Narrative:

We have had a violation of far 121.483(B) as concerns 24 hours of consecutive rest during 7 days. Our pattern started in anc with a report to duty and continued with 10-15 hour layovers and schedule changes at every stop until arriving in omdb. After 10 hours and 10 mins rest in omdb, we deadheaded from omdb to obbi with 18 hours and 50 mins rest scheduled before operating to omdb. A last min change to take the aircraft to egpk and kmia at the same departure time on nov/sat/02 at XA05Z had a problem with insufficient layover in egpk. While discussing this with the crew tracker, he noted a 24 in 7 problem as well before our arrival time in egpk. The aircraft could not situation in obbi due to ramp space. We were to take it to omdb for our 24 hour rest. The aircraft was delayed in obbi for 2 hours 15 mins waiting for a parking slot. This translated to a similar late arrival in omdb. We planned on reporting back for duty at XP15, dec/sun/02. On dec/sun/02, the company switched the scheduling computers from maestro to aims system. There is some initial confusion attendant. I was contacted by crew tracking and told that there was no requirement for 24 hours of rest as we had 29 hours on our previous stop in omdb, and we were to depart as originally scheduled. We complained that we had not had 29 hours rest as we had deadheaded to obbi right in the middle of that period. We were told that according to a letter of interpretation that the company has, only 'duty aloft' counts when considering 24 in 7. Deadheading, training, and other non-flying duties do not apply. We argued for 1 1/2 hours that we had never heard of such a thing. First with the new crew tracker then with the system chief pilot, who insisted that it was all perfectly legal and that we needed to go. We requested a faxed copy of the letter of interpretation, but it being sunday, no one was in the office to access it. We could get a copy when we got to kmia if we wanted. Still not comfortable, we contacted our base chief pilot. He was vaguely aware of such a letter and said that the system chief pilot was probably right. We took the flight. On the aircraft, we searched the fdm and far's finding no support for the company's position. From egpk we called crew tracking to tell them that we would not move the aircraft until we got a copy of the letter or had 24 hours of rest. The director of operations talked to me, quoting a couple of regulations that didn't quite seem appropriate. He said he doesn't normally send out papers, but would have the letter faxed to me. I was xferred back to tracking. In talking, we discovered that the wrong times had been entered into the computer for our trip egpk to ombd. We were given 24 hours off. A voice mail was issued by the system chief pilot explaining that there were some problems with the aims system. Ironically, we did this and crew scheduling, crew tracking, system chief pilot, and base chief pilot advised us to take the plane illegally.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLT TIME DUTY TIME REGS BECOME A PROB DURING AN EXTENDED INTL CARGO OP. A CHANGE OVER IN CREW TRACKING COMPLICATES THE PROB, AND PRESSURE IS PUT ON THE CREW TO OPERATE IN NON COMPLIANCE WITH THE FAR.

Narrative: WE HAVE HAD A VIOLATION OF FAR 121.483(B) AS CONCERNS 24 HRS OF CONSECUTIVE REST DURING 7 DAYS. OUR PATTERN STARTED IN ANC WITH A RPT TO DUTY AND CONTINUED WITH 10-15 HR LAYOVERS AND SCHEDULE CHANGES AT EVERY STOP UNTIL ARRIVING IN OMDB. AFTER 10 HRS AND 10 MINS REST IN OMDB, WE DEADHEADED FROM OMDB TO OBBI WITH 18 HRS AND 50 MINS REST SCHEDULED BEFORE OPERATING TO OMDB. A LAST MIN CHANGE TO TAKE THE ACFT TO EGPK AND KMIA AT THE SAME DEP TIME ON NOV/SAT/02 AT XA05Z HAD A PROB WITH INSUFFICIENT LAYOVER IN EGPK. WHILE DISCUSSING THIS WITH THE CREW TRACKER, HE NOTED A 24 IN 7 PROB AS WELL BEFORE OUR ARR TIME IN EGPK. THE ACFT COULD NOT SIT IN OBBI DUE TO RAMP SPACE. WE WERE TO TAKE IT TO OMDB FOR OUR 24 HR REST. THE ACFT WAS DELAYED IN OBBI FOR 2 HRS 15 MINS WAITING FOR A PARKING SLOT. THIS TRANSLATED TO A SIMILAR LATE ARR IN OMDB. WE PLANNED ON RPTING BACK FOR DUTY AT XP15, DEC/SUN/02. ON DEC/SUN/02, THE COMPANY SWITCHED THE SCHEDULING COMPUTERS FROM MAESTRO TO AIMS SYS. THERE IS SOME INITIAL CONFUSION ATTENDANT. I WAS CONTACTED BY CREW TRACKING AND TOLD THAT THERE WAS NO REQUIREMENT FOR 24 HRS OF REST AS WE HAD 29 HRS ON OUR PREVIOUS STOP IN OMDB, AND WE WERE TO DEPART AS ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED. WE COMPLAINED THAT WE HAD NOT HAD 29 HRS REST AS WE HAD DEADHEADED TO OBBI RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT PERIOD. WE WERE TOLD THAT ACCORDING TO A LETTER OF INTERP THAT THE COMPANY HAS, ONLY 'DUTY ALOFT' COUNTS WHEN CONSIDERING 24 IN 7. DEADHEADING, TRAINING, AND OTHER NON-FLYING DUTIES DO NOT APPLY. WE ARGUED FOR 1 1/2 HRS THAT WE HAD NEVER HEARD OF SUCH A THING. FIRST WITH THE NEW CREW TRACKER THEN WITH THE SYS CHIEF PLT, WHO INSISTED THAT IT WAS ALL PERFECTLY LEGAL AND THAT WE NEEDED TO GO. WE REQUESTED A FAXED COPY OF THE LETTER OF INTERP, BUT IT BEING SUNDAY, NO ONE WAS IN THE OFFICE TO ACCESS IT. WE COULD GET A COPY WHEN WE GOT TO KMIA IF WE WANTED. STILL NOT COMFORTABLE, WE CONTACTED OUR BASE CHIEF PLT. HE WAS VAGUELY AWARE OF SUCH A LETTER AND SAID THAT THE SYS CHIEF PLT WAS PROBABLY RIGHT. WE TOOK THE FLT. ON THE ACFT, WE SEARCHED THE FDM AND FAR'S FINDING NO SUPPORT FOR THE COMPANY'S POS. FROM EGPK WE CALLED CREW TRACKING TO TELL THEM THAT WE WOULD NOT MOVE THE ACFT UNTIL WE GOT A COPY OF THE LETTER OR HAD 24 HRS OF REST. THE DIRECTOR OF OPS TALKED TO ME, QUOTING A COUPLE OF REGS THAT DIDN'T QUITE SEEM APPROPRIATE. HE SAID HE DOESN'T NORMALLY SEND OUT PAPERS, BUT WOULD HAVE THE LETTER FAXED TO ME. I WAS XFERRED BACK TO TRACKING. IN TALKING, WE DISCOVERED THAT THE WRONG TIMES HAD BEEN ENTERED INTO THE COMPUTER FOR OUR TRIP EGPK TO OMBD. WE WERE GIVEN 24 HRS OFF. A VOICE MAIL WAS ISSUED BY THE SYS CHIEF PLT EXPLAINING THAT THERE WERE SOME PROBS WITH THE AIMS SYS. IRONICALLY, WE DID THIS AND CREW SCHEDULING, CREW TRACKING, SYS CHIEF PLT, AND BASE CHIEF PLT ADVISED US TO TAKE THE PLANE ILLEGALLY.

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.