Anyone heard anything about the new bill?
 

Just wondering has anyone heard anything about the bill? Is it going to get passed in Sept? Has the final draft that is to be submitted and voted on out yet? The last time I heard or saw anything about it was a month ago from the library of congress website.

Nothing new that I have been able to find out, but I imagine there will be another public announcment on it before the end of the year.These things will take time

There two completely separate processes to keep an eye...

The congressional bill, which will obviously have the force of law when passed.

The FAA rule-making process, which is more subject to debate, delays and outside influence.

A law, if passed, will overide any conflicting FAA provisions.

by the time we see or hear anything ill be 2010

Or until management runs out of money to lobby everyone.:rolleyes:

This may be one of those rare cases where public perception will out way the force of any lobbying effort by the ATA or RAA. Have you all written your representatives. You can try to make an appointment with them while they are in town as well.

HAHA I like your ICON PIC! I remember that show when I was Jr. High back in 1990. I just found the DVDs on Amazon last year and bought it. :D

Mine never responded.

They may not respond, but they (or their staffers at least) read ALL of their constituent mail and often use those inputs to develop their stand on some issues. You will not likely change their mind on some major issue which is a key platform of their party (ex. abortion), but on little-known issues which they don't have expertise or a predefined opinion, a few letters can make all the difference.

The committee that is deciding the new duty restrictions will have their last meeting this coming week. Sounds like so far the unions and the industry are pretty close on agreeing on the same rules. There will not be any more 16 hr duty days, they are going to have 2 separate max duty. One will be 12 hrs for day flying, and one will be 9 hrs for night flying due to your body being in circadian low.

People can get upset and say, "i can work way more than 12 hrs or 9 hrs." But this committee is using the facts, and using fatigue studies to come up with safe and responsible work hours.

So far this is only suppose to affect the 121 carriers, but there are some that are trying to make sure it gets to the 135 carriers too; ONE LEVEL OF SAFETY.

If you are talking about HR.3371, there is nothing new. I would hate to see this one grow stale and get dropped.

H.R. 3371: Airline Safety and Pilot Training Improvement Act of 2009 (GovTrack.us)

I wonder what this will do to trip productivity. Will airlines be forced to create more productive trips or will we be on the road more days in the month?

I'm really not being a smarta--, but you should already know the answer ot this one...

Depends on your contract work rules. It could be bad or good, however, if it's a regional, they will most likely have to hire more pilots if mainline wants to keep the RJ's on the same schedule they are on now.

Congress has been on summer recess right (August is there month off)? I'd imagine that the ball will begin rolling again in September when both the House and Senate are back in full.

There is a VERY real possibility that such legislation will actually reduce pilot QOL. If trips are forced to become more productive (longer overnights, shorter duty days), then expect to lose your days off. Even the best contracts don't guarantee more than 12 days off, even though senior pilots are accustomed to 16-18. Congress is not going to guarantee us any more than 1-2 days off per week.


This could have the greatest impact on those who fly the most legs...ie regionals.

I have written many letters and I encourage everyone to do so as well. There were even some templates posted on here about a month and a half ago. I probably received a 70% response rate, with some of the letters catching my attention on how detailed they were.

I believe Rick’s theory is correct. You may have a hard time changing a parties issue on big topics such as abortion, but when it comes to smaller issues like this, you can most definitely influence there decision with your letters.

H.r. 3371, The “airline Safety And Pilot Trai
 

I agree with the above post.
I feel that HR 3371 falls short of what should be goals to bolster airline safety.
The House of Reps has a Transportation Committee and underneath that there is an Aviation Subcommittee.

Transportation and Infrastructure Committee

This is the only real change in the bill. Everything else appears to be a "Study".

1. Requires airline pilots to hold an FAA Airline Transport Pilot license (1,500 minimum flight hours required).
2. Establishes comprehensive pre-employment screening of prospective pilots including an assessment of a pilot’s skills, aptitudes, airmanship and suitability for functioning in the airline’s operational environment.
3. Requires airlines to: establish pilot mentoring programs whereby highly experienced pilots will mentor junior pilots; create Pilot Professional Development Committees; modify training programs to accommodate new-hire pilots with different levels and types of flight experience; and provide leadership and command training to pilots in command (including complying with the "sterile cockpit rule").

