Originally Posted by
Dash8widget
Well sure, old rules, new rules - as long as they kept giving you the necessary breaks, you could be at work indefinitely, I guess.
Hypothetical 7 day trip:
Day 1: report 1900, 5 hour FDP, 14 hour layover
Day 2: 10 hour FDP, 14 hour layover
Day 3: 10 hour FDP, 14 hour layover
Day 4: 10 hour FDP, 14 hour layover
Day 5: 10 hour FDP, 11 hour layover
Day 6: 10 hour FDP, 11 hour layover
Day 7: 5 hour FDP. Block in at 1300
138 hours from report to block in. 60 total FDP hours. No 30 hour breaks, no 24 hour breaks.
At 1300 on day 7 you still had 30 hours off in the previous 168.
Legal under 117. Not legal under current FAR's
Yes, it's pushed right at the limit. No, we would probably never actually see a trip like this (never say never?). But a hypothetical trip like this is a good way to get a feel for what is possible under the new rules.
Now I see what you were getting at. Due to the 168 hour rolling window the "30 hour break" precedes working 7 calendar days in a row with no intervening break.
I agree, not a pretty picture, and hard to believe that this is under the new "scientifically based" rules.
Just another example of "the Man keeping us down."
Scoop