Article on FAA Rest Rules

[HA25]

I've been in the non-sched world my whole career. Both PAX and cargo. .

As which, Chief Pilot or DO?

 

[thunderworm]

What about the supps that fly regular scheduled service for some other airline hauling those pax? Does the rule still not apply because they are a supp and not a domestic although the supps are carrying the same pax? When is a life worth more or less? Is a pax life worth more than a pilots or other crew member? These are the questions I ask myself when people say there should be separate rules for different kinds or operations. I get that the operations can be completely different and some companies will benefit from a more relaxed set of rest rules, but nothing that can't be fixed by hiring more pilots and being more efficient with the ones they have.

 

[HA25]

@thunderworm.... you are onto something. I think anyone that thinks there should be two separate rules with regards to something as critical as rest in operating airplanes needs to get their head examined and possibly stand to lose their medical due to mental issues... the very idea that it's not safe to do it for the one, but its safe to do it for the other is truly insane.

 

[GittinFatter]

I'll keep this short.
I never said the current rules should stay. God knows we need some new and better rules, but the same rules for all airlines is not the answer.

 

[tailwindz]

I've been in the non-sched world my whole career. Both PAX and cargo. While much of the flying is scheduled, much is not! One set of rules is not the answer! Supplemental carriers DO provide a service to the world that sched pax and cargo operations do not. We do need some new rules, but United airlines rules do not mix well with our types of operations. Wars and natural/manmade disasters do not always happen at 8am eastern time. When a major pax carrier shucks and engine in Peru, who gets called to bring them the spare?? "Oh sorry, we can't do it right now, our boys need more sleep!" I really don't want to layover in some parts of the world that we fly too. I will gladly fly an extra hour or two so I don't have to lay over in Somalia.
You can build two different support structures for a bridge, that will be the same height and strength as each other, and be as SAFE as each other;but be different.

How will/can these new rules be bad? "IF" the crews are augmented and the companies install Class A (bunks) rest facilities we can continue to schedule pretty much as we do today.

So, you must be against more pilot jobs, more rest, more comfortable facilities on board.

I think I understand now, this is really about management bonuses and golden parachutes.

 

[spitfire1500]

never mind.....

 

[cessnapilot]

There are no rest rules that can ever address this, constant interruption of sleep cycles makes you fatigued.

Just not true. You can address the issue. You might still be tired, but a lot less tired if you're not allowed to fly 4 legs in the middle of the night. Shorten the max duty period if on the back side of the clock. Rules can address the issue or make it worse.

 

[HA25]

Just not true. You can address the issue. You might still be tired, but a lot less tired if you're not allowed to fly 4 legs in the middle of the night. Shorten the max duty period if on the back side of the clock. Rules can address the issue or make it worse.

you're wasting your time, management pilots don't understand science based rule making.

 

[cessnapilot]

you're wasting your time, management pilots don't understand science based rule making.

I know the deck is stacked against us, but my point was that we can be our worst enemy. I've read how UAL rules won't work for non-sked and it's a different business, etc, etc. This from people on the board here. Are you kidding me? The bravado of "who brings UAL an engine when they shuck one in Peru" is laughable. Hire more pilots and get adequate rest. It's possible. Yes it costs money and yes big business will be against it, but that doesn't mean we should help them in their argument.

but you're right... I'm wasting my time nothing else to do though...

 

[ABXbooger]

What happened to "one level of safety"? 20 years ago the 135 ops were forced to begin complying with 121 rules, and one level of safety was the word. All the regionals cried that there was no way they could be competitive, how has that worked out for them?

This is SCIENCE people, incontrovertible truths compiled by a governmental agency that has historically been reactive versus proactive. No matter what you believe do you expect us to alter our biology?

 

[pilotyip]

Just not true. You can address the issue. You might still be tired, but a lot less tired if you're not allowed to fly 4 legs in the middle of the night. Shorten the max duty period if on the back side of the clock. Rules can address the issue or make it worse.

Read above, I said that was a good rule that time on the back side of the clock count for double, I think something like that was proposed that time between 0100 and 0400 count as double duty, or something like that. If called out at 2300 your first day back to work, when you have not slept in 14 hours and then fly until 0900 the next morning even under those rules, you are still fatigued. BTW Does anyone support controlled napping in the cockpit, such as allowed in many other countries? A proven fatigued relief, and all of those who fly on the back side of the clock know it. Or is this about more pilot to do the smae work so you can move up that list and grab a CA's seat?

 

[tailwindz]

Read above, I said that was a good rule that time on the back side of the clock count for double, I think something like that was proposed that time between 0100 and 0400 count as double duty, or something like that. If called out at 2300 your first day back to work, when you have not slept in 14 hours and then fly until 0900 the next morning even under those rules, you are still fatigued. BTW Does anyone support controlled napping in the cockpit, such as allowed in many other countries? A proven fatigued relief, and all of those who fly on the back side of the clock know it. Or is this about more pilot to do the smae work so you can move up that list and grab a CA's seat?

