Air carrier mdt flight crew complaint about reduced crew rest period.

Attributes
ACN	96245
Time
Date	198810
Day	Sun
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : cmi
State Reference	IL
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Transport, High Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 180 flight time total : 4700
ASRS Report	96245
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 225 flight time total : 14000
ASRS Report	96170
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : far other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Airport
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

On 10/sun/88 I was the first officer of a crew working the third day of very eventful 3 day trip. The violation in question is that of far 121.471 second C-1, which deals with required rest. On the first night of a 3 day trip we were given a reduced rest period of less than 9 hours (8 hours, 8 mins). On the second night we were also given a reduced rest period of 8 hours and 57 mins. This was the violation, after the first reduced rest period we were required to have 10 hours of rest. The required rest period is very important to the airlines and our type of flying. I have dealt with this far many times before. It slipped past us for 2 reasons. The first was fatigue and the second was an emergency that happened on the first day of the trip. We had smoke in the cabin and had to shut down the left engine and divert to milwaukee, wi. The company then left us on duty for 14 hours, 58 mins. The second day had us on duty for 12 hours, 52 mins with 6 hours, 9 mins of hard time. The violation was not discovered until 10/mon/88, when each step of the trip and emergency. Through fatigue the emergency, although not life threatening, in the end took precedence in our minds. This shows that we should have been relieved much sooner.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR MDT FLT CREW COMPLAINT ABOUT REDUCED CREW REST PERIOD.

Narrative: ON 10/SUN/88 I WAS THE F/O OF A CREW WORKING THE THIRD DAY OF VERY EVENTFUL 3 DAY TRIP. THE VIOLATION IN QUESTION IS THAT OF FAR 121.471 SEC C-1, WHICH DEALS WITH REQUIRED REST. ON THE FIRST NIGHT OF A 3 DAY TRIP WE WERE GIVEN A REDUCED REST PERIOD OF LESS THAN 9 HRS (8 HRS, 8 MINS). ON THE SECOND NIGHT WE WERE ALSO GIVEN A REDUCED REST PERIOD OF 8 HRS AND 57 MINS. THIS WAS THE VIOLATION, AFTER THE FIRST REDUCED REST PERIOD WE WERE REQUIRED TO HAVE 10 HRS OF REST. THE REQUIRED REST PERIOD IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THE AIRLINES AND OUR TYPE OF FLYING. I HAVE DEALT WITH THIS FAR MANY TIMES BEFORE. IT SLIPPED PAST US FOR 2 REASONS. THE FIRST WAS FATIGUE AND THE SECOND WAS AN EMER THAT HAPPENED ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE TRIP. WE HAD SMOKE IN THE CABIN AND HAD TO SHUT DOWN THE LEFT ENG AND DIVERT TO MILWAUKEE, WI. THE COMPANY THEN LEFT US ON DUTY FOR 14 HRS, 58 MINS. THE SECOND DAY HAD US ON DUTY FOR 12 HRS, 52 MINS WITH 6 HRS, 9 MINS OF HARD TIME. THE VIOLATION WAS NOT DISCOVERED UNTIL 10/MON/88, WHEN EACH STEP OF THE TRIP AND EMER. THROUGH FATIGUE THE EMER, ALTHOUGH NOT LIFE THREATENING, IN THE END TOOK PRECEDENCE IN OUR MINDS. THIS SHOWS THAT WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN RELIEVED MUCH SOONER.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.