Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Spirit

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
In the meantime it sounds like you didn't mind flying blocks of 11 hours per duty period. Talking about opening a can of worms..

No, I would not mind flying 11h a day when I can be on duty for 14h and fly 8h a day as it is right now anyhow. And that is thanks to our contract ONLY, not the FAA. As far as the FAA cares you could block in 16 minus the show and leave time due to unforeseen circumstances. I would rather be able to fly 11h in 13h instead which is 3x3-4h leg. Not sure what makes you more tired, sitting in FLL or in the plane making money and working toward your monthly goals in less days. For me it is the same, so I might as well sit in the airplane, get paid, and not listen to the crew room BS.

But my point is, that this whole thing does not apply to Spirit. Yeah LA and Lima could be gone. I can live without those. When I've already sacrificed a day of my life for work, I would rather work than sit in a pub or hotel for 24h. Other than that, this will have a small impact on staffing needs at NK. I think.
 
Last edited:
It looks like they recommended duty time with no flight time limitation.

If there is a flight time limitation, they recommended between 7 and 11 hours depending on the start of the duty period.

Maybe I don't understand the ALPA email with their proposal...

I thought is was a max block time of 7-9 hours depending on what time of day you start...and maximum duty times vary by time of start and number of legs...

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/7253/73855767.jpg
 
Last edited:
Hi!

Yes, you don't understand the ALPA proposal.

It is less tiring to do two, 5 hour trans-con legs (10 flight hours) in a 12 hour duty day, than it is to do 7+45, with 7 legs, in a 16 hour day.

It would also be nice to not have to do 240 hours of consecutive reserve duty, and then be called, at 0200, for a 16+ hour duty day!!!

cliff
NBO
 
Yes, you don't understand the ALPA proposal.
Thank you for clearing that up for me...I understand it much better now.

Plus, I'm pretty sure I'm correct in my interpretation of this...maybe someone can check my understanding...

According to the tables...

Show 0430
Number of legs 4

Maximum duty is: 7.0
Maximum block is: 9.0

or...

Show 1115
Number of legs 2

Maximum duty is: 13.0
Maximum block is: 9.0

If I am not understanding correctly, please help me to understand.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for clearing that up for me...I understand it much better now.

Plus, I'm pretty sure I'm correct in my interpretation of this...maybe someone can check my understanding...

According to the tables...

Show 0430
Number of legs 4

Maximum duty is: 7.0
Maximum block is: 9.0

or...

Show 1115
Number of legs 2

Maximum duty is: 13.0
Maximum block is: 9.0

If I am not understanding correctly, please help me to understand.

No clue what atpcliff is talking about. That is how I interpret it also. ALPA email does not talk about anything more than 9h block. My guess is increase in block (beyond the 9h) must be coming from the airlines' side of the panel but I have not seen their proposal written down yet. Only the hint in that article.

My feeling is that ALPA published their proposal to let us know, what they were trying to accomplish. I am afraid they have felt the need to do this because the final version will be a good bit worse.
 
Maybe I don't understand the ALPA email with their proposal...

I thought is was a max block time of 7-9 hours depending on what time of day you start...and maximum duty times vary by time of start and number of legs...

I was referencing the proposal made by the airline members of the aviation rulemaking committee. The airlines committee recommended between 7 and 11 hours depending on start time and legs.

The ALPA proposal is much more restrictive on flight time and slightly more restrictive on duty.
 
Am I the only person pissed of that ALPA is trying to increase our flight time to 9 hours? I thought 8 hours was just fine.
 
Am I the only person pissed of that ALPA is trying to increase our flight time to 9 hours? I thought 8 hours was just fine.

But look at the trade off. Duty reduced from 16 to 9-13. You can't go to sleep until you are off duty. Why are you guys sticking to block so much? 8 or 9? Who cares? You are still at work just not behind the actual controls. You can't rest. moth point though because the ALPA version is not what the rule will be.
 
In the new proposal are the maximum flight times drop dead times? No more legal to start, legal to finish?

I'm pretty sure we have all have days with way more than 8 hours of block, my record was close to 12 hours for a day.
 
If ALPA was proposing a max duty time of 11 or maybe 12 hours...I would be more accepting of increasing flight time to 9 hours. But starting a day at 12:59 pm and working until 1:59 am with 4 legs and 9 hours of flight time is not much better than what we have now.

I say reduce all duty periods by 1 hour on the ALPA chart and eliminate the flight time limit. Then say you can't takeoff if you will exceed the duty time limit and you can't reduce the 10 hour rest requirement. That would make me happy =)
 
But starting a day at 12:59 pm and working until 1:59 am with 4 legs and 9 hours of flight time is not much better than what we have now.

11 or 12h for duty would be even better for sure. But following your example what we have now is: Start a day at 12:59PM and end it at 04:59AM with 8 hours scheduled flying. So I still think the ALPA proposal woudl be a huge improvement. Especially if the 9 hours can't be extended. But the email does not say that. Regardless. That ALPA proposal is not what we will be flying in 2 years. You bet it will be worse. It is almost fruitless to discuss it IMHO.

BTW why do they have to wait 2 years to implement this crap? That is BS too. That would actually create a lot of pilot jobs at many places. There is a real chance for Obama to create jobs... I know. I will take my pills now with beer. That should clear my head.
 
If ALPA was proposing a max duty time of 11 or maybe 12 hours...I would be more accepting of increasing flight time to 9 hours. But starting a day at 12:59 pm and working until 1:59 am with 4 legs and 9 hours of flight time is not much better than what we have now.

I say reduce all duty periods by 1 hour on the ALPA chart and eliminate the flight time limit. Then say you can't takeoff if you will exceed the duty time limit and you can't reduce the 10 hour rest requirement. That would make me happy =)


AMEN my friend, nice to see that there are still people out there with common sens, G you are even more restrictive than I would be.
Maybe because I have no faith in Alpa and the FAA, at this point I will be glad if it's stay the way it is. No kidding, you always have the option to call in fatigue. The Colgan guys were in their first leg, that is not going to change, unfortunately, you can't teach or regulate common sens. Some guys are still going to report not rested, with dirty shoes, wrinkle shirts, and the ever popular Farfrumpuken sticker on their flight bags. My point is you can't teach professionalism.
Unfortunately, I Believe, work rules are going to get worse before they get better, if ALPA is already proposing up to 9 hours block, imagine what the Airlines and the FAA are going to submit. Eventually they'll come to some kind of middle ground, lets say 10.5 hours, the government will gladly red stamp it, and it's going to be portrait, all over the news, as a milestone in safety and commune effort. Next Dwayne Worthless appointed secretary of transport, you watch.
Unfortunately, they all just want to show congress and the White house that they are doing something, if you really want to fix the max duty rule, reduce it from 16 to lets say 14 or 13 hours and that is it, it doesn't take a genius to figure that one out. Just like health care, reduce the price of health care and Px with more competition and less lobbyists and it'll be more affordable.
I am sorry for the rant, maybe my 20 years in this business made me so cynical.
Before I go, Guess who is going to get stuck, for the next decades with the idiotic work rules and irrational schedules? you've got it, "Yeah, Ding ding ding, we have a winner!!! "and it's a service men, just back from it's fifth tour of duty, who wins a Curtain rod"....
 
Well its going to be changed, you can count on that. And it's NOT gonna take 2 years either. This Babbit guy wants it in place fairly quick. He'll give them a year max. I say by next fall the new rules will be in place. Hopefully that'll create a lot of recalls come spring.
 
I think the 2 year comment was based on the fact that the airline members recommended 2 years. However, I think we will see the new rules much sooner than that.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom