Snoozing Over London

[Mitch Cronin]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-22051197

6 April 2013

Jet pilots doze off on duty twice in London area

Continue reading the main story

Pilots of jet planes have fallen asleep on duty in or over London twice in three years.

A Freedom of Information request to the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) revealed pilots dozed off in the cockpit in both June 2010 and June 2011.

And the British Airline Pilots Association (Balpa) claims the number of incidents is far higher, happening on a daily basis nationwide.

The CAA insists pilot fatigue is not a safety concern.

The 2010 incident happened on the tarmac in an Airbus A319, when the captain allegedly fell asleep for a short while on turnaround.

It was claimed unrealistic rostering caused flight crew fatigue.

Co-pilot shaken awake

In 2011 the captain of a Boeing 767 was unable to gain re-entry to the flight deck having taken a short break, with the plane airborne over the London area.

He used an emergency code to get in, to find the first officer unconscious. He came round on shaking.

Dr Rob Hunter, head of flight safety at Balpa, said: "A pilot falls asleep on the flight deck on a UK-registered airplane at least once in every 24 hours - and probably a lot more than that.

Continue reading the main story“"But the regulators and the industry seem to shy away from how serious a problem it is."

Dr Hunter said the large discrepancy between the CAA's figures and their own estimation of the problem was because pilots rarely report themselves falling asleep.

He said doing so risked pilots "writing the evidence for their own prosecution".

There is a possible two-year prison sentence for falling asleep in the cockpit.

Pilots blame fatigue and the number of hours they are asked to work.

But flying conditions may be about to worsen as under a proposed change in European law pilots could be asked to work extra hours more frequently and overnight flying may be extended.

Kathryn Jones, of the CAA, said: "We have no evidence of significant safety concerns with regard to crew and fatigue.

"The evidence the CAA has is that the fatigue of crew is not a significant safety concern."

[Don Hudson]

It is a simple story, and while the tabliods may be, the BBC is not Fox News.

Denial is a powerful thing.

Denial has powerful allies linked with specific interests in keeping crew costs to a minimum because they can.

The industry, including regulators, is extremely reluctant to cite fatigue as primary causes in incidents and accidents.

The really bright solution to fatigue is to jail pilots for falling asleep.

That's like jailing someone for getting the flu.

The "fog" over this 60-year-old issue is being lifted by science but some refuse to acknowledge and see what has been made visible in study after study. The trend to eschew science contributes to the ability to set aside data in favour of politics and economics.

We can't do without either, (science & economics), but it is a mistake that neither inform the other.

Pilots continue to be the 50,000A fuse in this matter while bus drivers have far stricter duty day rules complete with fines for exceeding them. Where is the sense?

[Kip Powick]

Afternoon Don,

I think a couple contributing factors to the "sleep" problem are the automation of aviation and the the physical/mental makeup of some pilots..

Fatigue, in this case sleeping, never seemed a big issue when we flew the more "steam-driven machines" as they required more attention and more physical work by the drivers. My first experience with the glass automation was the A310 and for the first year I was really awake on overseas long-haul as I wanted to know every facet of the aircraft. When I became, what I felt, as extremely comfortable with the automation, I became bored.....not much to do...but perhaps my training and physical makeup did not allow me to go zzzzzzing.

In the CF we used to do a 2-3 week stint out of Lahr with the CV580 and I once had an FO replace my current FO for two weeks. This guy could NEVER get on the time zones we were working and as a result I was pretty much solo operating in Europe. He was sent home after a week or so and sent to a Doctor. I never did hear what the diagnosis was but he never did overseas ops again. Perhaps there are some people who just can't adjust their body to the time zone time changes.

That I can remember, the only time I ever want to nod off was after 27 hour crew day flying the DC3......... we were returning from Gander when the FO and I were throwing raisins at each other to stay awake !!!

Just my opinion but I don't think just "fatigue" contributes to every incident of a pilot zzzzzzing.

