Pilot Fatigue Rules

Quote: Ayecarumba

I don't think you can have it both ways. The airline is being responsible to the public and their shareholders by grounding the pilot. The time limit might be set arbitrarily, but it is a rule that applies to all. If there were a crash, families of the deceased would not hold back from suing because the airline "trusted the pilot to be okay even though he was a few minutes over the allotted time".

I don't think I'm asking to have it both ways. I'm absolutely against airlines forcing passengers to sign away their rights with waivers.

What I am trying to say is that it isn't like a pilot is bright-eyed and bushy tailed one minute and too dangerously sleepy the next. I'll agree that to put it entirely to pilot discretion will be pretty much to do nothing. That's why I sport a phase-in period where if (1) the pilot feels safe to fly and (2) the airline pays a reasonable fine, then the plane can still fly.

That was a good point on Tenerife. By the way, Walter on Breaking Bad, I think, mispronounced it on Breaking Bad in his "Welcome Back" speech at the high school. I've just always wanted to point that out. That disaster was largely caused by pilot fatigue laws, as they were in a big rush to leave in very foggy conditions to avoid being grounded due to such laws.

Quote: Wizard

What I am trying to say is that it isn't like a pilot is bright-eyed and bushy tailed one minute and too dangerously sleepy the next. I'll agree that to put it entirely to pilot discretion will be pretty much to do nothing. That's why I sport a phase-in period where if (1) the pilot feels safe to fly and (2) the airline pays a reasonable fine, then the plane can still fly.

It is not how the pilot feels when he takes off, the issue is how will he be 4 hours later? Or 6 hours with a weather delay, or other unforeseen delay? That is why the rule.

Quote: AZDuffman

It is not how the pilot feels when he takes off, the issue is how will he be 4 hours later? Or 6 hours with a weather delay, or other unforeseen delay? That is why the rule.

That was not the case, evidently, on my flight from Seattle. He passed some deadline just sitting at the gate. He stressed it was just a matter of five minutes. On a 2.5 hour flight he could have flown faster to make up the five minutes, if the issue was his landing time in Vegas.

Quote: Wizard

That was not the case, evidently, on my flight from Seattle. He passed some deadline just sitting at the gate. He stressed it was just a matter of five minutes. On a 2.5 hour flight he could have flown faster to make up the five minutes, if the issue was his landing time in Vegas.

What I was meaning was that it was the reason for the rule. I get the frustration. I've lived it. The FAA and NTSB, however, are two of the most professional government agencies. These are not staffed like the gift shop at the Smithsonian. Rules are well thought out. But for the good of the forum, I will get more on how the rule works from my pilot brother. I think it was he who told me pilots can't even eat at the same restaurant before leaving for safety reasons.

Quote: Wizard

By the way, Walter on Breaking Bad, I think, mispronounced it on Breaking Bad in his "Welcome Back" speech at the high school. I've just always wanted to point that out. That disaster was largely caused by pilot fatigue laws, as they were in a big rush to leave in very foggy conditions to avoid being grounded due to such laws.

The investigation concluded that the fundamental cause of the accident was that Captain Veldhuyzen van Zanten took off without proper clearance. The investigators suggested the reason for his mistake might have been a desire to leave as soon as possible in order to comply with KLM's duty-time regulations, and before the weather deteriorated further.

Quote: Wizard

That was a good point on Tenerife. That disaster was largely caused by pilot fatigue laws, as they were in a big rush to leave in very foggy conditions to avoid being grounded due to such laws.

To be a bit more precise it was that the penalty was more severe than merely being grounded as 'over hours'. There are various time limits and some are based on estimated flight duration to destination or first alternate destination. Some are based on total air time and some "times" end at landing time rather than taxi and wait for gate time, while some time limits do not.

No matter how complicated a rule is still better than a too flexible rule. Taking off with too much weight...sure you will burn some while taxiing and waiting, but you might be cleared right away. Weight distribution? Fuel burn can be on selected tanks but usually take off and landing are on designated tanks so a pilot can't select the initial fuel burn. Actual passenger weight versus standard passenger weight... man if you are that close, the CG is going to be off by only a hair, but often that is all it takes. On a smaller plane a plane was tail heavy and once the landing gear was raised, that nosewheel folded back into its compartment and the plane became uncontrollable by the pilots. A very small weight shift thru a very small distance, but that is all it took for the plane to keep raising its nose no matter how much force the pilots applied to the controls. Once it stalled, the control surfaces became virtually useless. Just a bit of a change, but that is all it took.

Note: Most people tend to survive plane crashes. Though one Japanese crew developed a gas leak upon landing (not a drip, but a real gusher) and they wanted to taxi the fully loaded plane to the fully occupied terminal leaving a trail of airplane fuel all over the place behind them and their hot exhaust gases.

RE: Pronunciation of Tenerife.

Thank you, Paco, for proving I was right.

Quote: Wizard

Thank you, Paco, for proving I was right.

Anytime

The Total fatalities of 583 on March 27, 1977 was a grisly record that many thought would stand forever. But in the last year, airplanes with over 600 seats began flying on Emirates from Dubai to Copenhagen.

On 4 November 2010, an oil leak, caused by a defective oil supply pipe, led to an engine fire and subsequent un-contained engine failure on Qantas Flight 32 carrying 469 passengers and crew (with 44 empty seats). There were no injuries to the passengers, crew or people on the ground despite debris falling onto the Indonesian island of Batam. But so far that incident is the only accident involving an A380.

Quote: Pacomartin

On 4 November 2010, an oil leak, caused by a defective oil supply pipe, led to an engine fire and subsequent un-contained engine failure on Qantas Flight 32 carrying 469 passengers and crew (with 44 empty seats). There were no injuries to the passengers, crew or people on the ground despite debris falling onto the Indonesian island of Batam.

You can perform destructive and non-destructive testing on the oil supply pipe, you can install oil pressure gauges and oil leak sensors, you can design sufficient strength for containment of blade fragments, you can suffer uncontained debris in non-vital areas... but how do you test for a pilot who is too sleepy, too distracted, and who is too slow to react properly.

American carriers "build" pilots who are trained well beyond expected events and who have the social and economic clout to refuse to perform during excessive fatigue.

Foreign carriers "build" pilots who are trained to minimum expectations and who have neither the social nor economic clout to complain about anything at all, much less an accumulation of delays that are beyond the control of the airlines.

Pilots do fall asleep or have weird schedules and noisy hotel rooms. Some pilots wake up when hearing their call sign over the radio, some don't. Some pilots have time to react; some don't.

Where do you want your "margins"? Safety or Profit??

I would like to hear from Babs on this one. As an air traffic controller her interactions with the pilots would be affected by fatigued pilots. I wonder if ATC knows how many hours the pilot was on shift and if she noticed much difference in interaction with those pilots.