I support "NAPPING" in a bunk! If it takes more pilots so we can all get sleep while doing the job, so be it. The cost of doing business.

 

[HA25]

I support "NAPPING" in a bunk! If it takes more pilots so we can all get sleep while doing the job, so be it. The cost of doing business.

Yip is a guy who's never had to show up to a wide body jumbo at 10PM local and begin a trip with a SCHEDULED 18 hour duty day, two legs and 12 hours of flight time from one third world country to another. All this after working on a totally different clock two days before. Your wasting your time arguing with him.

 

[Birddog]

BTW Does anyone support controlled napping in the cockpit, such as allowed in many other countries? A proven fatigued relief, and all of those who fly on the back side of the clock know it.

I think it is a good idea, and think it will help, but I do not support any extension of duty time or justifying longer duty periods based on its use. There are too many things that can occur that will either keep you from sleeping or require you to stay awake to bank on being able to bank on it.

What I would support are rest periods that are based on circadian rhythms actual research. If it were up to me, I would not allow any 20 to 28 hour layovers if you have crossed more than 3 time zones. 12 to 14 hours is great, and 30 is too, but around that 24 hour mark you are going to work right when you are ready to go back to sleep.

 

[pilotyip]

Yip is a guy who's never had to show up to a wide body jumbo at 10PM local and begin a trip with a SCHEDULED 18 hour duty day, two legs and 12 hours of flight time from one third world country to another. All this after working on a totally different clock two days before. Your wasting your time arguing with him.

How about a P-3 24 hours of duty, 17 hours of flight time, no stops, three pilots 0100 to 0100 the next day. Does that count? How about a DA-20 18 hours duty, 11 hours flight time to six stops in two different foreign countries with two pilots. Does that count? Or does it have to be in wide body, with crew rest station to experience fatigue?

I support "NAPPING" in a bunk! If it takes more pilots so we can all get sleep while doing the job, so be it. The cost of doing business.

and when you ad more cost, less people purchase the product. May be very good for senior peo0ple, not so good for everyone else

 

[Nevergreen]

How about a P-3 24 hours of duty, 17 hours of flight time, no stops, three pilots 0100 to 0100 the next day. Does that count? How about a DA-20 18 hours duty, 11 hours flight time to six stops in two different foreign countries with two pilots. Does that count? Or does it have to be in wide body, with crew rest station to experience fatigue?

Yip,

So you are saying that is safe? Are you saying that should be allowed? Are you saying that a companies profits should be more important the health and safety of a crew or passengers?

I regularly work 18 + hour duty days on the 747-200. Are you saying that the owner of my company should expect me to sacrifice my health and safety so that his profit margin should be 1% higher or less?

We need reasonable and safe FT/DT. What we have now is not even close.

If the industry is so concerned with our health and safety; where is their counter proposal? All the industry wants to do is to keep the ridiculous system we have now.

If we all operate under the same rules, then no company will have an advantage over another.

 

[tailwindz]

How about a P-3 24 hours of duty, 17 hours of flight time, no stops, three pilots 0100 to 0100 the next day. Does that count? How about a DA-20 18 hours duty, 11 hours flight time to six stops in two different foreign countries with two pilots. Does that count? Or does it have to be in wide body, with crew rest station to experience fatigue?

That sounds stupid.

 

[HA25]

How about a P-3 24 hours of duty, 17 hours of flight time, no stops, three pilots 0100 to 0100 the next day. Does that count? How about a DA-20 18 hours duty, 11 hours flight time to six stops in two different foreign countries with two pilots. Does that count? Or does it have to be in wide body, with crew rest station to experience fatigue?

the rare occasional military mission doesn't count.. I know we did some during war time, as well... I'm talking about routine schedules.

And if you schedule 18 hour days in a DA20 at the place you work, with 2 man crews, then you REALLY are bigger bottom feeder than I ever gave you credit for.

 

[pilotyip]

Yip,

So you are saying..........er the same rules, then no company will have an advantage over another.

I was only responding to a statement I never get to experience fatigue. There are other places besides int'l wide bodies that experience fatigue.

That sounds stupid.

Why because only int'l wide bodies experience fatigue

And if you schedule 18 hour days in a DA20 at the place you work, with 2 man crews, then you REALLY are bigger bottom feeder than I ever gave you credit for.

You can not be scheduled for more than 14 hours, but when offered the chance to come home from MMIO, at 1900 after being on duty of 13 hours. You determine if you are capable of doing the job. I you got a good nights rest, a two hour nap at CYHM while waiting for cargo, be home by 0000, I am going for it. There are other days that you will be fatigued 7 hours into the flight. There is no one set of rules that will cover all fatigue rules. Crews will still fly fatigued, and many times like the crew on 3407, they do it to themselves.

Yip, tell me again what the domestic 121 duty day limit is? Just an FYI, under supplemental it's infinity.

As long as you don't exceed 8 hours of pilot time. BTW So is more days on the road resting is the solution for int'l wide bodies?

 

[HA25]

Yip, tell me again what the domestic 121 duty day limit is? Just an FYI, under supplemental it's infinity.