Jb Pushing For Repealing 8 Hour Rule

[AKAAB]

I don't think the motivation is to get a competitive advantage, rather, it is to explore whether safety is complemented or compromised. The primary motivation is quality of life.

If JetBlue goes forward with the plan, it will be for a temporary exemption that will allow for a scientific study of the physiological effects of the modified flight-hour rules.

To claim the ruination of the entire industry because JB pilots are looking to explore a safe way to enhance quality of life is a bit of a knee-jerk reaction. I, too, was concerned when I first heard about the idea, but after seeing some of the scientific arguments and proposed controls that would be in place, I am now a proponent for at least looking into the concept.

Every problem has a solution - unless you pretend there are no problems!
AKAAB

 

[Bear96]

I don't think the motivation is to get a competitive advantage, rather, it is to explore whether safety is complemented or compromised. The primary motivation is quality of life.

If JetBlue goes forward with the plan, it will be for a temporary exemption that will allow for a scientific study of the physiological effects of the modified flight-hour rules.

To claim the ruination of the entire industry because JB pilots are looking to explore a safe way to enhance quality of life is a bit of a knee-jerk reaction. I, too, was concerned when I first heard about the idea, but after seeing some of the scientific arguments and proposed controls that would be in place, I am now a proponent for at least looking into the concept.

Every problem has a solution - unless you pretend there are no problems!
AKAAB

It seems pretty obvious to many that extending the lengths of time crews can fly without a break is not safer. The jB pilots seem to be concetrating on one particular routing and scheduling scenario which exists today. If the rule is changed, airline management will quickly make sure it is extorted to its maximum; will change it bit by bit; and apply it to scenarios never contemplated by the pilots now pushing for it. Management will quickly find ways to exploit "controls" and other safeguards that will be put in place. Other airlines will quickly get the same "exemption" and it will ultimately morph into something unrecognizable and will be applied to ever-increasing flight sequences in the name of "efficiency." Quality of life-- and safety-- will ultimately not be enhanced but will be degraded, for all airlines.

I'm not saying it will lead to "the ruination of the entire industry," but if there is ever an example of a group not seeing the forest for the trees and not getting the big picture, this is it.

And I am not sure what "problem" you are referring to in your last paragraph? The problems I see are FAA rules already letting people fly too much in some situations. Relaxing what rules there are seems to be CREATING more problems, not solving any.

 

[runway4]

I must admit that on the return trip of a B6 transcon and chatting with a couple of the F/A's, I was shocked to learn that they were doing out-n-back transcons. It concerned me slightly, as a paying pax, from a safety perspective. However, looking at what a good friend of mine is now going through at AA under their new contract (he mostly flies transcons), many times by the time he blocks in on the outbound, checks into the hotel and is back up for the return, he's pulling in very little sleep and flying with toothpicks to keep his eyes open (to borrow an earlier poster's phrase). Which is better for safety and the health and happiness of the employee?

 

[Bear96]

I must admit that on the return trip of a B6 transcon and chatting with a couple of the F/A's, I was shocked to learn that they were doing out-n-back transcons. It concerned me slightly, as a paying pax, from a safety perspective. However, looking at what a good friend of mine is now going through at AA under their new contract (he mostly flies transcons), many times by the time he blocks in on the outbound, checks into the hotel and is back up for the return, he's pulling in very little sleep and flying with toothpicks to keep his eyes open (to borrow an earlier poster's phrase). Which is better for safety and the health and happiness of the employee?

Runway,

This is the same logic many jB pilots in support of this effort are using on the other DB in the link AKAAB provided: under current regs it is possible to build even worse sequences than an out-and-back transcon, so out-and-back transcons should be OK too. To me, they are BOTH unsafe. The proper response is not to loosen other regs so that we can look at ALL trips out there and say, "Yeah, they are all ugly and unsafe now," which is ultimately the end result of loosening the regs. Rather, we should be TIGHTENING UP those regs that permit the AA example you gave.

To put it another way:

Trip A: the out-and-back transcon. Less ugly than Trip B, but still ugly and unsafe. Illegal under current FARs.
Trip B: the AA trip (or any other ugly sequence airlines currently fly that is within the regs). More ugly than Trip A. Legal under FARs, but still unsafe.

