Narrative:

In sum: this very well written report (4 pages long) describes a trip in a B727 freighter from sat-rfd-sat. The #3 fuel quantity gauge was inoperative making extra work every time the aircraft was fueled. In fact, at least twice it was done wrong and the fueling had to be repeated. The reporter, the so had her sleep interrupted several times by aircraft noise from the airport which was very close to the motel. Different delays for one reason or another were described, all adding to crew fatigue. On the return to sat, WX was below minimums so they diverted to aus where a routine landing was made to minimums. At this point, the reporter had been awake for 18 hours and they had been flying all night. Upon arrival at aus, the ground crew was unprepared for their arrival and the flight crew had to remain on board for 1 1/2 hours before stairs were brought to the aircraft. Once again, there was a fueling problem caused by the inoperative fuel gauge. They then flew to sat where another approach to minimums was made. At this point the reporter had been awake for 21 1/2 hours and on duty for 13 1/2 hours. She says she was exhausted. Just prior to departing the airport for the layover hotel, the crew was advised they were being rescheduled to fly on to elp, an approximately 2 1/2 hour addition to their schedule. At this point, the crew refused the trip. When the crew scheduler was contacted, he threatened them with loss of pay and removal from the remaining 3 days of their trip. The captain then asked to speak to the chief pilot who affirmed they would be removed from the entire trip and would lose pay. At no time did anyone ask them if they could safely operate the aircraft. Further, the scheduler then attempted to re-revise their schedule to operate to guadalajara, mexico, which would have extended their duty day an additional 3 1/2 hours over the current completed schedule. At this point, the reporter was tempted to back down because of the hardship she seemed to be causing the captain and first officer. She mentally counted 6 valid reasons why she should not fly the trip and decided that loss of her job would not convince her to fly the trip. As they continued the discussion (listened to the tirade from scheduling), the schedulers realized that the schedule they had built for them was in violation of contractual requirements and possible far directives. They were then released to go into crew rest. The crew schedulers apologized. Reporter fears that a crew less sure of themselves would have crumbled to the extreme pressure from crew scheduling in the first place and taken the flight. The reporter then went on to suggest changes in far 91 concerning duty times, especially when flying on the back side of the clock.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B727 FREIGHTER FLC FLEW ALL NIGHT BACK OF THE CLOCK AND THEN WAS ILLEGALLY RESCHEDULED FOR ADDITIONAL FLYING. RPTR REFUSED TO FLY THE ADDED LEG AND THE BALANCE OF THE CREW FOLLOWED HER. THEY WERE THREATENED WITH DISCIPLINARY ACTION.

Narrative: IN SUM: THIS VERY WELL WRITTEN RPT (4 PAGES LONG) DESCRIBES A TRIP IN A B727 FREIGHTER FROM SAT-RFD-SAT. THE #3 FUEL QUANTITY GAUGE WAS INOP MAKING EXTRA WORK EVERY TIME THE ACFT WAS FUELED. IN FACT, AT LEAST TWICE IT WAS DONE WRONG AND THE FUELING HAD TO BE REPEATED. THE RPTR, THE SO HAD HER SLEEP INTERRUPTED SEVERAL TIMES BY ACFT NOISE FROM THE ARPT WHICH WAS VERY CLOSE TO THE MOTEL. DIFFERENT DELAYS FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER WERE DESCRIBED, ALL ADDING TO CREW FATIGUE. ON THE RETURN TO SAT, WX WAS BELOW MINIMUMS SO THEY DIVERTED TO AUS WHERE A ROUTINE LNDG WAS MADE TO MINIMUMS. AT THIS POINT, THE RPTR HAD BEEN AWAKE FOR 18 HRS AND THEY HAD BEEN FLYING ALL NIGHT. UPON ARR AT AUS, THE GND CREW WAS UNPREPARED FOR THEIR ARR AND THE FLC HAD TO REMAIN ON BOARD FOR 1 1/2 HRS BEFORE STAIRS WERE BROUGHT TO THE ACFT. ONCE AGAIN, THERE WAS A FUELING PROB CAUSED BY THE INOP FUEL GAUGE. THEY THEN FLEW TO SAT WHERE ANOTHER APCH TO MINIMUMS WAS MADE. AT THIS POINT THE RPTR HAD BEEN AWAKE FOR 21 1/2 HRS AND ON DUTY FOR 13 1/2 HRS. SHE SAYS SHE WAS EXHAUSTED. JUST PRIOR TO DEPARTING THE ARPT FOR THE LAYOVER HOTEL, THE CREW WAS ADVISED THEY WERE BEING RESCHEDULED TO FLY ON TO ELP, AN APPROX 2 1/2 HR ADDITION TO THEIR SCHEDULE. AT THIS POINT, THE CREW REFUSED THE TRIP. WHEN THE CREW SCHEDULER WAS CONTACTED, HE THREATENED THEM WITH LOSS OF PAY AND REMOVAL FROM THE REMAINING 3 DAYS OF THEIR TRIP. THE CAPT THEN ASKED TO SPEAK TO THE CHIEF PLT WHO AFFIRMED THEY WOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE ENTIRE TRIP AND WOULD LOSE PAY. AT NO TIME DID ANYONE ASK THEM IF THEY COULD SAFELY OPERATE THE ACFT. FURTHER, THE SCHEDULER THEN ATTEMPTED TO RE-REVISE THEIR SCHEDULE TO OPERATE TO GUADALAJARA, MEXICO, WHICH WOULD HAVE EXTENDED THEIR DUTY DAY AN ADDITIONAL 3 1/2 HRS OVER THE CURRENT COMPLETED SCHEDULE. AT THIS POINT, THE RPTR WAS TEMPTED TO BACK DOWN BECAUSE OF THE HARDSHIP SHE SEEMED TO BE CAUSING THE CAPT AND FO. SHE MENTALLY COUNTED 6 VALID REASONS WHY SHE SHOULD NOT FLY THE TRIP AND DECIDED THAT LOSS OF HER JOB WOULD NOT CONVINCE HER TO FLY THE TRIP. AS THEY CONTINUED THE DISCUSSION (LISTENED TO THE TIRADE FROM SCHEDULING), THE SCHEDULERS REALIZED THAT THE SCHEDULE THEY HAD BUILT FOR THEM WAS IN VIOLATION OF CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENTS AND POSSIBLE FAR DIRECTIVES. THEY WERE THEN RELEASED TO GO INTO CREW REST. THE CREW SCHEDULERS APOLOGIZED. RPTR FEARS THAT A CREW LESS SURE OF THEMSELVES WOULD HAVE CRUMBLED TO THE EXTREME PRESSURE FROM CREW SCHEDULING IN THE FIRST PLACE AND TAKEN THE FLT. THE RPTR THEN WENT ON TO SUGGEST CHANGES IN FAR 91 CONCERNING DUTY TIMES, ESPECIALLY WHEN FLYING ON THE BACK SIDE OF THE CLOCK.

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.