JBLU in hot water with FAA

[3BCat]

Lets see, they called it a "study" about ten times, but it wasn't an experiment or test.

Ok, whatever jB says must be true. Management never lies.

I find that ironic.

FJ

Have you ever done engine trend monitoring? What would that be a test flight?

 

[BlueSurfer]

Hey Falcon Jet,

Did U ever fly falcons out of Opa Locka? JC

 

[FDJ2]

Have you ever done engine trend monitoring? What would that be a test flight?

That would be "engine trend monitoring". It's part of most FAA approved maintenance programs and is incompliance with the FARs.

Now exactly which FAR authorizes scheduled domestic flights to have greater than eight scheduled block hours on a two leg flight within 24 hours?

 

[3BCat]

Did I stutter? Engine Trend Monitoring. It's called an analogy. Likening one thing, to another by way of comparison. (i.e. Gathering data on fatigue of pilots vs. gathering data on fatigue of engines.) I think it's a fairly good analogy at that.

Can you say "Supplemental Rules"?

 

[Falconjet]

Cub: I have.

That is a terrible analogy. One is required by the company and the FAA. The other was a "study" independently intiated by the company without proper authorization.

Not even close to the same.

Blue Surfer: only on a TAD basis. CC and Mobile mostly for me.

 

[3BCat]

Cub: I have.

That is a terrible analogy. One is required by the company and the FAA. The other was a "study" independently intiated by the company without proper authorization.

Not even close to the same.

Blue Surfer: only on a TAD basis. CC and Mobile mostly for me.

Thats Mr. Cub to you, bub. I say again, Is it your opinion that gathering data is what constitutes a test flight?

 

[Falconjet]

Excuse me "Mr Cub":

That is all you have?

I never even came close to saying that those were "test flights".

Were they conducting "tests" during a revenue flight? Sounds like it. But if you want to call that a "study" or whatever I don't really care.

What matters is what the FAA thinks of their "study".

And on that matter, time will tell what the ramifications will be for jB and those pilots. I wish no ill will toward the pilots, nor you.

I don't agree with them trying to find a way to extend duty limits, but that is simply my humble opinion, worth the nothing you paid for it.

FJ

Oh yeah, you can call me bub if you like. Sir.

 

[FDJ2]

Did I stutter? Engine Trend Monitoring. It's called an analogy. Likening one thing, to another by way of comparison. (i.e. Gathering data on fatigue of pilots vs. gathering data on fatigue of engines.) I think it's a fairly good analogy at that.

You did stutter, because the engine being monitored is being operated in accordance with the FARs, the pilots flying over 8 hours of scheduled block on a domestic turn are not.

Try another analogy.

 

[PCL_128]

Can you say "Supplemental Rules"?

Can you tell me if you have an Op Spec for your operation that includes using Supplemental rules for flying 121 domestically? No, I didn't think so. Thanks for playing, though.

 

[HomerJ]

Everyone, if you stop responding to people such as FDJ2, this thread will quickly die. You are never going to convince him that JB isn't the sole cause for all his companies' woes. Never mind 9-11, Airtran at his home hub, and his management's thievery over the past few years. He would like nothing more than for JB to truly be in hot water with the feds. Even though we got a letter from the FAA over a week ago stating the case was now closed, he won't shut it if you keep responding. So do the guy a favor, and let him realize there's other things in life besides finding articles about the supposed slow death of LCC's and the amazing comeback of the dinosaur.

 

[FDJ2]

You are never going to convince him that JB isn't the sole cause for all his companies' woes.

When did I ever say it was, but nice try changing the subject. Which is after all, JBLU's "test flights" with paying passengers onboard, contrary to the FARs.

Maybe you could be constructive. Could you please post the FAR that JBLU used which authorizes a scheduled domestic turn with over eight hours of block. Thanks in advance.

 

[JP4user]

JP4user and "tool" sononomous

"sononomous"?

Now who is the tool?

 

[JP4user]

When did I ever say it was, but nice try changing the subject. Which is after all, JBLU's "test flights" with paying passengers onboard, contrary to the FARs.

Maybe you could be constructive. Could you please post the FAR that JBLU used which authorizes a scheduled domestic turn with over eight hours of block. Thanks in advance.

I wonder if this test program was thought up by the same fools that decided to release private passenger data a while back?

 

[elag777]

"sononomous"?

Now who is the tool?

"Synonymous" my bad you still win the tool contest! spell check doesn't help with that one!

 

[Spectre]

Spectre seems to care about nothing but stock prices and $$$$$.

He's sounding pretty defensive - probably was one of the 29 - hoping the FAA doesn't send him a letter! Bet you guys wish you sent in a NASA form last year! Don't worry, with all the $$$ you're making it'll pay for a good attorney.



