Karnak

A signed FDRA means we accept an FDP extension just as much as a signed FDRA means we accept the fuel load.

If something that affects the flight changes, the captain alters it…or doesn't proceed.

To assume anything else is silly. If a volcano erupts along your route, and you want more fuel to go around it, do you simply suck it up because you've signed an FDRA with a fuel load? If you wrench your back while shifting bags in the cockpit, do you ignore the injury because you've signed an FDRA with a statement about physical status?

Any captain that believes a signed FDRA can't be voided by evolving circumstances probably shouldn't be a pilot in command at Delta.

sailingfun

Exactly, the extension can be voided at any time by sending as one post stated a simple ACARS message.

80ktsClamp

Why would you sign the fdra if you don't like the fuel load?

TeddyKGB

Because he was happy with the fuel up until the volcano erupted enroute.

Karnak

Circumstances that weren't considered by the dispatcher or crew when the FDRA was generated.

The closure of 13/31 at LGA a few weeks ago (winds), AFTER I signed the FDRA, made us change the numbers on the FDRA. We agreed with the dispatcher to change the fuel and the enroute time. It doesn't matter that we'd signed the FDRA.

The FARs require us to pay attention and make decisions regardless of what we signed ____ minutes ago.

Purple Drank

Why doses the company assume we will extend? (And why does ALPA let them?)

Why not assume we won't. Then, if something "changes," we'll let the dispatcher know.

Karnak

Don't know. Don't care.

The FDP times on my rotation don't determine my fitness to fly. Nothing I sign at Delta's behest removes my FAR requirement to be fit to fly if circumstances change.

From the May 30, 2014 Chairman's Letter: "While FAR 117 only specifies that the PIC must concur that he is fit for duty when presented with an FDP extension, this LOA expands that concurrence to include the entire crew. Let’s be clear; it always was, and always will be each pilot’s individual responsibility to determine his or her fitness for duty. The new language doesn’t change the landscape much, but the pilot’s acceptance of an extension is no longer automatically assumed. Your union has your back."

80ktsClamp

Yep, and then the old FDRA is trashed and a new one is generated. That is a difference on pre-accepting a 117 extension.

Dash8widget

It's important to note that the FDRA signature only applies to FDP extensions that are known at the time it is signed. The FAA has clearly stated that you cannot pre-accept a FDP extension before you know about it. From the McFadden interpretation letter:

Q1: Does the fitness-for-duty affirmation that the PIC signed prior to when he found out about the delay serve as concurrence to an extension?

Subsection 117.l9(a) allows an FDP to be extended up to 2 hours beyond the pertinent FDP limit in response to unforeseen operational circumstances that arise prior to takeoff. This extension is subject to a number of limitations, one of which is that the PIC and the certificate holder must both concur with the extension.' A document that the PIC signed before he found out about the need for an extension would not be sufficient to concur with the extension because a person cannot concur with something that he or she does not know about. Instead, the PIC must affirmatively concur with the extension.

qball

Denny... The only penalty I can see is the company must return to the minimum ASK level in the subsequent measurement period (essentially Jan1 to Jan1) So it looks like the company could be out of compliance for one measurement period and not be required to fix it until the subsequent measurement period. However, I see no teeth in the LOA for failure to do so and we have seen that the company has no qualms about not staying in compliance with the KLM/AF JV. The "cure" period seems tighter, but still no teeth for non compliance.