• NC Software is proud to announce the release of APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook version 10.0. Click here to view APDL on the Apple App store and install now.
  • Logbook Pro for Apple iOS version 8.1 is now available on the App Store. Major update including signature endorsements and dark/light theme support. Click here to install now.

FAA withdraws flightcrew duty, rest NPRM

diggertwo

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Posts
65
Total Time
3500+
http://www.pilotbug.com/?p=1668

The FAA issued a withdrawal of its 1995 Notice of Published Rulemaking (NPRM) on establishing rest, duty and flight time limitation of flight crewmembers. In that document, the FAA stated the NPRM had become outdated and because it raised so many issues that the FAA needed to address it decided to that new proposal will follow.

Long before and in the 14 years since, the rest, duty and flighttime requirements have been studied continually and proposal after proposal have been put out there and nothing has come from it. The February crash of Colgan 3407 in Buffalo, NY was just the last of the so-called “clarion call” regarding what to do about tired pilots. It is simply unbelievable that a NPRM has languished for nearly a decade and a half without any final rule on duty and rest.
 

Homer Jay

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 6, 2002
Posts
321
Total Time
9000
This is great news as it shows they're proceeding with the new proposal. HURRY UP!
 

Axel

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2003
Posts
1,132
While I agree that the rules need to be updated, be careful what you wish for, Homer. The law of unintended consequences is lurking in the shadows.
 

waveflyer

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Posts
10,005
Total Time
12000
Wow- unintended consequences... What's vague bs argument(!) So we clearly should do nothing- that's the answer. (shakes head) Why don't you get specific- then write letters and make your voice heard- our rest rules are ridiculous, non-scientific political half measures. They should be changed- and if we end up with more political/corporate compromises- then we should stand up to that too. It's hard for me to see that the rules could be less effective. And if you disagree- I doubt youve worked at a place that routinely schedules you up to the 'legal' max.
 

samballs

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 26, 2005
Posts
1,511
Total Time
000000
While I agree that the rules need to be updated, be careful what you wish for, Homer. The law of unintended consequences is lurking in the shadows.
You are the girl that votes yes, just because of fear
 

Axel

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2003
Posts
1,132
Whoa!!!

Spring loaded to the pissed off position, there doncha think? I believe I said somewhere in there that the rest rules needed work....oh, there it is! The very first sentence. Good thing it wasn't a snake.

So do the rest/duty rules need an overhaul? Of course they do. I am all for it, as is every other professional pilot. Just be aware that while we will be better rested and therefore safer as a whole, there will be burdens borne because of it and it will be we who bear them.

As for unintended consequences, well by their nature we'll just have to see what they are when they surface. I rather doubt they will bother the congress, the FAA or airline management as much as they will bother those of us in the trenches.
 
Last edited:

waveflyer

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Posts
10,005
Total Time
12000
No- not pissed at all. Bored and tired of the illogic fear mongering in this decade's politics. True- I don't want to be forced to be less productive and then have to spend more nights away from home-and more days at work- so I've already written the FAA, both senators and my congressman and told them my position.

Again, I think you speak from the perspective of never having born the weight of the current rules- therefore your concern with the changes.

By all means correct me if I'm wrong.
 

Axel

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2003
Posts
1,132
...

Again, I think you speak from the perspective of never having born the weight of the current rules- therefore your concern with the changes.

By all means correct me if I'm wrong.

You are corrected. I have lived it and worse: I worked for a Part 91 operator without even the rudimentary protections the current rules provide and was fired for refusing a trip. I have been living under the 121 rules and scheduled to the limits for 10+ years. So yes, I am speaking from a position of knowledge and experience, your attempted condescension notwithstanding.

I have not contacted my legislators in this regard, but that is because my experience with them in previous issues leads me to believe this will be met with the same response. The apathy is not on my part, but the term "pissing in the wind" comes to mind when I think of the honorable gentlemen who represent me (supposedly).

I have contacted my union rep's, who testified before congress, but ultimately the decision, whether in the form of proposed legislation or a NPRM will come from grandstanding legislators or out of touch FAA drones who are in fact here to help us.

As such, my concern with the effect of an overhaul of the rest rules by the FAA and the congress is precisely the accusation you make against me: that they have not had to live under the old rules, will not have to live under the new rules and are not in a position to accurately predict the consequences of their actions

I fear there is a certain naivete in that any change to the rest rules will be for the better. From the standpoint of safety that is certainly true. It will be interesting to see the reaction when we realize the true nature of the sacrifices a bunch of desk-jockeys thrust upon us. In this respect, I expect it is you who have not borne the effects of and who therefore lacks the experience with well intentioned ignorance and indifference.
 
Last edited:

Daddy

Well-known member
Joined
May 21, 2004
Posts
554
Total Time
Enough
While I agree that the rules need to be updated, be careful what you wish for, Homer. The law of unintended consequences is lurking in the shadows.

Well said, Axel! Glad to see someone sees through the BS. People who think things are going to suddenly get better for everyone and that the FAA will fix it all are kidding themselves...they are as political and corrupt as any politically motivated organization. Who is looking out for the pilots here? No one of consequence...stand by for those unintended consequences
 

planejockey

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Posts
153
Total Time
lost
The FAA is and will be corrupt. To figure this out you can look at the Licensing procedure, the airspace system, security, and airline safety.