Greedy Airine managers wanted cheaper labor (i.e. Pay everyone the same as a gate agent or Flight attendant). It was easy.... just create pilot ratings mills and flood the market with people with Commercial ins. multi certificates. I cant tell you how many ex-banktellers were in my new hire class, busting every checkride.... but coddled through and are now big Union guys because they want to protect the "good life" they have now.

Require a Bachelors for an ATP... and suddenly... Poof... Pay would go up and the professions respectability regains some lost form.

I thought there was going to be recommendations coming out Sept 1? Or did I hear something wrong?

Those are duty time recommendations from the FAA I believe. Which is a separate issue from anything congress decides to do.

Ah, you heard something wrong. It hasn't even been voted on by the House, then the Senate votes, then the Prez signs it and then there are a bunch of 90 days after and 180 days after and one year after and 24 months after. Maybe Sept 2010.

Gov't struggles to find answer to pilot fatigue

By JOAN LOWY (AP) – 8 minutes ago

WASHINGTON — Current federal rules for how many hours pilots can be scheduled to work were written in an age of propellor-driven planes. Officials back then defined a reasonable work day for a pilot without a scientific understanding of fatigue and well before the modern airline industry.

Finding ways to prevent pilot fatigue has stymied federal regulators and the airline industry for decades. The National Transportation Safety Board has been recommending since 1990 that rules on how many hours pilots can be scheduled to work be updated to take into account early starting times and frequent takeoffs and landings.

On Tuesday, a committee made up of airline officials and union leaders is expected to deliver recommendations for updating the regulations. Although Federal Aviation Administrator Randy Babbitt has promised to vet those recommendations swiftly and turn them into a formal proposal by the FAA, the process will at a minimum take months to complete.

NTSB Chairman Deborah Hersman said she doesn't expect the suggestions to be offered Tuesday to address all the issues that are part of the fatigue problem, but she hopes they will supply a foundation. "You have to build all the rest of the house around it," she said.

Some members of Congress, though, don't trust the FAA to finally come to grips with the problem. Besides forcing the agency's hand, a bill proposed by lawmakers would require airlines to use fatigue risk management systems — complex scheduling programs that alert the company to potential fatigue problems.

After the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee approved the bill earlier this month, Chairman James Oberstar ran through a list of the airline crashes in recent decades.

"The common thread running through all of it is fatigue," said Oberstar, D-Minn. "We have many experiences of the flight crew, the cabin crew, who in cases of emergency were just so numb they couldn't respond instantly to a tragedy at hand."

Linda Zimmerman, a retired Ohio teacher whose sister died in a 2004 regional airline crash in Kirksville, Mo., said the government's slow response saddens her.

"So many people have died and they haven't done anything about it," Zimmerman said.

Corporate Airlines Flight 5966 was preparing to land on Oct. 19, 2004, when the twin-engine turboprop slammed into trees. The pilots and 11 passengers were killed. Two injured passengers survived by jumping from the plane moments before it was engulfed in flames.

The NTSB said the pilots failed to notice that their plane had descended too quickly because they failed to follow procedures and engaged in unprofessional cockpit banter. But the board also said the captain and first officer probably were exhausted — they were completing their sixth flight of the day, had been on duty more than 14 hours and had flown three trips the day before.

Studies show exhaustion can impair a flier's judgment in much the same way alcohol does. It's not uncommon for overtired pilots to focus on a conversation or a single chore and miss other things going on around them, including critical flight information. In a few cases, they've just fallen asleep.

Last year, two Mesa Airlines pilots conked out for at least 18 minutes during a midmorning flight from Honolulu to Hilo, Hawaii, as their plane continued to cruise past its destination and out to sea. Air traffic controllers were finally able to raise the pilots, who turned around the plane with its 40 passengers and landed it safely.

NTSB said that even though the pilots had not been working long that day, they were clearly fatigued. They cited the pilots' work schedules — the day of the incident was the third consecutive day that both pilots started duty at 5:40 a.m. — and said the captain had an undiagnosed case of sleep apnea.

FAA rules on how many hours an airline pilot may fly or be on duty before he must rest have been virtually unchanged for nearly a half-century, mainly because if airlines have to allow their crews more rest, they would have to hire more crews.

An FAA effort to tackle the issue in the mid-1990s foundered because airlines wanted concessions from pilots in return for reducing flying hours, and the pilots unions wouldn't go along. The agency proposed a new rule, but it has languished for years without final action.

NTSB's investigation of the crash of Continental Connection Flight 3407 on Feb. 12 near Buffalo, N.Y., killing 50, has spotlighted the long hours, low pay and long-distance commutes of regional airline pilots.

