Thanks!

One of my kids (25yrs. old, still in college on the 8 year plan) called me a few days ago and she said, "Hey dad, can you send me some money so I can buy you something nice for Father's Day?"

At least my dog got me some Sam Adams Rebel IPA!

Man's best friend!

 

Why? This is how our company chooses to handle it. It's no secret. It's been put in writing. They never retracted it.

 

I agree with what you have posted however it's all kind of a moot point. It's 30 seconds on the ACARS to allow or deny a extension. Make a decision and send a message. It's done.
I believe the company has not made a change in policy because it always made it clear the concurrence could be revoke at any time. In the FAA interpretation the option to revoke was not there. Again however it makes no real difference.

 

Mega-millions. I like that.
Sounds like a very precise number. Almost as precise as the 125 jobs that we were specifically told C2012 would cost. At an average of maybe $200K plus benefits, that's probably around $32.5M per year.

May one assume that's what you meant by mega?

 

On the topic of HP 44's extension, I'm under the impression that the problem in 117 is the the PIC (not the individual pilot) makes the call as to fitness, which leaves the fatigue call as the only "approved" option to refuse the flight.

I don't know if Delta's pre-extension policy is legal, and I strongly object to it, but it was policy, and you can see how it combined with the FAR language to make the crew find that the path to least resistance went through the air. I heard other discussions, where first officers went along with Captains that were only interested in their own fitness. Fortunately, on a day where many of these discussions took place, I was flying with an APC regular, who consulted with me first, and simply called sched to tell them we weren't extending. EOS.

Enter the latest LOA...

The new language requires concurrence by both pilots to extend. It's more restrictive than 117, and it removes the extra pressure on the FO. So if HP 44's story occurs before the effective date of that change in the LOA, it highlights a benefit gained. If the story takes place afterwards, he needs to study his contract more.

 

Here's an idea: When you sign the release, also write at the bottom, "I will NOT extend past..." and enter your own personal drop dead time.

Then send and ACARS msg to the Disp. with the same drop dead time, as you are taxiing around JFK for an hour. You might put in a hotel request too, just to get him to pay attention!

 

CE,

The document you quote points to the PIC as the person that determines crew fitness, doesn't it? That might be the piece you're not considering.

Should be a moot point (not a mute FO) with the latest LOA.

 

Since it's history, I'm not gonna jump on the "I woulda/you shoulda" bandwagon, but ask you to do an FCR. These incidents need to be documented, if for nothing else our confusion over extension obligations.
I hate that the default is acceptance, and a threat of pay loss and CP involvement to justify our decision.
I've flown a couple of the new max effort 117 trips and never been so tired since my last ORI. So much for scientific crew rest.

 

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.

So we sign the FDRA and agree to an extension that's known prior to signing. But if a reason materializes after signing (after block-out), we have to agree via ACARS. Correct?

 

Blow the whistle on what?