That commute might get a little harder...
 

Airline Defends Training of Pilot in Crash - WSJ.com

From a WSJ article that previews tommorow's NTSB hearings on Colgan 3407:

As a commuter (albeit with a relatively short commute), this a can of worms that I don't want opened. The last thing I want to see are restrictions placed on how I get to work.

Well, if they expect us to live in base, then they need to look at where I work. RAH opens and closes bases at will, it seems. I would hate of have to move every few years. I did not join the military, although the airlines are somewhat paramilitary.

Airlines benefit from commuters just as much as pilots do. Commuters (such as I) have more motivation to make sure overnight legs do not cancel, to keep on schedule and to get weight restrictions lifted. (Though the last example is more an issue for the regional forum, it makes sense that we might be able to get a few revenue pax on in addition to our fellow commuters. )

Furthermore, one justification for not paying moving expenses for pilots is that we can just commute. Base closures and displacements are common and easy ways for airlines to align costs, but if we all the sudden have to move to our new bases, a whole new can of contractual worms gets opened.

I have a feeling that the same lobby that has kept work and duty rules on the books for so long may actually be on our side on this one particular issue

Can you imagine if every regional pilot in DC, Newark, or New York had to earn enough mony to actually LIVE there?

I don't commute (fly) to work. I drive. I live 80 miles away from my base (New York).

It is doable provided gas isn't $140 a barrrel.

I'm going out on a limb here, but I bet there are poor people living in all those places.:D

Don't mean to bust your chops, but how practical is that on reserve with a 90 minute callout?

True. And how many of those hold your loved ones lives in their hands?

I'm well within the callout time for the cesspool they call Newark.

Regional? Ha! I was CAL mainline and couldn't afford to live anywhere near EWR.

I wouldn't worry about it. The NTSB has been desperately trying to force the FAA to address pilot rest requirements for the past decade. The NTSB has no regulatory authority, just a bunch of highly educated people who know exactly what they're talking about.

Which pretty much means NADA when talking about the FAA and the numerous industry groups that oppose expensive changes in rest requirements for pilots.

That said, it looks like the CA had 22 hours off before showing up for his shift. That's plenty of time for rest. You can't regulate poor judgment (like riding a red-eye during your rest period).

I hear you but they don't need to do that. The restriction is already in place. You are supposed to be fit for your flight.

When I used to do my two leg commute for RP I had to have a backup flight for each leg. So with a show time of say 2PM in STL I still would get up 4:30AM to get on a 6AM Delta to ATL, then to STL or else I would have not made it. Then fly until 11PM, or later when delayed. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the FAA would have been all over me about why I have spent some 20 hours in airplanes/airports that day. The burden to prove that I was fit for my trip would have been on me. BTW real though to prove that when the TSA camera shows you walking through the checkpoint at 5:15AM half way across the country. In addition it is the law that a company scheduled deadhead, and the usual 30-45min prior the departure time of that DH is not considered rest. From there it only takes one step to prove that indeed my commute can't be considered rest although it is not forbidden. And we all know that it is true. It is no rest and you feel like crap on that first day.

Having said all that, I agree, this may have an outcome that will make commuting even more miserable. I don't expect anything good coming out of this. A 2 leg commute + a crappy regional schedule + commutable trips = playing with fire.

It wasn't the Captain they are talking about - the FO commuted in from Seattle the night before on the red-eye. I don't know what time her show was so she might of got a nap in the crew room.

The crash was at night and the FO took a redeye. Depending on her schedule she could have had all day to nap.

Seems to me we need to know the schedule of the pilots before we can point fingers.

Furthermore, why would you worry about the FAA changing rest requirements? They've proven time and again that it's not going to happen and the NTSB has no teeth.

I can see the FAA looking at commuters and questioning the rest. But there are 2 points I wonder about. 1) it's my time, so there is no way to control what I do on my time.and there are no rules for anyone getting to work. for example a guy driving 2 hours in traffic around NYC, LA, DC, or ATL may be more tired than a guy riding in the back of a plane for an hour from some small outstation. and 2) if its OK for IRO's or extra pilots on long trips to "rest" in cabin then why would a commuter be any different.