Good solution: Get FARs adjusted so Trip B is illegal. Don't mess with the FARs that make Trip A illegal-- keep it illegal.

Bad solution: Get FARs adjusted so Trip A is legal. Once an "exception" is made so that Trip A is legal, airline management will exploit it and create Trip C. Trip C is legal under the new FARs but makes Trip B look like a piece of cake and is even MORE unsafe. (And by the way now we can lay off a few more hundred or thousand people-- or at still-growing airlines, at least we won't see as much hiring so seniority will start to stagnate.) Did we really solve anything, or just make things worse?

 

[Borescope]

The day pilots can fly more than 8 hours in a day, is just sad.

They already can. All you need is a third pilot. This guy usually sits in FC and watches the movie. If the trip is flown during the day he probably never will see one of the seats in the pit.

 

[Borescope]

I think its unsafe for FA's as well.

What is your safety concern? Are you affraid you'll spill a drink on the businessman in 1B?

 

[smfav8r]

You can only exceed 8 hours of block time in the cockpit with an extra crewmember (the one who watches the movie) in international operations. And you can not exceed 12 hours (scheduled) without a heavy crew (4 crewmembers)

Many airlines fly scheduled turns down to the islands, Central and South America from the states. It's perfectly legal to exceed the 8 hours with an extra crewmember since it's international....but under domestic ops....you can't just throw an additional pilot in the cockpit and exceed the 8 hour rule.

 

[nimbus]

I think its unsafe for FA's as well.

What is your safety concern? Are you affraid you'll spill a drink on the businessman in 1B?

Are you serious? I agree the flight attendants are not flying the multi-million dollar piece of equipment but a flight attendant under the new work rules at AA may be so exhausted to be:

1. Alert to catch freaks like the shoebomber wannabees.
2. Alert to possible explosive passengers of air rage.
3. Alert during Emergency evacuations assisting,forcing,leading passengers out
of burning or smoked filled aircraft.
4. Alert to detect anomalous smells or aircraft irregularities.

I know more reasons too. I am sure other pilots and flight attendants could help me list other intelligent reasons in other than your offensive remark. As an airline worker, I am sure I could list numerous jokes diminishing your profession and some of its work rules too. Unless your a Flight Attendant.. don't insult the physical and mental alertness of their job unless you have experienced its daily toil.

 

[Borescope]

I think its unsafe for FA's as well. 

Are you serious? I agree the flight attendants are not flying the multi-million dollar piece of equipment but a flight attendant under the new work rules at AA may be so exhausted to be:

1. Alert to catch freaks like the shoebomber wannabees.
2. Alert to possible explosive passengers of air rage.
3. Alert during Emergency evacuations assisting,forcing,leading passengers out
of burning or smoked filled aircraft.
4. Alert to detect anomalous smells or aircraft irregularities.

I know more reasons too. I am sure other pilots and flight attendants could help me list other intelligent reasons in other than your offensive remark. As an airline worker, I am sure I could list numerous jokes diminishing your profession and some of its work rules too. Unless your a Flight Attendant.. don't insult the physical and mental alertness of their job unless you have experienced its daily toil.

1. You think pax's will sit by and wait for the FA's to act in this situation?
2. Same as # 1.
3. This may be somewhat true, but I dare say people aren't going to sit by and wait for your instructions if the AC is on fire.
4. Same as # 1.
Next?

 

[Busdrvr]

OK, then how about "so fatigued that they forget a step in a procedure after landing and blow a $30,000 slide"? could even be fatal.

 

[dgs]

It is not the rules that can make a schedule unsafe, but the implementation of the rules. Just because something can be done (by the book), doesn't mean it is wise or best to do so. Likewise, completely legal trips may not be the safest option. I routinely flew 10-hr to 14-hr flights with an unaugmented crew within a 16-hr crew duty day in a previous life. The key to success was your circadian rhythm. A 5-hr flight on the back side of the clock after having just flown a day trip (with all the legal rest requirements) can be much more exhausting than a 10 to 12-hr roundtrip transcon flown mostly during normal daylight hours. Personally, I'd much rather fly JFK-LGB in the morning, and turn back to JFK to arrive that evening than try to day sleep in LGB and do a redeye back to JFK the following night.

