A Question for Blue-Aid Drinkers?

[TonyC]

The key to success was your circadian rhythm. The research clearly supports this.

I don't believe anyone will argue that rules based on science that incorporate the effects of circadian rhythms would be far batter overall than arbitrary limits based on well-intentioned yet less well-informed advocates of safety of flight. However, removing one of these arbitrary rules in favor of NO rule hardly accomplishes that goal.

Unfortunately, trying to legislate common sense seldom works. You just can't cover all the possibilities without making the regulations incredibly complex.

You acknowledge that the best solution will be, by its very nature, complex. How, then, can you advocate the simple removal of a strict rule as part of a solution to your problem. (As far as I can tell, the only problem you seek to alleviate is the LGB layover followed by a LGB-JFK redeye.)

However, the European solution seems to make a lot more sense than FAA rules that allow some very tiring trips. Maybe we need to take some baby steps before overhauling our entire system of rules on crew rest and flight time.

Again, I must ask: How does removing a sensible limit qualify as a "baby step" in the quest to overhaul the current system into a complex set of rules that recognize circadian rhythms?!?!

The guys who are working for this change at jB are trying to improve pilot quality of life and safety. They also happen to be the same pilots who build our trip pairings. They are not management pilots trying to "screw" the work force. Quite the contrary, they are line pilots on the scheduling committee who are trying to improve our personal productivity and quality of life. If these pairings are popular, they will continue. If nobody likes them, the scheduling committee would react accordingly. Personally, for the reasons stated above and based on what I've seen with our flight attendants, I think these trips will be very popular and will go very senior.

In the utopian Blue world, it must seem that everything WILL work out the way you dream, and if by some incredibly minute chance it does not, all will STILL be well. It will be a simple matter to go back to the FAA and ask them to reinstate the rule, or rescind the exemption, and all will be well. Of course, the ONLY trip that will be affected is the JFK-LGB-JFK trip, and pilots will always have full control over pairing construction and scheduling parameters. In fact, you could probably have the FAA incorporate that language into the exemption you seek, just to be sure, right?

We can't control how other companies might pervert any rule changes we ask for, but that doesn't mean the changes aren't a good idea that enhance both safety and productivity. Ultimately, if the FAA approves this exemption based on scientific data, we should claim it as a victory and a step in the right direction to improve our lives and our performance, as better rested pilots.

That's exactly right, you cannot control how other companies WILL pervert any rule change. And you can NOT control how JetBlue will pervert the rule change, either.

BUT, you can pat yourself on the back as you arrive in the JFK terminal area at the end of your 16 hour day and look at the TCAS targets that surround you. They also will be affected by any rule change, and may not fare as well in the rest department as do you, with your blue pairings and blue schedules. Just like you, they'll be more "productive," and just like you, they'll be the worse for the wear. Look at the TCAS again. How many of those crews will be fully rested, and how many will be the victims of your rule change, stretched beyond limits of fatigue in the quest of productivity? How many will be safe? How safe will you feel?


P.S. I couldn't help but notice the personal pride you showed in supporting an effort to make yourself "more productive." Productivity is essentially a measure of how much work can be extruded from a commodity for how little cost. That would make YOU, the pilot, the commodity. Even JetBlue considers you to be a commodity, a cost center. Don't fool yourself. If you really want to be more productive, why not offer to work for half pay? That would double your productivity, right?

You ought to talk to some folks that used to live in a purple utopia. You might be surprised.

 

[USNFDX]

Tony C

Nail on the HEAD!

Excellent post.

 

[dgs]

However, removing one of these arbitrary rules in favor of NO rule hardly accomplishes that goal.

How, then, can you advocate the simple removal of a strict rule as part of a solution to your problem.

You exactly missed the point that we will not be asking to delete the rule. Any request for an exemption will come with extensive conditions and protocols that are designed specifically improve rest and safety by more closely matching circadian rhythms. I think that is a step in the right direction.

BUT, you can pat yourself on the back as you arrive in the JFK terminal area at the end of your 16 hour day and look at the TCAS targets that surround you. They also will be affected by any rule change, and may not fare as well in the rest department as do you, with your blue pairings and blue schedules. ... How many will be safe? How safe will you feel?

