Narrative:

I did not sleep during my rest break on this flight. I was very tired during the descent and approach. At that point; it was not practical to go back to the bunk and try again. I'm glad nothing went badly. Here's how I got into this situation.this plane is one with the 'notch' carved out of the head space for stowage of flight attendant emergency equipment. It also has a smoke detector on the ceiling right above the head space. The smoke detector has a bright green indicator light which is too bright and is a nuisance when trying to doze off. Until recently; it has been common to find various light blockers over the green light intended to mitigate the nuisance. Frequently those light blockers were successful. Also frequently they did not impede the light's function. One example is the gray disks that were removed from the mrd folder and placed over the indicator. Those were not opaque; so function was not impaired; but they were enough of a block to reduce if not eliminate the nuisance. Unfortunately; some authority has taken it upon himself to decide that having the light at full brightness directly over the resting pilot's face is more important than allowing the resting pilot to doze off naturally; and has made an issue of having any mitigation in place. That was the situation I encountered in this case. The light was directly over my face; and because of the notch space for the flight attendant equipment I could not move my face far enough to the side to get out from under the light. I was unable to doze off because of the light. This is simply the latest example of the farce that the crew rest facility conversation has become. It is abundantly clear that nobody - is serious about on board crew rest. If anybody was serious about it; something serious would have been done by now. In this case; the fleet has promised some sort of 'stop gap' measure; such as first class eye shields; to provide an ability to manage this light issue. Those have not been provided; but the self-help mitigation measures have been removed and emphatically prohibited. What message does that send? It is yet another acknowledgement that the facility is inadequate; i.e.; is not dark enough to allow comfortable sleep; but that it doesn't matter. If it did matter the eye shields at the very least would have been provided before all the planes were 'scrubbed' for stickers. This is on top of previous suggestions from the fleet that we should wear foam ear plugs to mitigate the well-documented noise issues. Again; that is an admission that the facility is too noise-prone to allow comfortable sleep. So here is what the company and the FAA have admitted. The current rest facility is too noisy. Nothing has been done. The current rest facility is too brightly illuminated. Nothing has been done. The temperature cannot be controlled. Nothing has been done. The bed itself is not large enough. Nothing has been done. And that it is more important for the flight attendants to have a vertical stowage closet than for pilots to have adequate head space. All this after years of conversation about an on board rest facility.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B777 First Officer described his company's inhospitable crew rest bunk conditions which are not conducive to sleep and result in flight crew fatigue during the flight's final stages.

Narrative: I did not sleep during my rest break on this flight. I was very tired during the descent and approach. At that point; it was not practical to go back to the bunk and try again. I'm glad nothing went badly. Here's how I got into this situation.This plane is one with the 'notch' carved out of the head space for stowage of flight attendant emergency equipment. It also has a smoke detector on the ceiling right above the head space. The smoke detector has a bright green indicator light which is too bright and is a nuisance when trying to doze off. Until recently; it has been common to find various light blockers over the green light intended to mitigate the nuisance. Frequently those light blockers were successful. Also frequently they did not impede the light's function. One example is the gray disks that were removed from the MRD folder and placed over the indicator. Those were not opaque; so function was not impaired; but they were enough of a block to reduce if not eliminate the nuisance. Unfortunately; some authority has taken it upon himself to decide that having the light at full brightness directly over the resting pilot's face is more important than allowing the resting pilot to doze off naturally; and has made an issue of having ANY mitigation in place. That was the situation I encountered in this case. The light was directly over my face; and because of the notch space for the flight attendant equipment I could not move my face far enough to the side to get out from under the light. I was unable to doze off because of the light. This is simply the latest example of the farce that the crew rest facility conversation has become. It is abundantly clear that nobody - is serious about on board crew rest. If anybody was serious about it; something serious would have been done by now. In this case; the fleet has promised some sort of 'stop gap' measure; such as first class eye shields; to provide an ability to manage this light issue. Those have not been provided; but the self-help mitigation measures have been removed and emphatically prohibited. What message does that send? It is yet another acknowledgement that the facility is inadequate; i.e.; is not dark enough to allow comfortable sleep; but that it doesn't matter. If it did matter the eye shields at the very least would have been provided before all the planes were 'scrubbed' for stickers. This is on top of previous suggestions from the fleet that we should wear foam ear plugs to mitigate the well-documented noise issues. Again; that is an admission that the facility is too noise-prone to allow comfortable sleep. So here is what the company and the FAA have admitted. The current rest facility is too noisy. Nothing has been done. The current rest facility is too brightly illuminated. Nothing has been done. The temperature cannot be controlled. Nothing has been done. The bed itself is not large enough. Nothing has been done. And that it is more important for the flight attendants to have a vertical stowage closet than for pilots to have adequate head space. All this after years of conversation about an on board rest facility.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.