preventing them all from leaving? Or is it sit tight to get the hours to move on? But again, that aside, fundamentally, if you know something to be unsafe, shouldn't you as a pilot have a professional and moral responsibility to say 'no'? Just because something is legal doesn't mean it is right or safe, agree? Isn't it really the pilots, not the management, that ultimately hold power in the Companies (after all, no pilots = no flying)?

Before people jump all over me, I am posing questions and discussion points here and not necessarily saying this is my opinion but my analysis seems to point in these directions....interested to know what others think.

And finally, is this a sad reflection of the culture of modern aviation? (I think ICAO with its SARPS and GASP is all bullsh*t! from tossers that are totally out of touch with reality - bunch of lawyers who've never sat in a cockpit!)

Just as a reference from my own experience I was flying for a charter company in Africa with similar issues and we (pilots) very nearly pulled off a 'coup' against management as they had too few pilots, not enough trainees and plenty of work and just as we were about to win, the economic downturn came, the work dried up and we were told accept the existing contract or don't let the door hit you in the ass! - of course, the work drying up, ironically, cured many of the problems!

Go trolling much??

Speed2hieght must be sitting at Costa.