[AME]

Dr Hunter said the large discrepancy between the CAA's figures and their own estimation of the problem was because pilots rarely report themselves falling asleep.

Therein lies the rub... if you don't report it. There is little evidence to support the arguement that there is a problem.

[AME]

Pilots continue to be the 50,000A fuse in this matter while bus drivers have far stricter duty day rules complete with fines for exceeding them. Where is the sense?

Apple and Oranges in my opinion you can not compare Bus Drivers to Pilots. When a bus driver falls asleep the result is a fatal crash almost 100% of the time whereas with pilots this is an extremely rare outcome.

Having said that I do agree there needs to be more stringent rules regarding fatigue and not just for the flight crew but maintenance as well.

[blues deville]

Its interesting to hear UK pilots are falling asleep at the wheel considering their CAP 371 rules are probably the best. For example, a realistic duty day based on time of departure.......not 14 hours no matter what time of day for Canadian pilots.

[Trader]

Kip--the issue is more than just time zones and long haul. In Europe they can do a full day and only have 8 hours TOTAL time bewteen flights (not rest time). I've been flying with some Ryan Air guys lately and the stuff they have to deal with is ridiculous.

I am also guessing that when you were flying long haul it was based on about 70 hours a month with greater than 24 hours for the layover. Nowadays, most companies regularly fly 90 hours a month and provide only 24 hours after a 14 hour long haul flight!

[Moon The Loon]

Its interesting to hear UK pilots are falling asleep at the wheel considering their CAP 371 rules are probably the best. For example, a realistic duty day based on time of departure.......not 14 hours no matter what time of day for Canadian pilots.

The rules are tougher but the enforcement is quite lax. That was my experience flying at Excel and other UK based carriers for 5 years.

[Kip Powick]

Kip--the issue is more than just time zones and long haul. In Europe they can do a full day and only have 8 hours TOTAL time bewteen flights (not rest time). I've been flying with some Ryan Air guys lately and the stuff they have to deal with is ridiculous.

I am also guessing that when you were flying long haul it was based on about 70 hours a month with greater than 24 hours for the layover. Nowadays, most companies regularly fly 90 hours a month and provide only 24 hours after a 14 hour long haul flight!

Thanks for the comments. I agree that it is probably more than time zones and long haul......but I think both items contribute, especially in aircraft where there is little for the pilot to do, (technology trumps heavy brain work). I think everyone agrees that the time seems to fly when one is busy whether it is in the cockpit or just a job at home. People fall asleep watching TV, not because they are tired but because what they are doing,(watching), is probably mind numbing. Gamers, who interact with the TV, seldom if ever, fall asleep.

My long haul was 80/mo and generally speaking we did get the majority of layovers with about 24 hours on the ground. I have never experienced a 14 hour flight except as a pax

Ryan Air ??? Probably the worst airline in the world as far as treating crews go and a good poster boy for how not to treat employees.

I agree that some of today's work rules do contribute to the snoooozing that happens but I also think there is a time zone issue as well as a boredom issue in the mix.

And finally...thank goodness I am out of the mix now....cause as far as pilots go.....nothing seems to be getting better !!!

[Don Hudson]

Hi Kip;

Thank you for your comments -

Re, "Perhaps there are some people who just can't adjust their body to the time zone time changes."

"Just my opinion but I don't think just "fatigue" contributes to every incident of a pilot zzzzzzing."

Yes, agree with both of your comments. There's a lot of research now available on the management of fatigue. Last summer, the REPORT OF THE CANADIAN AVIATION REGULATION ADVISORY COUNCIL (CARAC) FLIGHT CREW FATIGUE MANAGEMENT WORKING GROUP was issued. The work references the research employed to support the report so people can examine the science for themselves. Also, TC released a document (Fatigue Risk Management System for the Canadian Aviation Industry - Developing and Implementing a Fatigue risk management System) for guidance on how to create an FRMS Program.

