Nice job AMR and CAL: FAA Drops New Rest Requirements ! :-(

[bizicmo]

Hmmmmmmmm....I would assume that AMR would have to upgrade and hire (recall) more pilots to cover the 2 CA/ 2 FO staffing formula.

Surprised I had to explain that one.

Not if they continue to reduce total fleet size.

 

[AA717driver]

What are the pros and cons of the two formats....

Respectfully....

Rez--I'll give you the AA side first, then, IMO, the industry side.

At AA, they've been heaping more and more responsibility on the CA's since 9/11. For example, MX doesn't do walkarounds anymore so the CA has to rely on the FO to find things. Yes, I'm trained to do walkarounds but I know I can't see the same stuff a mech will on a regular basis. It's a lot of little stuff that just adds up.

It appears that the company is putting increasing responsibility on the CA's and will be the first to throw them under the bus when something goes wrong.

The larger concern is if the CA is on rest break and they go off track, he gets violated even though he's in the back, asleep. In theory, since all FO's are typed, they are technically PIC while the CA is off the flight deck. But in reality, the CA (the company designated PIC) is going to get the brunt of the punishment.

NWA used the 2/2 set up I believe. One crew takes off and the other lands. At no time (other than bathroom breaks) is there not a CA who has been designated by the company as PIC on the flight deck.

We even had this issue at my corporate job. Our FAA guy said we had to make a notation on the flight plan when we switched off PIC's. Maybe this is possible in 121 (I'm sure it is in the 2/2 situation.) but with a 1/3 crewing, I don't see the company allowing it.

Hope that give some insight--extremely complex and the only impediment is that it costs more to do the 2/2 crewing.

TC

 

[EWR_FO]

The problem with the attempted change was the complete circumvention of the normal process. If they had actually bothered to ask the PILOTS who fly these trips all the time, not a bunch of management fools who play pilot once every three months, what they think- they would have found the overwhelming response to be that this change does NOTHING to improve safety. In fact, it could be argued that it actually makes these trips more tiring by letting you START to adjust to local time, just in time to leave.

I have been doing the long-haul gig for fourteen years and am convinced the spotlight needs to start on the domestic rules with the next stop being the two-man international rules.

The fact that airline management was able to influence the process is disturbing because to them it is all about money, they couldn't give a rat's ass who is tired or not. It absolutely grates on me to actually be on the same side of an issue as them, although the motivation is different, but this whole issue needs to start domestically.

 

[aircowboy]

The FAA is bought and paid for

 

[JungleJett]

HorseShiit.

This is about money and if anyone tells you different, they are full of it.......if the pilots at these airlines would have been compensated in pay or days off, you would not have heard one peep out of them.

This could have been a stepping stone to a closer look at domestic rules...but those who opposed just screwed themselves.

Man we are really dumb sometimes....

The problem with the attempted change was the complete circumvention of the normal process. If they had actually bothered to ask the PILOTS who fly these trips all the time, not a bunch of management fools who play pilot once every three months, what they think- they would have found the overwhelming response to be that this change does NOTHING to improve safety. In fact, it could be argued that it actually makes these trips more tiring by letting you START to adjust to local time, just in time to leave.

I have been doing the long-haul gig for fourteen years and am convinced the spotlight needs to start on the domestic rules with the next stop being the two-man international rules.

The fact that airline management was able to influence the process is disturbing because to them it is all about money, they couldn't give a rat's ass who is tired or not. It absolutely grates on me to actually be on the same side of an issue as them, although the motivation is different, but this whole issue needs to start domestically.

 

[whymeworry?]

The FAAs PRM was, for lack of a better word, stupid. It took the pilots out of their normal body clock for flights to India and China. Beleive me, we are all better off leaving it the way it is.

It's not like actual LINE pilots wrote the propsed rule anyway.

Besides, the REAL fatigue gorilla in the room is US domestic. How can the FAA say they "remain committed to addressing fatigue" when they allow some of the US domestic bs to go on for years and years?

Y'all know what I'm talking about.

 

[jetflier]

Sending an email to http://www.faa.gov/safety/safety_hotline/ is a great way to send the FAA the pilots perspective. Even better yet, an email to your local Congressman and other Government official will begin to put political pressure on the FAA in the interest of safety.
I suggested that the FAA assign a team to shadow the ultra long haul pilots in the flightdeck for the entire duty period.

 

[Kugelblitz]

Comments by Poser's

Back when this proposed rule change first came out, I read a bunch of complaints against it from CAL and DAL pilots about how it would "hurt their schedules, they'd rather have an extra day off at home every month vs an extra 24 hour layover in Delhi, etc".

Sadly, it reminded of when I heard JetBlue pilots screaming about how much they wanted relief from the 8 hour rule so they could do transcon turns w/o a relief pilot.

Both made me a little bit sick.

If the FAA really gave a crap about safety, how about stand up overnights, back to back red eye schedules, or schedules that reflect max allowed duty days? Why go after aircraft with bunks?

Most of you must be poser pilots, or you would understand what the current situation is like in the airline industry regarding days off, RJ commuting, and lousy pay. I am sure there are many of you in jobs you don't like that think you would do anything to fly big airplanes but for those of us in the industry and married, things look a little differently.

This industry is shaping up to be something completely different than most of us signed up for and we are doing the best we can to cope with the dynamics of it. For people like me, I am "stuck" with flying international because that is the last bastion of the major airlines. I don't need the FAA or a bunch of 'wannabee's' making my life any more difficult than it is.