This is fun!

No, this is more fun...I don't really care about stock prices...up 25% now since last week. And, no, I wasn't one of the 29 volunteers either. However, it seems to me like FEDEX should take the lead in the study of fatigue rather than JetBlue. Don't you guys bend up at least one airplane a year due to pilot fatigue? Heck, just do a GOOGLE search on FEDEX and crashes and you'll find many, many articles. Here's one:

Fatigue can defeat pilots' proven performance records, progressive company policies and proven procedures.
The object lesson comes from the July 26, 2002, collision with trees on final approach of a Federal Express (FedEx) B727 cargo jet at Tallahassee, Fla. The three pilots survived the crash, but their airplane was destroyed.
The fatigue factor was woven throughout the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) final hearing on the case last week.
"Much more work needs to be done on the fatigue issue, especially on the back side of the clock," said NTSB Member John Goglia. The "back side of the clock" is the expression often used to describe the time from midnight to about six a.m., when the human body's natural demand for sleep is greatest. As one of his last official acts after nine years on the board, Goglia chaired the hearing. He noted with dismay that the accident occurred even though FedEx "is one of the more enlightened companies regarding the fatigue issue."
Updating obsolescent flight time and duty time regulations has been on the NTSB "Most Wanted" list of aviation safety improvements since its inception in 1990. The FedEx crash case has focused attention on this issue, as it marks at least the third crash in which the safety board has cited pilot fatigue as a contributing factor.

 

[A350]

Spectre:

Don't stoop to the level of throwing stones......we all live in a glass house in this business.

A350

 

[sandman2122]

Spectre:

Don't change the subject, last I recall this thread was about how Jetblue is in hot water with the FAA for flying >8 hrs with two crewmembers - and not allowing the RFO to perform any flying duties because you guys were conducting company directed fatigue experiments with paying passengers onboard.

Just getting you back on topic.

 

[FDJ2]

Don't change the subject, last I recall this thread was about how Jetblue is in hot water with the FAA for flying >8 hrs with two crewmembers - and not allowing the RFO to perform any flying duties because you guys were conducting company directed fatigue experiments with paying passengers onboard.

Just getting you back on topic.

Was there a RFO onboard? I didn't think they had a crew rest seat in the back and rest breaks scheduled for the cockpit crew.

Any of you Blue dudes know if there was an RFO or just an observer onboard and which supplemental rule was used for scheduling the flight for >8 hours on a domestic turn.

 

[Spectre]

Spectre:

Don't change the subject, last I recall this thread was about how Jetblue is in hot water with the FAA for flying >8 hrs with two crewmembers - and not allowing the RFO to perform any flying duties because you guys were conducting company directed fatigue experiments with paying passengers onboard.

Just getting you back on topic.

I think I'm right on topic. FEDEX pilots get legal rest, yet they still bend up planes due to fatigue in the cockpit. Maybe it's not the number of legal hours flown in a day or the number of hours you rest between flights. Maybe doing a daylight turn 9 hours and reducing the duty day to 14 or 15 hours (instead of 16) is a possible alternative. It's better than flying a red-eye followed by a day sleep and a night flight. Other fatigue reducing schedules were tried, but only the few "over 8 hour flying" schedules are highlighted by ALPA and the media.

If JB can find new methods to schedule flights and schedule rest that allows pilots to avoid fatigue in the cockpit, why not give it a try? NASA studies on fatigue were done decades ago. There really hasn't been any new scientific studies done on this topic.

How JB gathers data or conducts their tests may be in question. But I really don't think JB's safety record or their efforts to make flying more safe is in question.

 

[Bavarian Chef]

Was there a RFO onboard? I didn't think they had a crew rest seat in the back and rest breaks scheduled for the cockpit crew.

Any of you Blue dudes know if there was an RFO or just an observer onboard and which supplemental rule was used for scheduling the flight for >8 hours on a domestic turn.

WHO CARES? The FAA has already ruled in this case. It is closed.

For the record, not everyone at jb wants to do transcon turns (including me). And yes, the current rules are b.s. and can lead to fatigue as well. Legal fatigue.

I can't believe this stoopid thread has gone this long. The FAA isn't gonna allow transcon turns. You people need to go check out the Delta Jumpseat thread. It ranks high on my list of ... "Well I could go outside and enjoy the weather/kids, I could have sex with my wife, or maybe I could workout, no, I will just sit here and surf porn and flightinfo at the same time" ... things to do today.

 

[FDJ2]

WHO CARES?

You ought to care.

BTW, which supplemental rule were they using for domestic turns greater than 8 hours?