Re "nothing getting better for pilots", yes, widely discussed at length here and elsewhere and I agree with that too. But in aviation where a defined minimum level of qualification and competency, in all aspects of aviation on not just the pointy end, is required, that is a self-correcting loop with significant risk factors attached.

I like your comment on the relationship between automation and fatigue, particularly through physical inactivity and a requirement to monitor. Log-keeping, communications, programming / re-programming can all contribute to mental activity but with three to five hours per year of actual hand-flying the machine for international crews and perhaps twice or maybe three times that for domestic crews, physical activity is at a minimum. Humans are poor monitors as we all know, and machines don't get tired. Perhaps the two were given the wrong tasks and should have been swapped decades ago?!

I can speak from lots of experience regarding long-haul and crew rest. I've done two eighteen-plus hour duty days in my career (a medical emergency (YVR > HKG) with a turn-back to Anchorage, continuing to HKG, and on 9/13 - 2 days after 9/11, YVR > TPE due to the length of time it took to arrange clearance across the Pacific - we were the first flight out of N.A westbound), and on both flights we had double augmentation which essentially halves the duty time and makes a signficant operational difference. In terms of crew costs alone (for the 4th pilot), on the medical diversion, it saved the company a huge buck because the alternative on the turn-back was to park the airplane and send us all to the hotel to depart the next day, or muster a rescue aircraft and a fresh front & back crew while the passengers waited either at the airport, (a horror show to be sure) or the hotel, ($$$ again). We all agreed, (pilots, F/A's), that we were up for the extended duty day and it worked with minimum cost; the operation made good economic sense, and it was safe.

But battling for the fourth pilot on that route (and others which were on the cusp of the agreement) even on economics alone (as per the above example), was a huge fight, as some here will know. The industry has come a long way. We routinely did YVR > LHR > YVR or the same out of YYC, with just two pilots. It didn't matter how well one slept in LHR - it was not possible to avoid significant fatigue levels particularly on the west-bound leg, and that was long before "Controlled Rest" was considered. Freight work was magically assumed to be different, so a departure at 01:40 from YYZ > YMX > YWG > YEG > YVR arriving at 06:30 was never examined. We used to do three legs overseas and back. No longer - these are improvements that are worth their cost.

The notions that humans can "motor through" fatigue if one just willed oneself to stay awake, was continuously active or was just psychologically "built for it" were all popular and they were and are all wrong. When the brain needs rest, it will take it, whether in micro-sleeps which one is not always cognizant of or in just falling asleep no matter what the circumstances.

Hi Brett - thank you as well for your comments. I do see the point being made, (re apples / oranges; fatigue & aviation vs. bus accidents) and I think it is worth considering that the difference is the immediacy of the effects as perceived by the regulator (and by the public). Clearly, a bus driver who falls asleep while driving is an instant, extremely high risk whereas the same occuring to airline crews does not have the same quality of immediacy. In fact it is upon this notion that perhaps the regulator (and I suggest not-even-perhaps the air carriers) rest their current arguments against more tightly-controlled duty day, rest and augmentation policies.

These notions do not only apply to air crews; they apply, equally in my view, to maintenance personnel. While they typically are not exposed to time zone work, they do perform critical work in "low-circadian-rhythm" time periods and that can have, (and has had) material effects on risk and air safety.

It may seem a bit cynical to suggest that a study of fatalities attributable to operator fatigue be made. I say cynical because no fatalities are acceptable, and to study them with a view to "finding permission" to keep things as they are though that may not be the original intention of the work, is always possible.

However, the "immediacy" of a bus or truck accident drives, as you say, the tighter regulations and stricter enforcement activities while, for both reasonable, and not-so-defensible reasons, there are none, (of the same character and intent), in place for air crews. The comparison is complex and not always fair, but it should at least err on the conservative side.

[Boney]

CrewAlert is a great tool.