Why can't we do this here

[leftoftrack]

The FAA has clarified that being on-call is duty time. The idea of a rolling rest period is dead in the U.S., working south of the border you now know when your duty time is and when they can call you in. you can plan your rest periods accordingly

http://aviationweek.com/bca/faa-call-pilots-are-duty

[Redneck_pilot86]

You mean people couldnt do one flight, and then sit around waiting on another flight, while simultaneously resetting in case the next flight comes in 12 hours later?

[leftoftrack]

exactly, you cant be awake all day waiting for a phone call then in the evening get called to start your duty day. they require operators to allow pilots to plan there rest. seems like a novel concept

[Shady McSly]

Looks nice on paper, but unrealistic for smaller on-demand charter operators/management companies. Careful what y'all wish for..

[tbaylx]

Looks nice on paper, but unrealistic for smaller on-demand charter operators/management companies. Careful what y'all wish for..

What's unrealistic is calling a pilot at 7pm to do a 14 hour duty day through the middle of the night cause its legal. Tough luck for the smaller charter operators, have two pilots on call, one for the day shift, one for the night. Bout time we used proper fatigue management to make our rest rules where time of day and number of sectors flown are taken into account.

[PROC_HDG]

Looks nice on paper, but unrealistic for smaller on-demand charter operators/management companies. Careful what y'all wish for..

Safety ought to take precedence over the cost structure of a company. If the 'smaller on-demand charter operators' can't hack it, tough $h!t. Cost of doing business.

PROC_HDG

[Shady McSly]

If you're tired then grow some balls and 'just say no'. We don't need more nanny-state rules that could ruin small charter operators in this country because of the new "cost of doing business".

You can't paint aviation in this country with an airline-centric brush.

[xsbank]

No, it's time that pilots were treated like the majority of workers. Why is it ok to keep someone on duty for 14 hours? You wouldn't even ski, go to the pub, work out, go dancing or plumbing, construction, electrical work for 14 straight hours. It's got to change now that it's proven conclusively that pilots are the major cause of accidents. You can still be a macho, Hero of The North and not be exhausted.

[CL-Skadoo!]

If you're tired then grow some balls and 'just say no'. We don't need more nanny-state rules that could ruin small charter operators in this country because of the new "cost of doing business".

You can't paint aviation in this country with an airline-centric brush.

I typically agree with your posts, Shady, but on this one, you're slightly out of touch.

10 days on call, day 9, phone finally rings at 23:45, 15 minutes after you let your guard down and fell asleep. 2 hour show time for a medevac flight to Africa. You say no, you look for a new job. The options shouldn't be throw your balls down to lose your job OR suck it up to sacrifice safety; companies will always find people to be stupid and always say yes. If an operator is running like this, you can guran-damn-tee your job is on the line every time you resist.

Plenty of operators who are actually interested in keeping people around run the rotating 12 hours on, 12 off on call. It's pretty frigging simple and wouldn't cripple the industry if done with a little foresight.

You're right about the airline oriented model, however, there's a million different qualifiers that you could tack on to protect smaller operators to some extent.

[Rockie]

If you're tired then grow some balls and 'just say no'. We don't need more nanny-state rules that could ruin small charter operators in this country because of the new "cost of doing business".

You can't paint aviation in this country with an airline-centric brush.

The "nanny state" rules aren't there to protect the pilot. They exist to protect the public who should not be at the mercy of an unscrupulous operator who treats their pilots like a machine. And yes, as long as there are human beings driving the airplanes it doesn't matter what kind of airplane or operator it is - fatigued is fatigued.

[Tanker299]

This absolutely should be the rule. Remember almost all rules in aviation are written in blood. Sure they can't fire you for fatigue but do it enough times and they will find a way to fire you. Employees outside of a union job have very few rights. You can't even file for wrongful until you have a year in. So "growing a pair" won't help you, making rules that make sense will. These type of rules were supposed to in the new duty regs but 703 is exempt.

[5x5]

It's difficult to say exactly what should be rules/law/regulation and what should be common sense. The problem is that the two tend to be in direct conflict much of the time. For those of you that are strongly in favour of additional regulation, I'd be curious how many have been in a position of running a company and dealing regularly with the full extent of existing regulations?

In a utopian world, we would cap the existing regulations and any new additions could only be made once an existing, ineffective regulation is removed.

Remember almost all rules in aviation are written in blood.

That statement is just patently untrue. There are so many rules that are so far removed from any aspect of causing blood that it's ridiculous.

[Rockie]

For those of you that are strongly in favour of additional regulation, I'd be curious how many have been in a position of running a company and dealing regularly with the full extent of existing regulations?

It's not additional regulation, it's bringing the existing ones in line with what science has known about human physiology for decades and in compliance with ICAO recommendations. Who can argue with that except those people you mention who might have to spend a bit more money in the interest of safety - just like everybody else in the world.