 

[radarlove]

"There's nothing to see here, please move along..."

 

[FDJ2]

"There's nothing to see here, please move along..."

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

I guess quite a few guys wish this had never become public knowledge. That's understandable. It must be an embarrassment.

Nevertheless, JBLU pilots said this flight was flown in a manner consistant with the FARs under supplemental rules, yet none of them can provide which rule allows a greater than 8 hour domestic turn.

I readily admit that I don't know all there is to know about the FARs, so could some one please tell us which supplemental rule was used for these flights and were these flights scheduled or not?

Thanks in advance.

 

[ATR-DRIVR]

You ought to care

Why should he? Did he not say that the case is closed? Has the FAA AND JB finished the matter? It is no longer an open study, case, whatever. Done, over. Why do you continue to propogate this??
Okay, bad JB, bad JB. Enough??

 

[Fins Up]

and this thread is closed in ...3....2...1...NOW. No? Oh well, I tried.

 

[Bavarian Chef]

You ought to care.

BTW, which supplemental rule were they using for domestic turns greater than 8 hours?

I have no clue. Call the FAA and have them dig up the file or READ THE FAR. Or better yet call your congressman and beetch about it.

 

[Occam's Razor]

Occam.....

Oh yes....you can tear through the class b at 400 kts...at IAH whilst conducting a "test" for the FAA.....

1. Only because the Administrator authorized the test. Show me the Administrator's approval for the JBlu test and I'll concede the point. If you can't, don't waste bandwidth.

2. A Fed in your jumpseat can't authorize you to exceed the speed limit...and a POI can't authorize you to violate FAR's regarding required rest and/or duty times. By the same token, your POI can't authorize you to fly with a pacemaker, fly an aircraft over gross, or buzz the White House. It falls under "area of responsibility".

JB made the mistake of not going to the "higher" ups which was the province of their POI. When JB talks to the POI, they are talking to the FAA. There is a chain of command. Is JB blameless in this, no.

A350

When I talk to Metering in ORD, I'm talking to the FAA. The POI is a noodlehead for "authorizing" the test. JBlu Flight Ops mangement are noodleheads for going to the wrong person...and for accepting authorization that didn't include the words, "The Administrator grants....".

No question that it's "over and done with" now...in the same way other head-slapping boo boos are "over and done with". We're past them, but we're paid to remember them, lest we allow the screw-ups to be repeated.

 

[Bavarian Chef]

1. Only because the Administrator authorized the test. Show me the Administrator's approval for the JBlu test and I'll concede the point. If you can't, don't waste bandwidth.

2. A Fed in your jumpseat can't authorize you to exceed the speed limit...and a POI can't authorize you to violate FAR's regarding required rest and/or duty times. By the same token, your POI can't authorize you to fly with a pacemaker, fly an aircraft over gross, or buzz the White House. It falls under "area of responsibility".



When I talk to Metering in ORD, I'm talking to the FAA. The POI is a noodlehead for "authorizing" the test. JBlu Flight Ops mangement are noodleheads for going to the wrong person...and for accepting authorization that didn't include the words, "The Administrator grants....".

No question that it's "over and done with" now...in the same way other head-slapping boo boos are "over and done with". We're past them, but we're paid to remember them, lest we allow the screw-ups to be repeated.

We asked Mom and Mom said yes. Didn't tell Dad. Dad happens to be Bull Meechum. Dad yells at us at a basketball game and calls us hogs. Dad then proceeds to land a 757 on a taxiway at EWR. And we leave town with our Mom, who happens to be hot. Man I love the South.

Film at 11.

 

[3BCat]

Excuse me "Mr Cub":

That is all you have?

I never even came close to saying that those were "test flights".

Were they conducting "tests" during a revenue flight? Sounds like it. But if you want to call that a "study" or whatever I don't really care.

What matters is what the FAA thinks of their "study".

And on that matter, time will tell what the ramifications will be for jB and those pilots. I wish no ill will toward the pilots, nor you.

I don't agree with them trying to find a way to extend duty limits, but that is simply my humble opinion, worth the nothing you paid for it.

FJ

Oh yeah, you can call me bub if you like. Sir.

Hey Bub!

You did be-moan the fact that it was not referred to as an experiment or test by JB. However, your opinion of the motives for this data gathering, don't concern me.

JB recieved approval for Supplement Rules from the FAA, and did the deed. What I find fascinating is that the uproar is not over some "Joe Bag of Donuts" in the FAA overstepping his bounds in authorizing this event, but at JB for doing exactly what they were allowed to do.

And please, don't call me "Sir"

 

[FDJ2]

JB recieved approval for Supplement Rules from the FAA

Which supplemental rules would those be?