It's not clear where the captain of Flight 3407 slept the night before the crash, but it appears he may have tried to nap in a busy airport crew room where his company — regional carrier Colgan Air Inc. of Manassas, Va., which operated the flight for Continental — kept bright lights on continuously to discourage extended sleeping. The first officer commuted overnight from her home near Seattle to Newark, N.J., to make the flight to Buffalo.

Current rules say pilots can be scheduled for up to 16 hours on duty and up to eight hours of actual flight time in a day, with a minimum of eight hours off in between. They don't take into account that it is probably more tiring for regional airline pilots to fly five or six short legs in seven hours than it is for a pilot with a major airline to fly eight hours across the Atlantic to Europe with only one takeoff and landing.

One way to compensate would be a "controlled napping" policy, based on NASA research more than two decades ago. It found that pilots were more alert and performed better during landings when they were allowed to take turns napping during the cruise phase of flights. Other countries have adopted the policies, but the FAA has not.

According to Curtis Graeber, who ran NASA's fatigue research program for 10 years, some high-level officials worried that controlled napping would become the butt of jokes by late-night comedians.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Add News to your iGoogle Homepage Add News to your Google Homepage
The Associated Press

glad to see this reporter is following the story along since today is the purposed day the faa would come out with new rules...so we shall see

I think the change should be 8 hours of flight time and no more than 12 hours dutty time per day.

The Sept 1st date was the when the FAA working groups recommended changes afre supposed to be on Randy Babbit's desk. He will then initiate the public comment phase, and then finalize the rules. Since congress is breathing down his back, I expect the new FAA rules to be finalized in about 4 months. The effective dates for the various changes will come later, but not too much later.

Congress could do something different if they want, and they could do it whenever they want, either before or after the FAA makes their rules. Congress would override the FAA rules obviously.

They need to up the 30 in 7 to 35 in 7 or 40 in 7.

The advisory committee on pilot fatigue was expected to deliver its recommendations to the Federal Aviation Administration late Tuesday.
Committee members said the FAA had asked them not to make their recommendations public.


New rules may be coming to fight pilots? fatigue - News- msnbc.com

I do have mixed feelings about congress crossing the line and making FARs. What is the point of the FAA if they are going to do this? BUT at the same time, the FAA has let us down on these issues for many decades because they seem to keep caving to the airlines. If congress turns it into law, I wonder how these new regs will be enforced and modified if needed. This really takes a lot of authority away from the FAA if they ever want to make a revision in the future on these rules. And I can see our perspective airlines sticking it to us with these possible new duty times. (Less days off/Less block time per day) So now we sit 3 12 hr shifts to get 15hrs of block instead of 2 15hr days and get 15hrs of block. Time for unions to get more min days off when they go back to the table for new contracts???

Hi!

Congress is not "Crossing The Line". They made the laws creating the FAA, and they pass the laws funding the FAA. The are in control of the FAA and can legally do anything they want, including disbanding the FAA, if they so choose.

I, personally, am glad Congress is involved. The NTSB has been trying for DECADES to get the FAA to pass regulations to make flying safer, but the FAA, because of pressure from the Airline Industry, has decided to keep our flying more dangerous than it has to be.

I realize that safety has a price, but the changes that have been proposed by the NTSB make sense, and are economical in the long term. When the Airline Industry fights safety, they are short-sightedly thinking of near-term profits, instead of the long-term health of the industry.

Shame (and stupidity) on them!

cliff
NBO

The Subcommittee on Aviation under the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee will be hearing testimony tomorrow at 10:00 am. They will be streaming it live. Just click on the Yellow Box with Blue writing that says "View Web Cast" located on the left side of the screen. The web site is Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (hxxp://transportation.house.gov/).

The committee will be hearing testimony about the FAAs "Call to Action on Airline Safety and Pilot Training." H.R. 3371 (the "ATP required" to fly 121 bill) will come up as representatives from the University Aviation Association (UAA) and Aviation Accreditation Board International (AABI) will be giving testimony. The theme "Quality over Quantity" is what they are pushing.

The UAA and AABI are in favor of H.R. 3371 except for the part requiring an ATP to fly 121. They would like the bill to be amended which would allow pilots that graduate from an accredited AABI flight program be eligible for hire into a 121 operator.