[Tanker299]

5x5 I think that prop hit you in the head a few too many times. The majority of rules ( majority or almost all does not equal every rule nor does is imply that there are not a lot of stupid ones) are do this or you and/or others may be injured or killed. Also don't include me in you utopia as your utopia would not be mine therefore it would not be a utopian world.

[tbaylx]

For those of you that are strongly in favour of additional regulation, I'd be curious how many have been in a position of running a company and dealing regularly with the full extent of existing regulations?

It's not additional regulation, it's bringing the existing ones in line with what science has known about human physiology for decades and in compliance with ICAO recommendations. Who can argue with that except those people you mention who might have to spend a bit more money in the interest of safety - just like everybody else in the world.

I'm puzzled how anyone involved in aviation can argue with a straight face that Canada's duty regulations aren't an international embarrassment. Reminds me of Saddams PR guy saying "There are no Americans in Baghdad!! We are crushing them!" as the American tanks roll by in the background. It's time we adjust our duty regulations to incorporate science, best practices and yes..common sense.

[5x5]

tanker299, the way I understand English, "almost all" is not synonymous with a simple majority. It means close to 100%. Obviously, you think differently and that's OK but it does make for difficult communication.

As for the utopia thing, I didn't include anybody else. I simply expressed my opinion of what I feel would be terrific as it relates to regulation. I'm glad you're happy with keeping all the silly/useless rules.

[tipsails]

No, it's time that pilots were treated like the majority of workers. Why is it ok to keep someone on duty for 14 hours? You wouldn't even ski, go to the pub, work out, go dancing or plumbing, construction, electrical work for 14 straight hours. It's got to change now that it's proven conclusively that pilots are the major cause of accidents. You can still be a macho, Hero of The North and not be exhausted.

I just got home from a 14 hour day and I'm wiped. Why am I even on AvCan.. LOL.

[Independence]

The classic example is 'I am about to go to bed at 10pm and the phone rings and now I have to spend 12 hours on a long haul medevac'. The answer being suggested here seems to be that there would be say a 9am-9pm crew and a 9pm-9am crew and the 'fresh' night crew would do the flight. Sounds simple but I don't buy that the night crew would actually spend 8 hours sleeping during every day on the off chance that they may go flying that evening. In reality whatever crew does the through the night flight, they are going to be tired. This is not sked flying so the sked type rules don't apply as well.

[leftoftrack]

The classic example is 'I am about to go to bed at 10pm and the phone rings and now I have to spend 12 hours on a long haul medevac'. The answer being suggested here seems to be that there would be say a 9am-9pm crew and a 9pm-9am crew and the 'fresh' night crew would do the flight. Sounds simple but I don't buy that the night crew would actually spend 8 hours sleeping during every day on the off chance that they may go flying that evening. In reality whatever crew does the through the night flight, they are going to be tired. This is not sked flying so the sked type rules don't apply as well.

I've worked on a 12hr night shift on call for medivacs and I absolutely prepared my sleep pattern for the possibility that I was going to fly all night. while at the bottom end of the clock I never use to be at the top of my game, I was a hell of allot better than if I stayed up for the entire day not really sure when to rest and when to workout

[Rockie]

The classic example is 'I am about to go to bed at 10pm and the phone rings and now I have to spend 12 hours on a long haul medevac'. The answer being suggested here seems to be that there would be say a 9am-9pm crew and a 9pm-9am crew and the 'fresh' night crew would do the flight. Sounds simple but I don't buy that the night crew would actually spend 8 hours sleeping during every day on the off chance that they may go flying that evening. In reality whatever crew does the through the night flight, they are going to be tired. This is not sked flying so the sked type rules don't apply as well.

Pilots always fly tired, it's a part of the job and really a question of degree. Reserve rules more than anything have got to accommodate human physiology or "tired" becomes "fatigued" in no time. The people who fight changing the regulations and the policy makers who listen to them can be found fast asleep in their beds every night between 23:00 and 06:00.

[springlocked]

To me this is much like the discussions over the smoking ban in restaurants and bars a few years ago. The bar owners claimed it would put them out of business if the smokers were not aloud to blow smoke in everybody's face. We look what happened they managed to stay in business and likely even have more people in their bars and restaurants today. The argument from the operators that it will do the same is just bullshit. Sure it means more pilots but it is across the board so the expense is common. It does not create an unfair atmosphere. If they are operating on such a shoe string that a common added expense, that can be passed on in the rates or don't have the foresight to include a "change of regulation" clause in contracts maybe they are better off for all in the sunset anyway. I pack up and laughing when I see and hear 20 or 30 something dinosaur thinking pilots who have been brain washed at some earlier point in their profession.