Reduced capacity? If they reduce their capacity any more in some markets, they'll just be shooting themselves in the foot...pax are so disgusted now with oversells/cancellations and rude gate agents/staff that I've heard more than one talk of driving, taking AMTRAK if it's available or just not traveling.

None of those are good outcomes, and entirely avoidable if the mainline carriers could think beyond the end of the quarter and "analysts expectations". Of course the one long-term thought that all of management has in common is what color their parachute is. Gold seems to be particularly popular in our industry. :D

It think it is likely that we will see daily legs taken into consideration. Sounds like it will be something along these lines:

12 hours max duty, no extensions.
10 hour max flight, with 2 legs.
More than two legs and you start reducing the legal flight hours. Net result would be a max of 4-5 really short legs, or maybe 3-4 longer legs.
10 hours min rest, not reducible, and starting/ending in the hotel lobby.

I have also heard the time zone crossing reg. (US only) If anyone of your legs cross a time zone different than your origin airport, you will be limited to 7 hrs. total flight time.

One has to wonder even if rest requirements improved will these laws have the opposite effect as intended. Will pilots drink more on the road and get less quality of sleep due to all the free time? Will pilots push their commutes and sleep in airports more so they can get more time at home due to reduced days off? Just because something looks good on paper doesn't mean it will have the desired outcome.

Oh my god. Can you say girlie-men?? I don't even know what to say, for those hiding behind the veil of "safety." I hear it in the crewroom all the time! Y'all want to never fly more than one leg a day! We've all had a 16-hour, 8-leg day, and if you can't handle that on occasion, you don't belong in the flightdeck!

Incredible...

I think the problem is that it's not "on occasion". It's built into every trip... Just like reduced rest isn't "for emergencies", it's scheduled into trips now...

And, as a pilot, YOU should know better... Just because something is legal, doesn't make it a good idea. Because you got away with flying tired a few (or a few hundred) times doesn't mean it's a safe practice... Cook an engine at v1 in a heavy plane on that 8th leg at 16 hours "legal to start, legal to finish" in the ice and THEN see how "manly" you are.

On occasion. Some places do these "girlie-men" 16 hour, 8 leg routes on a daily basis. So since your wonderful place of work, wherever it may be, is so amazing that they only have these days once in a blue moon, please, spread your awesome knowledge around so that others may benefit from the awe-inspiring knowledge you posses to choose airline employers oh great captain of non-fatigue.

Ok Randy Savage.

Keyboard commando at it's best.

Next time I’m fatigued in the cockpit I’ll just make sure to keep flying but at the same time mention that in the event of an incident or accident I don’t want to be called a girlie-man by ExperimentalAB on Airline Pilot Forums for calling in fatigued.. you know, just so it’s on the CVR.

The $50,000 question is why does anything need to be done when there are perfectly good rules in place that already protect a pilot? I guess the only thing I've thought was BS was the min of 8hrs. Bump it to 9 and call it a day. Most of the fatigue related incidents were because of bad decisions made by the pilots. Laws can't fix that. You can take a horse to water but you can't force him to drink. All a pilot has to do is pickup the phone and say "I'm fatigued" and it's a done deal. I've never called fatigue but we have called and had departures pushed back an extra hour or two and it didn't take much effort.