How tired the FO was or wasn't is a moot point. The captain was the one who was manipulting the controls and initially allowed the upset to occur. While the FO's alertness level could be effected by tiredness, how many newer regional FOs, based on experience level, would have taken command and overrode the captain's inputs? How many have sat there and not challenged the captain when they don't follow procedure?

I'm not throwing anyone under the bus, just pointing out that IMO experience played a larger part that sleep deprivation. When I was a newbie regional FO, I was not as forceful and direct with captains as I am now, having gotten older and been a captain myself. It was a tragic accident that occured. Hopefully politics and posturing to place blame won't obscure the important things that can come from this to make everyone else safer in the future.

Exactly, that was going to be my point as well. How do we know this FO didn't sleep like a baby on that red-eye?

What I find interesting is that commercial vehicle operators have higher rest and shorter on duty requirements than airline pilots. Crazy.

Yep, this is a very good point. Definitely can relate to what you are saying. Even if she saw the speed decay she may have just been thinking "okay, I'll give him 5 more knots until I say something." Although being 1500 feet above the ground and slow, even after only one year of experience, is something that I cannot imagine anyone would let slide.

Well...driving is more dangerous than flying right and no autopilot on that big rig and most often alone. :)

USMCFLYR

If the FAA or airlines intend to regulate my off-duty schedule, well then it becomes a duty obligation and I will need to get paid for it.

Pilots who commute from low-cost towns to places like EWR/NY will not cheerfully relocate their families into the ghetto and live in NY on $25K. I think most would quit, I certainly would.

Another option would be space positive travel to work...on the latest flight which will get you there. That would save you from planning backup flights.

Ha, as if we even get paid for the time we're on duty between flights?

Guys, read the human performance group report, it's in the public docket on the NTSB website. The FO commuted in on FedEx; the pilots and another commuter on the SEA-MEM leg said she slept, and she told the CA of the MEM-EWR leg that she slept. She was then observed sleeping in the crew room throughout the day (her showtime was 1330 but their first roundtrip was cancelled so both her and the CA hung out in the crew room all day). Now, none of that is very good rest - but from the report it's clear that there was more than enough time to get good rest if they'd had a place to do so. Neither had a crashpad.

Even if both pilots had received all the sleep that everyone would agree allowed them to operate at their optimum level of performance, would the result have been different?

I'm curious just how much ice they accumulated on the wing. Did not other aircraft go through the area just prior to the accident?

Crews that are fatigued make more mistakes every time. Every accident is a chain of mistakes. It only takes catching one of the mistakes to break the chain and prevent the accident. My worst performances have always been when very tired. One eye opener is serving as a relief pilot international. You get a gods eye view and see all the mistakes. The rest the crew has received is directly proportional to the mistakes made. Just one of them catching the airspeed reduction would have saved the day.

Hmph. It would take me several days off to recharge, shake the fatigue. Whether they slept prior to the accident flight is irrelevant, imho. After being jerked around by crew scheduling for a week or so, I'm toast. I could get all the sleep I could handle, but feel like a hollow shell of a zombie. Glad that's all behind me now.

Dude I so hear you. After a regular 4 day that was anything from a 4-6 day with the lost days after commuting, all I was able to do for the first 24 hours was to drink coffee, watch TV, check emails... But no gym, no going out, no reading, nothing productive or fun. Sitting like a potatoe without brain waves. It is amazing how much the job improves once you don't have to commute anymore.

But knowing you were in this fatigued state you chose to fly anyway.

The next time you have an operation, ask your doctor how much rest he/she got. My dad got called in all the time in the middle of this night to operate after working a full day.

Deets. We need deets!

You're right about needing to know the schedules first, which have been fleshed out more now than when I originally posted. Looks like the pilot "plan" was to commute on a redeye, sleep in the crew room, then show up for work. If I got that right, then I'd have say it sounds like poor judgment that started at the beginning of the commute on the pilots own time.

I'm not worried about the FAA changing jack squat. I WISH they'd listen to the NTSB and do so, even if it's not pertinent in this incident. This has been on the NSTB top ten "urgent action" list for at least 5 years. Not holding my breath though.