To the extent that these rule changes (note I didn't say deletions) improve safety by ensuring BETTER rested crews (including me), I'm pretty comfortable entering the terminal environment under those conditions. BTW, we enter the terminal environment at JFK every day with TCAS targets that have just flown over the pond from all over the world, some with very long duty days. That's life in this business. I, for one, would prefer to be better rested to deal with any of their mistakes.

 

[Beerme]

BTW, we enter the terminal environment at JFK every day with TCAS targets that have just flown over the pond from all over the world, some with very long duty days. That's life in this business. I, for one, would prefer to be better rested to deal with any of their mistakes.

Don't forget, those other TCAS targets that just crossed the pond are augmented to help prevent the fatigue factor we're discussing and also promote safety.

 

[Daedalus]

P.S. I couldn't help but notice the personal pride you showed in supporting an effort to make yourself "more productive." Productivity is essentially a measure of how much work can be extruded from a commodity for how little cost. That would make YOU, the pilot, the commodity. Even JetBlue considers you to be a commodity, a cost center. Don't fool yourself. If you really want to be more productive, why not offer to work for half pay? That would double your productivity, right?

I don't know what dictionary you use to define "productivity" but it indicates, in part, the basis for your opinion. Productivity improvements increase efficiency which allows airlines in a capital intensive industry to remain financially solvent, and grow. This is a big reason why JB is doing well amid a sea of financial ruin by many of its competitors. JB pilots are evaluating if specific exemptions to the FARs will make their flying both safer and more productive.

To say that JB obtaining such an exemption will only open the door for abuse and perversion of the FARs is hyperbole and flawed logic. If this was in fact the case then there would be ample evidence of such behavior, and the responsibility to enforce such abuses would fall upon the FAA, not for JB to cease and desist in its efforts to improve its own operations. It sounds like you're saying that the system of rules cannot be followed, therefore JB has no right to make further changes to a precarious operating environment. If true, then there is a much bigger problem that exists, yet no one in the profession is doing anything substantive to fix it....of course all in the name of improving safety.

If JB's pilots and management can work together effectively to bring about solutions to their operations that work to improve safety and efficiency, then they should be allowed pursue such actions. Even if the majority of other airlines cannot work in the same manner due to their own self-induced dysfunctionality brought on by years of abuses and greed by both sides. Nor despite structurally different operational setups (i.e., LCC point-to-point versus legacy hub-and-spoke).

If jetBlue pilots can fly 8-10 hours within a 14 hour crew duty day, when everyone else can only fly 7-8 hours in the same 14 hours, then the burden does not fall upon JB, but those who must adapt to the most capable operator.

The naysayers haven't convinced me yet.

 

[TonyC]

I don't know what dictionary you use to define "productivity" but it indicates, in part, the basis for your opinion.

I don't know why you'd want to quibble over the definition of "productivity," but I'm perfectly happy to go there.

PRODUCTIVITY
Pronunciation: `prowduk'tivitee


WordNet Dictionary

. Definition: [n] the quality of being productive or having the power to produce
. [n] (economics) the ratio of the quantity and quality of units produced to the labor per unit of time


. Synonyms: productiveness

. Antonyms: unproductiveness

. See Also: fecundity, fruitfulness, ratio




Webster's 1913 Dictionary

. Definition: \Pro`duc*tiv"i*ty\, n.
The quality or state of being productive; productiveness.
--Emerson.

. Not indeed as the product, but as the producing power,
. the productivity. --Coleridge.




Biology Dictionary

. Definition: Amount of production over a given period of time. Expressed as a rate such as g/m2 per day, kg/ha per year, etc.

Glossary

. Definition: the amount of work a person accomplishes in a given period of time.

(As you read the "economics" definition, remember that you, the pilot, are the LABOR.)

Since your pay is based on time, I stand by my assertion that productivity is a ratio of how much work you (the pilot) do, relative to the amount of money the company pays you. If your goal is, as you assert, to improve productivity, why aren't you willing to work for less money? If you are unwilling to work for less money, there must be another motive.

. (By the way. If you get to do these single duty period double-transcons, will JetBlue cease to offer to the flying public the option of taking the red-eye LGB-JFK? Or will there still be some poor (less productive?) schmuck stuck flying the redeye anyway?)

To say that JB obtaining such an exemption will only open the door for abuse and perversion of the FARs is hyperbole and flawed logic.

To think that it will NOT open the door for abuse and perversion in naive.