First licensing in the GA world is based on cash infusion to the DPE ( I know many DPEs that will fall people on small stuff so they could get the re test fee. For example I will hang my neck out there, I had to "re-take" my MEI because I didn't read my checklist out loud. My re test was .2 and was completed during a taxi. My "mistake" although was not in PTS I was made to pay the DPE $300 extra. The FSDO is too busy to do MEI rides. After my bust the guy did the same type of crap to atleast 10-15 people before the FSDO cracked the whip. On the airline side the FAA does what the companies what it to do therefore they created the SIC BS and allowed pax to be flown in a 100 seat RJ without an ATP. Enter Colgan accident FO with little to no experience in icing conditions.

Second, the airspace system is so jacked up the only people that benefit it is maybe the computer guys that works at the FAA. We are creating more and more lateral and vertical deviations because of the inadequacy of the system. It simply cannot support the volume of traffic. If NASA can find funds to blow up the moon the FAA can find a few dollars to redo the airspace system.

Security, all I have to say is TSA

Safety, SWA, AA etc flying hundreds of a/c with ADs that were not addressed and risking the lives of the millions. It seams like the left hand doesn't know where its finger has been. The FAA officials for those airlines need to be put on trial for allowing such an egregious actions in the MX procedure. As a military officer if I risked the lives of people working for me knowingly you can bet that I will be in a ton of trouble.

If you want to see the model govt branch look towards the United States Coast Guard and what it does to keep the maritime industry safe. The FAA is the complete opposite. keep in mind the CG is smaller than the NYC police force and takes care of the US and world vessel safety. Throw in Iraq, Somalia, and other deployments as well.
 
Last edited:

waveflyer

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Posts
10,005
Total Time
12000
You guys are apathetic, cynical, and feel out of control-
so you can take the time to type on this board, but you can't write a REAL letter....?
Much easier to blame, sit on the sidelines, right? A lot easier to b!tch about how others don't take responsibility, right?

How do you define "loser"?
I know how I do.
 

Axel

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2003
Posts
1,132
You guys are apathetic, cynical, and feel out of control-
so you can take the time to type on this board, but you can't write a REAL letter....?
Much easier to blame, sit on the sidelines, right? A lot easier to b!tch about how others don't take responsibility, right?

How do you define "loser"?
I know how I do.

Apathetic: No. Cynical: Yes. I have exercised what control I have. I did, in fact, write a real letter; well, actually an e-mail.

As for the rest, that is a bit of a stretch. Kind of similar to your incorrect assumption that I had not worked under the current rest rules.

I have not contacted my legislators in this regard, but that is because my experience with them in previous issues leads me to believe this will be met with the same response. The apathy is not on my part, but the term "pissing in the wind" comes to mind when I think of the honorable gentlemen who represent me (supposedly).

I have contacted my union rep's, who testified before congress...
 
Last edited:

GuinessGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Posts
238
Total Time
7000+
Careful what you wish for..............85 hrs of credit with 17+ days off a month will go the way Pan Am went.
"hey, kid.....gear up.......i remember the days of getting 4 or 5 days off in a row, but still getting almost 90 hours of credit......."
 

PCL_128

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2002
Posts
15,296
Total Time
5000+
Yeah, to hell with safety. Let's fly 20 hours block per day so we can get an extra couple of days off. :rolleyes:
 

crj567

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Posts
2,052
All the FAA really needs to do is create a "no fault crew fatigue" policy. If you are tired, call in and you would have no disciplinary action. I think any other kind of regulation on this issue is gonna be so subjective as to be completely useless. Everyone knows a 12 hour day with solid weather and 6 approaches is far more tiring than a 14 or even 16 hour day with clear blue skies.

-I can think of a couple of 12 hour days when I probably would have used such a policy.
 

General Lee

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Posts
20,442
Total Time
A lot
All the FAA really needs to do is create a "no fault crew fatigue" policy. If you are tired, call in and you would have no disciplinary action. I think any other kind of regulation on this issue is gonna be so subjective as to be completely useless. Everyone knows a 12 hour day with solid weather and 6 approaches is far more tiring than a 14 or even 16 hour day with clear blue skies.

-I can think of a couple of 12 hour days when I probably would have used such a policy.

Yes, but why is it most of your captains call in for the same reason before each of your trips? There is a reason why you only fly with Reserve Captains---they have to fly with you.....Sounds like you aren't liked in cockpit, as well as on forums. Get back to the fry machine McFry!


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
Last edited:

saabservant

disgruntled
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Posts
337
Total Time
7850
Careful what you wish for..............85 hrs of credit with 17+ days off a month will go the way Pan Am went.
"hey, kid.....gear up.......i remember the days of getting 4 or 5 days off in a row, but still getting almost 90 hours of credit......."

True, but we also demand pay improvements while in section 6, and tell alpa representation to go to h***when they tell us to concede....
 

Skywest Pylot

Well-known member
Joined
May 18, 2005
Posts
338
Total Time
7000+
Careful what you wish for..............85 hrs of credit with 17+ days off a month will go the way Pan Am went.
"hey, kid.....gear up.......i remember the days of getting 4 or 5 days off in a row, but still getting almost 90 hours of credit......."

I don't know why guys are hell bent on keeping flight hours and credit hours way up. IMO, a 75hr monthly average would be perfect with a an adjustment in pay rates to make up the difference. For me there is way too much on the line to be flying fatigued.
 
Top