Listed below is what they would like to see put into the legislation:

Insert on page 33, line 11:

(3) ACCREDITED UNIVERSITY GRADUATES.—

(A) FLIGHT CREW MEMBERS FROM ACCREDITED UNIVERSITIES.—Not withstanding paragraph (2), flight crew members from accredited universities shall be permitted to—

(i) complete the flight time requirements of the airline transport pilot certificate required in subparagraph (B) during air carrier employment; and

(ii) achieve the 23 years-old age limit during air carrier employment.

(B) AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT CERTIFICATE PRACTICAL EXAMINATION REQUIREMENT.--After having fulfilled the flight time requirements of the airline transport pilot license, flight crew members from accredited universities shall undergo and pass the airline transport pilot certificate practical examination administered by appropriately designated FAA personnel.

(C) FLIGHT CREW MEMBERS FROM ACCREDITED UNIVERSITIES DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term “flight crew members from accredited universities” means flight crew members who have--

(i) completed the commercial pilot certificate and multi-engine pilot ratings, the instrument rating, and the certified flight instructor certificate;

(ii) completed the airline transport pilot certificate knowledge requirements including the airline transport pilot certificate written examination; and

(iii) graduated from a university or college flight education program accredited by the Aviation Accreditation Board International or graduated from a university or college flight education program that meets the Aviation Accreditation Board International flight education criteria. The Aviation Accreditation Board International and University Aviation Association shall jointly determine the means by which compliance with Aviation Accreditation Board International flight education criteria is demonstrated.


This web site is a PDF version of the Bill H.R. 3371 as it stands now hxxp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3371ih.t xt.pdf. This website is the Government Printing Office (GPO).

We'll see how it plays out tomorrow.

-Tiger

Well of course they would! :rolleyes:

I wonder if Gulfstream et al is part of this accredited group?

I thought the whole idea is to gain experience beyond the academic amount dictated by the FAA for a commercial pilot license. That's kind of why the ATP has the minimums it does anyway right?

I had a feeling someone was going to propose a loophole in this somewhere and it looks like we now have it. Very frustrating.

http://www.aabi.aero/programs.html
http://www.aabi.aero/programs2.html

Removed.......

Nope dont blame GTA for this one, this is your ERAU and the like looking for a way to market their already steep prices. Lets see, We are the only way to 121 without an ATP, so we'll charge you 200K for our program now, I can see it already.

This accreditation thing is a complete load of crap. The whole point of this bill was to get experience into the flight deck. This does the exact reverse. I actually went to one of these programs, though I did not stay to instruct. I gained a great deal more experience working at an FBO where their wasn't a flight manager holding the instructor's and student's hands.

Hahaha ERAU is already $200k, estimated annual costs of attending are $53,000/year for undergrads.

Estimated Cost of Attending Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

I can't imagine what kind of person could look at that cost, look at the industry today, and think that this is a good idea. Probably the kind of person that's not very good at math.

Probably the kind of person that shouldn't get an exemption from the ATP requirement for Part 121.

If you guys don't like that amendment, give a subcommittee member a call, especially if one of them is a senator from your state. Here's the list:

Jerry F. Costello, Illinois, Chairman

Russ Carnahan, Missouri Parker Griffith, Alabama
Michael E. McMahon, New York
Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon
Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Columbia
Bob Filner, California
Eddie Bernice Johnson, Texas
Leonard L. Boswell, Iowa
Tim Holden, Pennsylvania
Michael E. Capuano, Massachusetts
Daniel Lipinski, Illinois
Mazie K. Hirono, Hawaii
Harry E. Mitchell, Arizona
John J. Hall, New York
Steve Cohen, Tennessee
Laura A. Richardson, California
John A. Boccieri, Ohio
Nick J. Rahall, II, West Virginia
Corrine Brown, Florida
Elijah E. Cummings, Maryland
Jason Altmire, Pennsylvania
Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
Mark H. Schauer, Michigan
James L. Oberstar, Minnesota (ex officio)

Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin, Ranking Member
Howard Coble, North Carolina
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee
Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan
Frank A. LoBiondo, New Jersey
Jerry Moran, Kansas
Sam Graves, Missouri
John Boozman, Arkansas
Shelley Moore Capito, West Virginia
Jim Gerlach, Pennsylvania
Charles W. Dent, Pennsylvania
Connie Mack, Florida
Lynn A. Westmoreland, Georgia
Jean Schmidt, Ohio
Mary Fallin, Oklahoma
Vern Buchanan, Florida
Brett Guthrie, Kentucky

Did anyone see the hearing webcast?