My personal rest and fitness and readiness for flight is my business and professional responsibility, I don't need anyone on this web-board or the FAA regulating this for me. If you are a pilot and wanted these changes, find another profession. I go to work to work, not go on 30 hour vacations.

 

[EWR_FO]

HorseShiit.

This is about money and if anyone tells you different, they are full of it.......if the pilots at these airlines would have been compensated in pay or days off, you would not have heard one peep out of them.

This could have been a stepping stone to a closer look at domestic rules...but those who opposed just screwed themselves.

Man we are really dumb sometimes....

It is all about money to the people who run airlines and unfortunately, in this case, it puts them on the same side of the issue as the guys who do this all the time saying it does NOTHING to improve safety.

Why rampage through the long haul rules just to try and change the domestic rules? There are more than a few domestic guys who would scream bloody murder if mandated longer rests turned into less days off for them.

I have done both kinds of flying and can say unequivocally that the domestic rules need change yesterday and the long haul ones don't.

One of the reasons the FAA rolled back the change was because of an overwhelming response during the "comment period" of guys telling them that their methodology was fu**ed up. You can't argue with your body clock no matter what the FAA says.

 

[JungleJett]

Would you be opposed to the FAA implementing a new domestic rest rule without going through the "normal process"?

And how does this NOT enhance safety?

 

[EWR_FO]

Would you be opposed to the FAA implementing a new domestic rest rule without going through the "normal process"?

And how does this NOT enhance safety?

It allows you to start to adjust to local time just in time to leave. If you can stay on "your" time it's much less tiring going home. Period.

I don't think the FAA is qualified to do ANYTHING outside of the normal process, that's why there IS a process. No one should be making any rules without consulting with the guys who do it all the time.

 

[kaisersose]

And as a result, there is a need for fewer pilots.

Hey G long time no chat. I must say I am all for keeping the rest periods the same. Of course two captains is good for movement but I fail to see how changing to a two night layover would increase the need for any pilots. Those of us who do these trips get 19-21 days off a month. They will not have to drop any of my flying to keep me over in BOM an extra night. They will not have to staff the 777 any deeper either. Lets say we go 7 days a week, thats 4 pilots for every round trip. Increase the layover all you want but it is still 4 pilots departing each day. Not a single extra pilot would be needed until the trip went to a 7 day trip, at that point if someone did 3 in a month he'd be below the min days off. Besides, I've been on longer layovers in India and Hong Kong and I can tell you that everyone I know is more tired on the way home the longer the layover is (beyond 24). It has nothing to do with drinking either. Our reserves (777) fly an average of less than one trip a month, so an extra night in BOM isn't going to time them out or require more numbers either.

My personal experience ranks domestic redeyes the worst as far as fatigue goes. Going to Europe causes many more yawns in the pit than I have ever experienced during ULH. Heck, a long day in the 737 is much more tiring than ULH flying.

The FAA was misguided in it's attempt here. I think it is good that it is on the radar but there are so many other pilots out there flying much more tired than the ULH guys. If you want to address fatigue and staffing then require IROs for any flight on the back side of the clock. If there is a problem with ULH then the solution would be one or two more IROs not another night in a S&*%hole like BOM.

How's the family, G?

B

 

[GogglesPisano]

Hey G long time no chat. I must say I am all for keeping the rest periods the same. Of course two captains is good for movement but I fail to see how changing to a two night layover would increase the need for any pilots. Those of us who do these trips get 19-21 days off a month. They will not have to drop any of my flying to keep me over in BOM an extra night. They will not have to staff the 777 any deeper either. Lets say we go 7 days a week, thats 4 pilots for every round trip. Increase the layover all you want but it is still 4 pilots departing each day. Not a single extra pilot would be needed until the trip went to a 7 day trip, at that point if someone did 3 in a month he'd be below the min days off. Besides, I've been on longer layovers in India and Hong Kong and I can tell you that everyone I know is more tired on the way home the longer the layover is (beyond 24). It has nothing to do with drinking either. Our reserves (777) fly an average of less than one trip a month, so an extra night in BOM isn't going to time them out or require more numbers either.

My personal experience ranks domestic redeyes the worst as far as fatigue goes. Going to Europe causes many more yawns in the pit than I have ever experienced during ULH. Heck, a long day in the 737 is much more tiring than ULH flying.

The FAA was misguided in it's attempt here. I think it is good that it is on the radar but there are so many other pilots out there flying much more tired than the ULH guys. If you want to address fatigue and staffing then require IROs for any flight on the back side of the clock. If there is a problem with ULH then the solution would be one or two more IROs not another night in a S&*%hole like BOM.

How's the family, G?

B

Family's fine, B. Thanks for asking. I see your logic re: staffing.

 

[pipejockey]

It always comes to the widebody guys. The 1 leggers. How about addressing the numerous pilots at the despicable regionals doing 5 legs a day 12-16 hours a day with an incessant delays, edcts, ground stops, never operating the sequence as designed. It's bad enough they are paid like garbage, but they continue to be treated like garbage as well. But lets just keep looking out for those longhaul guys earning 6 figures...pathetic!!

 

[WayBack]

What's that old sticker say.....Something like "ALPA FIGHTING FATIGUE!!!!"
Yep, looks like the hit a grand slam with this one.
Spineless choades