Unfortunately, trying to legislate common sense never works. You just can't cover all the possibilities without making the regulations incredibly complex. The guys who are working for this change at jB are trying to improve pilot quality of life and safety. They also happen to be the same pilots who build our trip pairings. They are not management pilots trying to "screw" the work force. Quite the contrary, they are trying to improve our own productivity and quality of life. We can't control how other companies might pervert any rule changes we ask for, but that doesn't mean the changes aren't a good idea. I trust our guys to make the most of any rule changes they can get to improve our lives.

 

[nimbus]

I think its unsafe for FA's as well. 

Are you serious? I agree the flight attendants are not flying the multi-million dollar piece of equipment but a flight attendant under the new work rules at AA may be so exhausted to be:

1. Alert to catch freaks like the shoebomber wannabees.
2. Alert to possible explosive passengers of air rage.
3. Alert during Emergency evacuations assisting,forcing,leading passengers out
of burning or smoked filled aircraft.
4. Alert to detect anomalous smells or aircraft irregularities.

I know more reasons too. I am sure other pilots and flight attendants could help me list other intelligent reasons in other than your offensive remark. As an airline worker, I am sure I could list numerous jokes diminishing your profession and some of its work rules too. Unless your a Flight Attendant.. don't insult the physical and mental alertness of their job unless you have experienced its daily toil.

1. You think pax's will sit by and wait for the FA's to act in this situation?
2. Same as # 1.
3. This may be somewhat true, but I dare say people aren't going to sit by and wait for your instructions if the AC is on fire.
4. Same as # 1.
Next?

Actually, YES. You were 100% right. The answer is #1. Most people do wait for the Fligth Attendants lead.

In mid air fires... I trust the flight attendant to know where the different types of extinguishers are. As for wackos on Flights... majority of F/A need to rally passengers for assistance because most passengers shy away. Contrary to your belief in people, most people are not heros or leaders. As these woman and men are working in the back of the plane, passengers look to them to deal with irregularities and to react.

With your outlook of Flight Attendants, I hope that you, (your spouse, or your family member traveling without you) never, never, ever ask the Flight Attendant for anything other than a food or beverage service issue but; when that passenger sitting next to you, or your family member, has a problem (whether it is a medical emergency, drunkiness, air rage, rudeness, over- bearing arrogance, or questionable behavior) please take care of it yourself without causing a fight , riot, or pandimonium.) Or if you or your family ever has a medical issue, again.. please don;t ask a flight attendant to assist you except to get you a cocktail beverage. Then you can join that small club of leaders that don;t look to Flight Attendants for guidence and assistance.

BTW, what is your profession in the airlines or are you a casual observer/investor?

 

[Bizman]

Sounds like their in the plane business by the name

 

[G4G5]

Anyone opposed to this feel free to email your opinion to:

Melissa.M.Mallis@nasa.gov

She is in charge of the Fatigue Countermeasures Group, aka Zteam at the NASA Ames Research center


Melissa M. Mallis, Ph.D. is a NASA Research Psychologist and is the Principal Investigator for the Fatigue Countermeasures Group. She received her B.S. in Physics from Villanova University, her Ph.D. in Biomedical Science from Drexel University and completed a pre-doctoral fellowship, under the direction of Dr. David F. Dinges, at the Unit for Experimental Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine. As part of her doctoral training, Dr. Mallis was a contributor to US Air Force multi-center project on countermeasures for jet lag and sleep deprivation in which she reviewed various fatigue-detection technologies and alerting countermeasures. She also conducted, for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Federal Highway Administration, the first systematic, controlled, double-blind validation trial on six promising biobehavioral technologies designed to predict varying alertness/fatigue levels. Her current research focuses on the detection of fatigue with the use of fatigue and alertness monitoring technologies, the evaluation of performance effects of fatigue, and the evaluation of fatigue countermeasures on human performance and alertness levels.


I am sure that the FAA will be asking NASA for thier advice and if enough people make their opinions know, I am sure that the voices of the many will out weigh the voices of the few.

If this ever gets to the FAA's NPRM status, then you will really see a puplic out cry on the subject. Please feel free to post her email on your companies intra web site, I did it at my airline.

 

[chadbtpa]

...