But is raising the flaps before the stall recovery is accomplished a product of fatigue or is it a lack of training/understanding about what a stall is and the role flaps have in keeping an airplane airborne?

I wonder what Bombardier's training program looks like regarding stall and shaker recognition and recovery. I'll bet they include it. Since Colgan is a new q-400 operator, don't they ascribe to the manufacturer's program?
Who set up the syllibus for the training?
And what, in the captain's background, promped him to pull back at the shaker? Did he think it was a tail stall due to ice?

Thank you!

Question, are there auto throttles on the Q400?

Thanks.

2. "rest" back in the cabin is technically not rest, it is still counted as part of a duty period. On flights under 12 hours scheduled block crews do not need any rest facilities. On flights scheduled over 12 hours a suitable rest area is required but this does not count to a FAR legal rest period as in off duty.

Bombardier does not offer a Q400 training program to operators. The Bombardier pilots who have testified @ the hearing have all been trained by Bombardier, which includes taking the plane through the pusher in the sim, but, then again, most of them took the actual aircraft through the pusher in real life too - they're test pilots. That's their job. They developed the Bombardier program that they then put themselves though.

Flight Safety was contracted by Bombardier to do so for Colgan. It is unclear how much input Bombardier had in this training. The FO went through Flight Safety training. The CA went through Colgan training.

It is impossible to know what the captain thought. He did know he was in ice. He had watched the NASA tail stall video. He had never been trained on tail stalls in the sim. He was flying an aircraft that is not susceptible to tail stalls in the normal flight regime, but he had not been provided that information. He had received stick pusher training while on the Saab as both an FO and CA @ Colgan, prior to his time on the Q400. His recovery procedures (as well as those of the FO) did not comply with any known wing stall recovery procedures, but do bear a resemblance to tail stall recovery procedures - is this coincidence, or should this suggest he thought he was in a tail stall? That's above my pay grade.

All this is info that I've acquired from watching the Colgan NTSB hearings.

No.

No.

One of the more common errors seen in simulator training is forgetting to add power on level off or configuration changes during approaches, especially as the loc and glideslope comes in (read: distraction).

Bringing it back to the commute
 

Colgan's VP of Safety just finished testifying. 3 of the 4 members of the NTSB panel spent some time on discussing commuting, and the impact on the duty day, including the Chairman (a former pilot), who ended the session with a 5 minute comment on 'responsible commuting' (as well the NTSB's feelings on Colgan's plans to pull CVR's to monitor sterile cockpit, but that's a whole 'nother thread).

It is extremely imperative that those pilots who choose to commute do so in a professional manner. The NTSB is on the prowl for fatigue reduction (As they should be). We, as pilots, cannot champion the cause of changing the duty rules if we are not willing to police ourselves on other issue of fatigue, such as commuting. It is easy media fodder to write stories about pilots who fly all night to get to work, and then work all day. It is much harder to write a story on the US domestic rest requirements.

A good hour, at least, has been spent discussing the accident FO's commute. (wake in SEA, SEA-MEM-EWR redeye on FedEx, with a 4 hour sit in MEM, and then a 6 hour sit in EWR before her show time). Please be responsible with your commute, or the FAA will ensure this is done for you.

It might be too late on the last one Sniper. We will see what this new FAA administration does with the NTSB findings! (Remember who is in charge of the FAA now)

I listened to some of it, and the defense of "How can you expect a pilot to live in base when bases change frequently, they only make $16,000/yr, and the housing market stinks" didn't go over too well.

Nor did the allowance letting crews "nap" in the crew room vs. no tolerance for "sleep" in the same crew room . . one being a quickie, the other for spending your off time sleeping preparing for a shift.

It actually came across for what it is: all parties involved have turned a deliberate blind eye to what commuting pilots do because generally, they behave pretty responsibility. This MAY (repeat MAY) be a case where someone didn't and it contributed to an accident.

I wonder how the FAA could address this? It's hard to imagine a regulatory solution that isn't extremely onerous. Maybe just some training course that teaches pilot that sleeping in a crowded crew room isn't the best way to get ready for work?