37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 297642 |
Time | |
Date | 199503 |
Day | Wed |
Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : pvd |
State Reference | RI |
Altitude | agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 100 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Night |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tracon : pvd |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | SF 340B |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | landing other |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 9000 flight time type : 800 |
ASRS Report | 297642 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : commercial pilot : instrument |
Events | |
Anomaly | other anomaly other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other other : unspecified cockpit |
Resolutory Action | none taken : detected after the fact |
Consequence | Other |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
My carrier has attempted to cover its liability in the event of an accident by issuing 'pilot fatigue procedures' (see attached form). The procedure is intended to intimidate pilots as much as possible and lessen the # of reported fatigue incidents. There have been instances where pilots reporting in to be released per this procedure have received veiled and open threats that is 'you are guilty of job abandonment.' the principal operations inspector for our carrier is very involved with line checking and ramp checking our pilots and airplanes - you will always find some trivial item during these checks that is technically not in compliance with SOP's or maintenance standards but is little or no hazard to safety. Unfortunately our poi does not recognize pilot fatigue as being the real safety problem at our carrier. During this reported occurrence myself and my crew (first officer and flight attendant) had been duty as follows: day 1) XX25 - xy 45, 5.0 block time, 15.20 duty day. Day 2) XX25 - XY15, 5.0 block time, 14:50 duty day. Day 3) XX25 - YZ00, 7.0 block time, 13:35 duty day. The WX conditions all 3 days were poor - low IFR and light to moderate icing conditions with extended holding near boston and new york. Additionally, myself and my crew all live one hour driving time from our domicile at providence, further reducing our available time at home to rest. On our last approach on day 3, and instrument approach in lifr conditions, both myself and my first officer failed to notice that we had bugged the wrong speeds for the flap setting in use - our stall margin, VMC protection and V2 speed on the go around were wrong. Fortunately the incident ended with nothing more than a stick shaker in the flare and a lousy landing. I know my peers face the same problem everyday on line. My detractors may say I am guilty of not quitting sooner in the day - the procedures in effect however, pressure our pilots to stay in line or risk being singled out as a 'problem.' I hope the FAA rewrites the far part 121 duty time regulations very soon. My seniors at the majors are protected by superior work agreements (contracts) I am not.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: FLC MIS-SET THEIR AIRSPD BUG REFERENCES.
Narrative: MY CARRIER HAS ATTEMPTED TO COVER ITS LIABILITY IN THE EVENT OF AN ACCIDENT BY ISSUING 'PLT FATIGUE PROCS' (SEE ATTACHED FORM). THE PROC IS INTENDED TO INTIMIDATE PLTS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE AND LESSEN THE # OF RPTED FATIGUE INCIDENTS. THERE HAVE BEEN INSTANCES WHERE PLTS RPTING IN TO BE RELEASED PER THIS PROC HAVE RECEIVED VEILED AND OPEN THREATS THAT IS 'YOU ARE GUILTY OF JOB ABANDONMENT.' THE PRINCIPAL OPS INSPECTOR FOR OUR CARRIER IS VERY INVOLVED WITH LINE CHKING AND RAMP CHKING OUR PLTS AND AIRPLANES - YOU WILL ALWAYS FIND SOME TRIVIAL ITEM DURING THESE CHKS THAT IS TECHNICALLY NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH SOP'S OR MAINT STANDARDS BUT IS LITTLE OR NO HAZARD TO SAFETY. UNFORTUNATELY OUR POI DOES NOT RECOGNIZE PLT FATIGUE AS BEING THE REAL SAFETY PROB AT OUR CARRIER. DURING THIS RPTED OCCURRENCE MYSELF AND MY CREW (FO AND FLT ATTENDANT) HAD BEEN DUTY AS FOLLOWS: DAY 1) XX25 - XY 45, 5.0 BLOCK TIME, 15.20 DUTY DAY. DAY 2) XX25 - XY15, 5.0 BLOCK TIME, 14:50 DUTY DAY. DAY 3) XX25 - YZ00, 7.0 BLOCK TIME, 13:35 DUTY DAY. THE WX CONDITIONS ALL 3 DAYS WERE POOR - LOW IFR AND LIGHT TO MODERATE ICING CONDITIONS WITH EXTENDED HOLDING NEAR BOSTON AND NEW YORK. ADDITIONALLY, MYSELF AND MY CREW ALL LIVE ONE HR DRIVING TIME FROM OUR DOMICILE AT PROVIDENCE, FURTHER REDUCING OUR AVAILABLE TIME AT HOME TO REST. ON OUR LAST APCH ON DAY 3, AND INSTRUMENT APCH IN LIFR CONDITIONS, BOTH MYSELF AND MY FO FAILED TO NOTICE THAT WE HAD BUGGED THE WRONG SPEEDS FOR THE FLAP SETTING IN USE - OUR STALL MARGIN, VMC PROTECTION AND V2 SPD ON THE GAR WERE WRONG. FORTUNATELY THE INCIDENT ENDED WITH NOTHING MORE THAN A STICK SHAKER IN THE FLARE AND A LOUSY LNDG. I KNOW MY PEERS FACE THE SAME PROB EVERYDAY ON LINE. MY DETRACTORS MAY SAY I AM GUILTY OF NOT QUITTING SOONER IN THE DAY - THE PROCS IN EFFECT HOWEVER, PRESSURE OUR PLTS TO STAY IN LINE OR RISK BEING SINGLED OUT AS A 'PROB.' I HOPE THE FAA REWRITES THE FAR PART 121 DUTY TIME REGULATIONS VERY SOON. MY SENIORS AT THE MAJORS ARE PROTECTED BY SUPERIOR WORK AGREEMENTS (CONTRACTS) I AM NOT.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.