FAA urged to Change Rest rules by NTSB in Recent accident study

[Soverytired]

I used to fly DC-8's. There is no way you can rested under all conditions. Look at a 1700 departure ATL-London, England. You might nap, but there is no way you will be alert that entire trip unless you do drugs. Then you have ruffly 28 hours off, you do not sleep well being out of time zone, and then you fly back. You are wipped for two days, and I was 35 at that time. Again the pilots want more rest, does that mean no more jumpseating into your trip on your own time? Would the pilot support that you are at your departure point 8-10 hours in advance of departure so you will be proplerly rested. This is not all the companies or FAA's fault that pilots are not rested.

Personally, I just want what's safe. NASA, the NTSB, and others have repeatedly and extensively studied circadian rthyms, sleep disruption, and their effects on physical and mental performance. Their incontrovertible evidence has been repeatedly ignored.

I'm less concerned about whether or not pilots obey new rules (i.e., jumpseating in on the day of a shift). There will always be those who ignore the intent of the rules for their own convenience.

Right now, rules are so poorly written that pilots can follow them exactly and still wind up utterly exhausted. This must stop.

 

[Jet41]

This isn't anything new. NASA has done these studies before, all supporting shorter duty periods. But nothing will be done because all politicians (they are really the ones that control the FAA) are in the hip pocket of airline management.

 

[Max Powers]

I used to fly DC-8's. There is no way you can rested under all conditions. Look at a 1700 departure ATL-London, England. You might nap, but there is no way you will be alert that entire trip unless you do drugs. Then you have ruffly 28 hours off, you do not sleep well being out of time zone, and then you fly back. You are wipped for two days, and I was 35 at that time. Again the pilots want more rest, does that mean no more jumpseating into your trip on your own time? Would the pilot support that you are at your departure point 8-10 hours in advance of departure so you will be proplerly rested. This is not all the companies or FAA's fault that pilots are not rested.

Hey in regard to the no jumpseating/commuting, lets worry about one problem at a time. In other words don't blame this on someones commute. I seriously can't believe a pilot is trying to pass blame upon another pilot for his commute - which he didn't even have.

 

[imacdog]

I used to fly DC-8's. There is no way you can rested under all conditions. Look at a 1700 departure ATL-London, England. You might nap, but there is no way you will be alert that entire trip unless you do drugs. Then you have ruffly 28 hours off, you do not sleep well being out of time zone, and then you fly back. You are wipped for two days, and I was 35 at that time. Again the pilots want more rest, does that mean no more jumpseating into your trip on your own time? Would the pilot support that you are at your departure point 8-10 hours in advance of departure so you will be proplerly rested. This is not all the companies or FAA's fault that pilots are not rested.

This post makes sense coming from a manager from a bottom feeding freight operator. However, I think most rational people would agree that airline schedules certainly can contribute to fatigue. Pilots that do a long commute just before their official duty day begins certainly aren't doing themselves any favors but things like 121 reduced rest need to go away. 135 unscheduled requires 10 hours rest with no provisions for reduced rest, why the discrepancy?

 

[XJohXJ]

Not only that, but the rest needs to begin after transportation to the hotel, not before. It's not by any pilots' choices that we stay at poor hotels with inadequate van service. We wouldn't be in that van on our own time, so it's still company time, and should still be accounted as duty time.

 

[goodgig]

Unless your company is running with 135.265......

 

[11thHour]

What drives me mad is this: Studies show that being tired/fatigued can impact your performance as much if not more so that being mildly drunk. So, rightly so the airlines have a staunch alcohol limit - yet they don't bat an eye at working us 16 hours with 8 hours 'rest', which in my experience equates to about 4 hours of sleep. This is infuriating! The FAA has to pull their heads out.

 

[Gillegan]

I actually think that some progressive changes in the FTL's could be beneficial to the airlines. It is after all a competitive issue. Due to the insufficient FTL's, some unions have taken it upon themselves to negotiate more restrictive guidelines. This creates a competitive/cost advantage for those airlines who do not "self-regulate". To remain cost competitive, those other airlines then have to make up the cost difference somewhere else (pay and conditions?). In my opinion, this is one area where the unions and airlines have completely missed the boat. By having a realistic and transparent FTL regulation, the playing field (at least in this area) is levelled moving the competition back to where it should be, in service and network.

This is also an issue for the globalization of aviation. (Sorry for the thread creep but it is all related) Right now, there is a huge discrepancy in how some countries regulate and tax their airlines. This creates a large gradient in costs yet, these same airlines are competing on a global stage.

 

[Andy Neill]

Here is the preliminary on the accident:
http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/GenPDF.asp?id=DCA07FA037&rpt=p

 

[Lear70]

At the time of the accident, how long had the captain been on duty, and how much rest preceded that duty?

The CA on that flight was in my initial new-hire class at PCL. He had become a Check Airman, had about 7,000 hours total time, and about 5,000 in the CRJ, 3,000+ of which was PIC time (estimated based on how much time I had in the airplane knowing he flew about 1,000 more hours than I did in my first 3 years before I got off reserve).

He was doing IOE with a new-hire pilot who was very low-time.

It was the last leg of the day, I "heard" 9:30 (approximate) hours rest the night before, and they were at 14 hours and change of duty at the time of the accident, pretty close to midnight.

I disagree with the board on finding that he disregarded information that the runway was slick. 15 minutes prior to landing, he spoke with the airport manager who was doing snow removal ops and received a verbal that braking action was "fair" as reported by a truck following the snow removal equipment. The worst of the storm hit just a few moments later after the CA returned to normal descent duties and approach planning, and he was too busy flying the descent and approach to check in one last time below 10,000.

What's most interesting about this is that the Captain initially REFUSED this leg based on weather and the forecast winds and heavy snow. Pinnacle dispatch called NWA ops and got them to CHANGE the forecast to include a wind just BARELY at the legal limit for tailwind to do the only approach available to meet the forecast ceiling and vis, AND amended the snow forecast to LIGHT snow instead of heavy.

Northwest has the ability to amend their own TAF's away from what the NWS publishes within certain parameters. I'VE HAD THEM DO THIS TO ME, it's NOT a rumor. Difference is the last time they did this, I diverted back to MSP when we got to the destination because the weather was below mins (it's one of my interview stories where I disagreed with a policy, did as instructed anyway, then chose the safe exit and came home, proving my point along the way). This CA didn't divert because it was within acceptable mins when he started the approach. This is the first time I know of that it has bit NWA directly.

Where he touched down is in debate. The airport manager insists it was "halfway down the runway" while the FD data (weight on wheels), G/S recording, and aircraft speed show it closer to 2,000 feet past the threshold - well within the TDZ.

Doubt very seriously they will change the rest rules over it. No fatalities, regional carrier, and, quite frankly, without those factors, they're simply going to pin it on the CA being fatigued and making a bad call which is partially true, but he was walked down the primrose path.

This guy is VERY sharp, one of the nicest guys in the biz that I know, and didn't deserve the crucifying he got over it (he lost his job). We all make mistakes; we just get lucky most of the time and either the person beside us catches it or we luck out and nothing happens.

Was hoping the board would emphasize the weather changing issues by NWA ops more in this hearing. Personally, I don't think ANY airline should have that ability...