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

[Max Powers]

Safety Board Cites Pilot Fatigue
In 2007 Pinnacle Airlines Accident

[FONT=times new roman,times,serif][FONT=times new roman,times,serif]By ANDY PASZTOR
June 10, 2008 2:26 p.m.[/FONT]
[/FONT]
LOS ANGELES – Federal investigators highlighted crew fatigue as a major factor in the nonfatal crash of a Pinnacle Airlines commuter jet that slid off the end of a snowy runway in Traverse City, Mich., in April 2007.
During a National Transportation Safety Board hearing in Washington, D.C., members and staff repeatedly cited the captain's fatigue in explaining the sequence of events that ended with the Bombardier jet landing in deteriorating weather conditions, despite reports that the runway was slick and aircraft brakes would be ineffective.

Associated Press No injuries were reported among the 46 passengers and three crewmembers on Pinnacle Airlines jet, en route to Traverse City from Minneapolis, which slid about 50 feet off the runway. Ken Egge, a senior board investigator, said the crew "really shouldn't have been in that position" and instead should have opted to land somewhere else. Bill English, another board investigator, told the public meeting that the crew failed to realize that "the safety margins that we expect to have in passenger operations" simply "wouldn't have existed" due to the adverse weather.
Despite an experienced captain with knowledge of winter flying, the crew failed to carefully monitor changing weather conditions during the flight and then landed slightly farther down the runway than normal. The plane was substantially damaged, but none of the 49 passengers and three crew members were injured. The flight was operated in conjunction with Northwest Airlines.
Malcolm Brenner, a fatigue and human-factors expert on the board's staff, said the captain wasn't "attending to" flight duties or monitoring weather issues "with the full attention" of a pilot of his experience and training. "We believe the captain was impaired by fatigue." The board hasn't concluded, however, that the crew's schedule that day violated current FAA limits on consecutive flying hours or a maximum workday.
The safety board is expected to adopt recommendations urging the Federal Aviation Administration to take action to ensure that flying schedules give cockpit crews adequate rest. The board has investigated a number of commuter accidents and incidents in recent years. Board members have said that commuter pilots may face particularly strong economic or management pressures to fly long hours and attempt to land in difficult weather conditions.
With the FAA's basic fatigue-prevention rules at least three decades old, the safety board wants airlines and the FAA to implement updated fatigue-management systems that would be more flexible and better able to deal with changes in flying patterns and industry conditions. Board Chairman Mark Rosenker said it is essential for the FAA to enact regulatory changes "to prevent the kinds of things we've been seeing" with the Pinnacle Airlines accident and other recent crashes.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

Can a person buy stock in the RAA's lobbying firm? I have a feeling they'll be billing more hours after this. . .

 

[atlcrashpad]

Sumppin' needs ta be dun wif rest requirements........... dee NTSB needs to twist duh FAA's arm to give mo rest..........

bouyyyyyyyyyyy....

 

[ultrarunner]

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

 

[Soverytired]

Good stuff, Mr. Powers.

(Even a broken clock is right twice a day. )

Here's to something we can all agree on . . . regulatory changes to duty time and rest requirements are desperately needed.
=================================

"We believe the captain was impaired by fatigue."

Board Chairman Mark Rosenker said it is essential for the FAA to enact regulatory changes "to prevent the kinds of things we've been seeing" with the Pinnacle Airlines accident and other recent crashes.
============================

Here's to hoping that after avoiding the issue for 3 decades, through different administrations and lord knows how many NTSB, NASA, Union, and physiological fatigue impact studies . . . THIS TIME it might actually make a difference.

 

[DashTrash400]

Will the 9E crash - no deaths, few injuries - force the FAA to change where the AA LIT crash (a dozen deaths, many injuries) or Corporate Air crash (20 or so deaths) failed?

I'm not counting on it. Once a 767 load of people die and it's pinned on crew fatigue the FAA might change the regs, within 5 or 10 years.

F'ing Worthless A A

 

[~~~^~~~]

Until then the NTSB will give the FAA, no rest...

 

[Poahi]

Do you guys really think with everything going on right now the airlines are going to support greater staffing? At best, the FAA is going to support a a voluntary 'pilot program' addressing the issues, but don't hold your breath on new rest rules.

 

[pilotyip]

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.

 

[Soverytired]

..........

 

[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...