New FAA Pilot Fatigue Rules

[KBayDog]

Wondering what anyone's thoughts are on the new FAA rules regarding crew day/rest (particularly those AWs affected by this in their "day jobs"(HAL, Wink, etc.))

While these rules may/may not make the skies safer, will the new guidelines result in a need for more flight crews to cover the gaps? Or will the schedules with existing crews just have to be adjusted to accommodate the rules, potentially cutting routes?

And, I have to ask: What impact will these new rules have on the bottom lines...of both the airlines and the customers?

 

[Recovering LSO]

I suspect it will have an effect on ticket prices. I also suspect there will be more flights that push back late because they're waiting for a pilot.

Separate but somewhat related question - any chance the flight attendant's union will see this and lobby for similar rules? What is the relationship like between the two unions? Do they work together, good relationship between leadership, or do they each just kinda do their own thing?

 

[Fallonflyr]

With age 65 and the new FAA rules, 2013 will be the perfect storm for anyone who wants to enter the civilian side of aviation. Be at the front end of this hiring spree and you will be golden.

 

[HAL Pilot]

For what Hawaiian flies, the biggest effect on the number of pilots will probably be a need for more reserves on a daily basis. A couple of our flights might need to carry 4 instead of 3 pilots due to new duty day limitations. So some additional pilots but not significant numbers. The best thing for us will be finally getting a proper rest facility/chairs on our 767s for long-range flying.

I can see the reduction in crew length day causing other airlines, especially regionals, to have to hire more pilots.

The UPS pilot's union is sueing the FAA for leaving cargo carriers out. They were supposed to be included, the FAA and Congress wanted them included, but the Obama administration was convinced by the cargo carrier management to leave them out saying it was too expensive. This dispite the fact cargo is the most profitable segment of the industry and UPS & FedEx are making HUGE profits. The cargoe carriers would definitely have to hire if they were included.

 

[Recovering LSO]

The UPS pilot's union is sueing the FAA for leaving cargo carriers out. They were supposed to be included, the FAA and Congress wanted them included, but the Obama administration was convinced by the cargo carrier management to leave them out saying it was too expensive. This dispite the fact cargo is the most profitable segment of the industry and UPS & FedEx are making HUGE profits. The cargoe carriers would definitely have to hire if they were included.

Does this have to do with the fact that the lion's share DHL, UPS, FEDEX flying takes place at night? Or is crew rest crew rest, regardless of shift?

 

[HAL Pilot]

I've flown many an all-nighter. You never really get used to them or get into a "night" rhythm as UPS managemnt claims. Not all crew rest is equal.

 

[Recovering LSO]

@HAL Pilot

Separate but somewhat related question - any chance the flight attendant's union will see this and lobby for similar rules? What is the relationship like between the two unions? Do they work together, good relationship between leadership, or do they each just kinda do their own thing?

 

[FrankTheTank]

"The FAA said forcing cargo carriers to reduce the number of hours their pilots can fly would be too costly compared to the safety benefits."

Money talks! Plain and simple.

The projected cost for all-cargo operations is $306 million ($214 million present value at 7% and $252 million at 3%). The projected benefit of avoiding one fatal all-cargo accident ranges between $20.35 million and $32.55 million, depending on the number of crewmembers on board the aircraft.

 

[HooverPilot]

Regardless, releasing the rules now just hosed my thesis on the effects of the proposed regulations. 30 pages already written...

 

[FrankTheTank]

Regardless, releasing the rules now just hosed my thesis on the effects of the proposed regulations. 30 pages already written...

Not really, because I think they have 2 years to impliment the changes.

 

[wink]

The rules will likely result in the need for more pilots. Let's be honest. That is one reason the unions pushed so hard it ended up in congress, and not the normal rule making process. I haven't seen the rule yet, but as it effects us during a trip, on duty, fine. Flying all night and then switching to a day trip, or getting on the back side of the body clock can be difficult. I fly west to east like HAL, and it was a bear before I got real senior and could avoid that stuff. But someone else is always doing it. What burns me is that the accident that prompted all this was not caused by fatigue, but poor airmanship and probably some training issues. To the extent fatigue was a contributing factor, it was due to commuting pilots not allowing for enough rest before starting their trip, not airline scheduling within current rules. It was once proposed that the new rules would control our rest before we even got to work and were on the clock. A factor in the Colgan mishap in question. But if you are going to control my rest because I fly one hour into my base on a jumpseat then why not the guy that has a 2.5 hour drive? Happens all the time in our business. Apparently they dropped all that talk and for good reason. Bottom line is that if tired, you don't fly. If you commute, be responsible and get your rest.

 

[Recovering LSO]

To the extent fatigue was a contributing factor, it was due to commuting pilots not allowing for enough rest before starting their trip, not airline scheduling within current rules.

...and paying their crews (in the Colgan case) so poorly that they can't afford to live closer to their base - or commute sooner because of the cost of lodging until their trip starts.

 

[wink]

...and paying their crews (in the Colgan case) so poorly that they can't afford to live closer to their base - or commute sooner because of the cost of lodging until their trip starts.

Many commuter/regional airlines pay very poorly. I worked for one in the mid 80's and was paid more than many get paid today. But the airline pays what individuals are willing to fly for. It is a market, meaning the pilots who sell their labor have a hand in the final wage set. Surely the answer isn't wage controls. At the risk of my union card, you know the pay when you take the job. You know where you will likely be based as a junior guy in the seat or a new hire. If your required commute makes you fatigued or less than safe in any way, put safety and professionalism first and don't take the job. Let's not forget, this sort of paradigm occurs in the case of major airlines that pay well, and a guy has company seniority, but bids into a larger aircraft or to the left seat to make more money. Then his relative seniority on that plane is so low it requires an onerous commute. Lots of pilots put themselves in that position voluntarily so they can afford the boat payment. We are not talking $20K a year 20 something rookies here. Don't get me wrong. I have commuted my entire career at a major airline, and for about a year commuted 2.5 hours by car to fly for a regional outfit. I love that we have this flexibility. But in the end it comes down to professionalism and that means putting safety first. Not a career goal to fly the next biggest aircraft or the next "best" flying job.

 

[Recovering LSO]

smart words

I don't discount your experience or perspective, but I do suspect that your point my be a bit idealistic. A lot of these kids emerge from aviation factories with shit tons of debt and aren't going to make some of the mature decisions you alluded to.

Speaking of pilot factories - with the new (in two years) crew rest rules and the general consensus that more pilots will be hired, how do you guys think that will happen? More hires directly to the majors? More "upgrades" from regionals - and ensuing increase in regional hiring? Do you think hiring standards will suffer even further?

 

[FrankTheTank]

The new rules in a nutshell:

http://public.alpa.org/portals/alpa/fastread/2011/FastReadNewsflash_20111223.htm