If JB's pilots and management can work together effectively to bring about solutions to their operations that work to improve safety and efficiency, then they should be allowed pursue such actions.

Agreed. We all applaud you for the wonderful way that you get along with your management, and the successes you are enjoying. Don't expect us, though, to hold that same dreamy-eyed gaze at you while you try to make rule changes that will jeapordize our safety.

If jetBlue pilots can fly 8-10 hours within a 14 hour crew duty day, when everyone else can only fly 7-8 hours in the same 14 hours,...

I'll use a word I used before. Naive. (Look it up in a dictionary if you care.)

The naysayers haven't convinced me yet.

Consider the score even, then. You haven't convinced us either.

Shall we take a vote??

 

[active_herk]

here is a poll for you Tony C

Tony C

Here is a poll so we can all see how everyone feels.

http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?threadid=23502

 

[G4G5]

I don't know what dictionary you use to define "productivity" but it indicates, in part, the basis for your opinion. Productivity improvements increase efficiency which allows airlines in a capital intensive industry to remain financially solvent, and grow. This is a big reason why JB is doing well amid a sea of financial ruin by many of its competitors. JB pilots are evaluating if specific exemptions to the FARs will make their flying both safer and more productive.

To say that JB obtaining such an exemption will only open the door for abuse and perversion of the FARs is hyperbole and flawed logic. If this was in fact the case then there would be ample evidence of such behavior, and the responsibility to enforce such abuses would fall upon the FAA, not for JB to cease and desist in its efforts to improve its own operations. It sounds like you're saying that the system of rules cannot be followed, therefore JB has no right to make further changes to a precarious operating environment. If true, then there is a much bigger problem that exists, yet no one in the profession is doing anything substantive to fix it....of course all in the name of improving safety.

If JB's pilots and management can work together effectively to bring about solutions to their operations that work to improve safety and efficiency, then they should be allowed pursue such actions. Even if the majority of other airlines cannot work in the same manner due to their own self-induced dysfunctionality brought on by years of abuses and greed by both sides. Nor despite structurally different operational setups (i.e., LCC point-to-point versus legacy hub-and-spoke).

If jetBlue pilots can fly 8-10 hours within a 14 hour crew duty day, when everyone else can only fly 7-8 hours in the same 14 hours, then the burden does not fall upon JB, but those who must adapt to the most capable operator.

The naysayers haven't convinced me yet.

And none of the JetBlue folks have been able to answer this question?

How is it safer? How does removing the 8 in 24 restriction make this industry safer?

Until any of you can answer that question, you need to re evaluate your position.

 

[G4G5]

Re: here is a poll for you Tony C

Tony C

Here is a poll so we can all see how everyone feels.

http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?threadid=23502

No need for a pole just email your opinion to:

[email protected]

She is in charge of the Fatigue Countermeasures Group, aka Zteam at the NASA Ames Research center


Melissa M. Mallis, Ph.D. is a NASA Research Psychologist and is the Principal Investigator for the Fatigue Countermeasures Group. She received her B.S. in Physics from Villanova University, her Ph.D. in Biomedical Science from Drexel University and completed a pre-doctoral fellowship, under the direction of Dr. David F. Dinges, at the Unit for Experimental Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine. As part of her doctoral training, Dr. Mallis was a contributor to US Air Force multi-center project on countermeasures for jet lag and sleep deprivation in which she reviewed various fatigue-detection technologies and alerting countermeasures. She also conducted, for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Federal Highway Administration, the first systematic, controlled, double-blind validation trial on six promising biobehavioral technologies designed to predict varying alertness/fatigue levels. Her current research focuses on the detection of fatigue with the use of fatigue and alertness monitoring technologies, the evaluation of performance effects of fatigue, and the evaluation of fatigue countermeasures on human performance and alertness levels.


I am sure that the FAA will be asking NASA for thier advice and if enough people make their opinions know, I am sure that the voices of the many will out weigh the voices of the few.

If this ever gets to the FAA's NPRM status, then you will really see a puplic out cry on the subject. Please feel free to post her email on your companies intra web site, I did it at my airline.

 

[B190Captain]

As one unamed FAA official said, "The Federal Aviation Regulations are written in blood."

Not Kool-Aid.

Even the FAR's that we presently abide by are pretty tough especially for us 121 commuter dogs. Why change things for the worst?

If approved, other airline management groups will follow, NOT GOOD!!