37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 123541 |
Time | |
Date | 198909 |
Day | Wed |
Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : ewr |
State Reference | NJ |
Altitude | agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0 |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng |
Flight Phase | ground : preflight |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : instrument pilot : commercial pilot : cfi pilot : atp pilot : flight engineer |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 7945 flight time type : 3400 |
ASRS Report | 123541 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Events | |
Anomaly | non adherence : far non adherence other |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | none taken : detected after the fact |
Consequence | Other Other |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Ambiguous |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation other |
Narrative:
I am writing because in today's age of computers, it is very easy to rely on a program that might not be programmed to handle all possibilities. On 9/tue/89, I was called in from reserve duty to fly a ewr-ord-ewr turn. We departed ewr at XX22 pm and returned to ewr at XX08 pm local, with 5:18 flight time. Scheduling then assigned us a dca overnight. When we landed in dca at XX22 pm local our flight time totaled 6:46. We had a reduced rest period of 8:45 block-to-block, as per the company policy, and planned for a XX07 am departure back to ewr. While we slept, scheduling assigned us a pwm turn after our dca-ewr flight. We were scheduled to be back from pwm prior to our XX21 pm departure on the next day. This is where the computer glitch appeared. When we went to sleep we were legal, however when we woke up we were illegal. Our pairing now had us scheduling to fly in excess of 11:00 within a 24-hour period, with only 8:45 block-to-block reduced rest. We should have had 9:45 block-to-block reduced rest as per the company policy based on the FAA regulations. I don't believe that the computer would have allowed this pairing to be built completely from the beginning. Because it was modified twice, however, it was unable to pick up a rest problem that had already occurred. With only 6 hours sleep and being rushed in the morning for the early push from dca-ewr, I'm embarrassed to say that we didn't scrutinize the problem until on our return flight from pwm, when scheduling again wanted to add another turn to our pairing (of course they couldn't). I have already alerted my assistant chief pilot in ewr to this problem, and he has promised to follow it up. Beware of computer programmers--both in the cockpit and on the ground.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ACR FLT CREW EXCEEDS THE 8-IN-24 HOURS FLT TIME RULING WITH THE 2-FOR-1 REST PERIOD.
Narrative: I AM WRITING BECAUSE IN TODAY'S AGE OF COMPUTERS, IT IS VERY EASY TO RELY ON A PROGRAM THAT MIGHT NOT BE PROGRAMMED TO HANDLE ALL POSSIBILITIES. ON 9/TUE/89, I WAS CALLED IN FROM RESERVE DUTY TO FLY A EWR-ORD-EWR TURN. WE DEPARTED EWR AT XX22 PM AND RETURNED TO EWR AT XX08 PM LCL, WITH 5:18 FLT TIME. SCHEDULING THEN ASSIGNED US A DCA OVERNIGHT. WHEN WE LANDED IN DCA AT XX22 PM LCL OUR FLT TIME TOTALED 6:46. WE HAD A REDUCED REST PERIOD OF 8:45 BLOCK-TO-BLOCK, AS PER THE COMPANY POLICY, AND PLANNED FOR A XX07 AM DEP BACK TO EWR. WHILE WE SLEPT, SCHEDULING ASSIGNED US A PWM TURN AFTER OUR DCA-EWR FLT. WE WERE SCHEDULED TO BE BACK FROM PWM PRIOR TO OUR XX21 PM DEP ON THE NEXT DAY. THIS IS WHERE THE COMPUTER GLITCH APPEARED. WHEN WE WENT TO SLEEP WE WERE LEGAL, HOWEVER WHEN WE WOKE UP WE WERE ILLEGAL. OUR PAIRING NOW HAD US SCHEDULING TO FLY IN EXCESS OF 11:00 WITHIN A 24-HR PERIOD, WITH ONLY 8:45 BLOCK-TO-BLOCK REDUCED REST. WE SHOULD HAVE HAD 9:45 BLOCK-TO-BLOCK REDUCED REST AS PER THE COMPANY POLICY BASED ON THE FAA REGS. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE COMPUTER WOULD HAVE ALLOWED THIS PAIRING TO BE BUILT COMPLETELY FROM THE BEGINNING. BECAUSE IT WAS MODIFIED TWICE, HOWEVER, IT WAS UNABLE TO PICK UP A REST PROB THAT HAD ALREADY OCCURRED. WITH ONLY 6 HRS SLEEP AND BEING RUSHED IN THE MORNING FOR THE EARLY PUSH FROM DCA-EWR, I'M EMBARRASSED TO SAY THAT WE DIDN'T SCRUTINIZE THE PROB UNTIL ON OUR RETURN FLT FROM PWM, WHEN SCHEDULING AGAIN WANTED TO ADD ANOTHER TURN TO OUR PAIRING (OF COURSE THEY COULDN'T). I HAVE ALREADY ALERTED MY ASSISTANT CHIEF PLT IN EWR TO THIS PROB, AND HE HAS PROMISED TO FOLLOW IT UP. BEWARE OF COMPUTER PROGRAMMERS--BOTH IN THE COCKPIT AND ON THE GND.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.