Narrative:

During my sequence; I utilized the extension under far 117 for the first time. After completion of the sequence I had the chance to re-evaluate the sequence of events and thought I should share them for informational and safety purposes so that they can be improved upon. No known violations or incidents occurred during the sequence.I was called at early morning [for a] departure [that would be] terminating after a four hour flight. Upon arrival in phl; I was reassigned to [a] flight round trip with a scheduled termination of [approximately] eight hours. I arrived on the flight deck; and boarding began shortly after. After boarding; we were told of a catering delay that would be up to 1:30 long. The scheduled round trip was about 8:52 and therefore put us into a position that if continued delays would occur we would be exceeding our duty day limits. The captain called scheduling and informed them of the delay and they said that currently we appeared 'legal' for the trip but would keep their eye on it. After the delay exceeded 2 hours; we were kept on the paring under the assumption that we would still be legal to complete the entire pairing. We ended up departing after one hour forty minutes; and did not hear anything from scheduling. On the arrival to destination; we received an ACARS message from dispatch asking for an extension to be legal for the return flight. The captain and I agreed to do so. I have been in situations in which crew duty was an issue and typically the operations will do all they can to assist in a quick turn. This was not the case; it took over 30 minutes to get paperwork. The turn took about 57 minutes; however; we only had 40 passengers so as soon as we got paperwork they were trying to push us. We flew back to phl without incident. Upon termination of my pilot duties; I had been awake and active for over 18 hours. As I said there were no violations or rules broken on this sequence; however I thought I should share my opinion on how an far 117 extension works. My opinion is that as soon as you grant the extension the company could care less about how much longer or harder your day will get. The ground staff in our destination did not seem to know of the duty issue. Scheduling did not seem to care about the issue in phl before we left; only after it became an issue for them did they contact us back. As soon as we gave the extension they got what they needed out of us. At the time I granted the extension; I felt fit for duty and did not want to strand the aircraft or the passengers; therefore I was willing to take the extension. However; after looking back on the sequence of events I regret agreeing to it as I felt it showed that the company is not concerned about the fatigue of the pilots flying the aircraft but only compliance of the regulation. They should be concerned with both.we should not have been put in this situation to begin with. I did not become fatigued during the sequence; however shortly after on my drive home I did. It made me realize how granting an extension and then flying a 4-hour flight is simply gambling with safety; and should not be done ever. Far 117 is a good regulation; however the loophole is the extension. I can see very easily after yesterday how an operation can manipulate a pilot to fly into a situation in which they are fatigued and make a grave mistake. Upon review of the regulations; an extension is for unforeseen circumstances. We made the company aware of the issue almost 11 hours before it actually became an issue; this does not constitute an 'unforeseen' circumstance.in a situation like this; where the possibility of the crew duty becoming an issue was noted so long before it became an issue; an extension should not be allowed. The company had plenty of time to utilize their massive resources to avoid this. I blame myself for allowing myself to be put into a situation like this and will not do it again. One obvious recommendation from my experience is that an extension should not be allowed for takeoff for any leg that exceeds 2 hours. We flew almost 4 hours after granting the extension; no one can predict how fit they will feel 4 hours from now. I hope you can use my comments and experience to help prevent fatigue.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B757 Captain accepted the duty time extension available under FAR 117. After the flight; the pilot felt in hindsight that by accepting the extension; crew scheduling had filled their coverage issue; and they were no longer concerned about possible fatigue issues.

Narrative: During my sequence; I utilized the extension under FAR 117 for the first time. After completion of the sequence I had the chance to re-evaluate the sequence of events and thought I should share them for informational and safety purposes so that they can be improved upon. No known violations or incidents occurred during the sequence.I was called at Early morning [for a] departure [that would be] terminating after a four hour flight. Upon arrival in PHL; I was reassigned to [a] flight round trip with a scheduled termination of [approximately] eight hours. I arrived on the flight deck; and boarding began shortly after. After boarding; we were told of a catering delay that would be up to 1:30 long. The scheduled round trip was about 8:52 and therefore put us into a position that if continued delays would occur we would be exceeding our duty day limits. The captain called scheduling and informed them of the delay and they said that currently we appeared 'legal' for the trip but would keep their eye on it. After the delay exceeded 2 hours; we were kept on the paring under the assumption that we would still be legal to complete the entire pairing. We ended up departing after one hour forty minutes; and did not hear anything from scheduling. On the arrival to destination; we received an ACARS message from dispatch asking for an extension to be legal for the return flight. The Captain and I agreed to do so. I have been in situations in which crew duty was an issue and typically the operations will do all they can to assist in a quick turn. This was not the case; it took over 30 minutes to get paperwork. The turn took about 57 minutes; however; we only had 40 passengers so as soon as we got paperwork they were trying to push us. We flew back to PHL without incident. Upon termination of my pilot duties; I had been awake and active for over 18 hours. As I said there were no violations or rules broken on this sequence; however I thought I should share my opinion on how an FAR 117 extension works. My opinion is that as soon as you grant the extension the company could care less about how much longer or harder your day will get. The ground staff in our destination did not seem to know of the duty issue. Scheduling did not seem to care about the issue in PHL before we left; only after it became an issue for them did they contact us back. As soon as we gave the extension they got what they needed out of us. At the time I granted the extension; I felt fit for duty and did not want to strand the aircraft or the passengers; therefore I was willing to take the extension. However; after looking back on the sequence of events I regret agreeing to it as I felt it showed that the company is not concerned about the fatigue of the pilots flying the aircraft but only compliance of the regulation. They should be concerned with both.We should not have been put in this situation to begin with. I did not become fatigued during the sequence; however shortly after on my drive home I did. It made me realize how granting an extension and then flying a 4-hour flight is simply gambling with safety; and should not be done ever. FAR 117 is a good regulation; however the loophole is the extension. I can see very easily after yesterday how an operation can manipulate a pilot to fly into a situation in which they are fatigued and make a grave mistake. Upon review of the regulations; an extension is for unforeseen circumstances. We made the company aware of the issue almost 11 hours before it actually became an issue; this does not constitute an 'unforeseen' circumstance.In a situation like this; where the possibility of the crew duty becoming an issue was noted so long before it became an issue; an extension should not be allowed. The company had plenty of time to utilize their massive resources to avoid this. I blame myself for allowing myself to be put into a situation like this and will not do it again. One obvious recommendation from my experience is that an extension should not be allowed for takeoff for any leg that exceeds 2 hours. We flew almost 4 hours after granting the extension; no one can predict how fit they will feel 4 hours from now. I hope you can use my comments and experience to help prevent fatigue.

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.