Safe Skies Act
#1
Thread Starter
Prime Minister/Moderator

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,870
Likes: 667
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
#5
#7
Line Holder
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
From: 767 Line Check Airman
I'll take them. We have trans Pacific and Atlantic flights. My 767 cargo configured aircraft doesn't have any rest facilities. The only way we'll ever get them is through legislation and not company negotiations.
#8
Line Holder
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 24
#9
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 981
Likes: 27
I’m not quite sure just how this would change things with cargo ops, but it may be short sighted to think this is good for pilots just because it’s bad for management.
In my pax flying days, it definitely gave me more rest opportunity, but absolutely destroyed my QOL. I was never a fan of 117 and most I knew agreed.
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
From: Frm. DHLAirways. Blue & White Boeing's Now. YEA!!
I’m not quite sure just how this would change things with cargo ops, but it may be short sighted to think this is good for pilots just because it’s bad for management.
In my pax flying days, it definitely gave me more rest opportunity, but absolutely destroyed my QOL. I was never a fan of 117 and most I knew agreed.
In my pax flying days, it definitely gave me more rest opportunity, but absolutely destroyed my QOL. I was never a fan of 117 and most I knew agreed.
Honest question here. Other than 4 years as a pax commuter pilot in the 90s, I’ve flown nothing but part 121 freight since then. I can see by the charts in the 117 rules, that rest periods are better and governed by circadian rhythm. But, again coming from a 121 freight guy, how did it affect your quality of life and why do you believe it was adversely affected?
TIA, FAJ
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



