Now wait a second Charlie. The 'ball was rolling' on the new rest rules LOOOONG before the accident. Also, the ATP Requirement was really born out of the ALPA Submission AND it was originally more encompassing than putting a solid hour requirement that was later mandated by Congress.
Take a look at page 176 of this report...
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2010/aar1001.pdf
Please clarifiy? The numbered page, or the page of the data document? I can't find what you're looking for. What I did find was a date on the signature page- 2010. Long enough for ALPA to adopt the bullet of R3407 Project after the fact. And yes, the hour requirement (which is one the key issues I'm asserting was my idea) was mandated by Congress. Where do you think that idea came from?
Fatigue has been an issue that the NTSB has wanted better managed since the inception on their NTSB Most Wanted List in 1990. FRMS and science based rest rules have been around for years. Randy Babbitt, when he was ALPA President (early 1990s), tried to have the rest rules rewritten. He had some success, but not enough. When he was made head of the FAA, he wanted to finish what he started when he was ALPA President. The Colgan Accident gave him ammunition.
Here is a White Paper from 2008, concerning rest rules (among other items), which was before the Accident...
http://www.alpa.org/portals/alpa/pressroom/inthecockpit/FatigueRiskMSWP_6-2008.pdf
ALPA has in fact been involved in number fatigue study initiatives stretching back decades. I spoke to a number of the pilots that were involved in the Short Haul fatigue study done in 1995. Ultimately, however, ALPA failed to make any cumulative change.
Now, take a look at 5.1 'Recommendations to the FAA' in the following link
http://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms/search/document.cfm?docID=322233&docketID=47271&mkey=73351
Points 3, 4, and 5 point directly at the ATP Requirement. I know you didn't work on the report and I know specifics for the '1500 hour rule' wasn't mandated or discussed by Congress until well after the ALPA Submission was published. But the real reason, I believe, is why Congress acted on the 1500 hour rule, is that the NTSB, a government agency, was pushing for a rule, ANY rule that dealt with low time pilots. Putting a hard number requirement is a lot easier than regulating all encompassing training programs. In the end though, a majority of that rule that was put in place came directly from the ALPA submission. A lot of Regional FOs are getting their SIC type made into a PIC type because of the recommendation on the ALPA Report, that went to the FAA, that went through an ARC, that went into law.
For those reading this thread, notice ALPA didn't say ANYTHING about a time requirement. They knew it would open up a whole can of worms as is being discussed in this thread.
All noted. The date of that document is December, 2009. Over six months after my initiative, at least.
Now, from a timing stand point. During the NTSB Public Hearing in May 2009, Fatigue and Pilot Qualifications were discussed in depth. Your website didn't come online until June of 2009 correct?
I'm not certain that's correct. I can't find the specific start date of the website anywhere- but I find references to it being up in May.
Finally, were you asked to be on any of the Aviation Rule Making Committees (ARCS) or asked to consult any of the ARCS about the above rules?
No. So? The ideas pushed for the surviving families were adopted from the letter campaign used to bombard Congress with the ideas.
Bottom line is, I don't think it is fair to say that 'others carried your ideas'.
Yes it is. Key points addressed that were my idea and were commented on or implemented by the DOT or FAA:
1. Truth in advertising clause for travel websites, clarifying the need for transparency and accountability in the airline world. The point of this was to draw attention to the scope of Regional airline operations and its effect on air travelers.
2. A required minimum wage for airline pilots. The FAA commented on this and basically said "we don't do this." It was never intended to be taken that far, and was a "pie in the sky" suggestion.
3. Prior to the Remember 3407 Project, no one had suggested that the rules be changed by lobbying Congress to pass a law directing the FAA directly. So we did. Shortly after I started the initial Remember 3407 Project, the American Eagle MEC Communications chair approached me about adopting my idea set and launching an official American Eagle campaign.
If ALPA national already had such things fully underway, why do that?
4. You stated above that ALPA pushed for "improved training". At no time did they push for a hard qualification change. That was absolutely my idea.
ALPA lent its full weight to backing the ideas put forward, and the 3407 Families carried the ideas they garnered from media exposure of the Remember 3407 Project bullets as far as President Obama. Ultimately, I believe it was their adoption of and lobbying for the ideas that carried them to fruition.
As for the start date of the Remember 3407 Project, it may have been April or May of 2009. I don't entirely remember. The thread archiving here doesn't go back quite far enough. But this update thread from July, 2009, references the letter writing campaign in May of 2009. *shrugs*
http://forums.jetcareers.com/threads/remember-3407-project-strikes-a-chord.90887/
"Back in in mid-May I sent a letter to both my Senators and my Congressman regarding the hot button issues for regional airline pilots. I focused my letter on fatigue, qualifications and pay using many of the topic points that FIREBIRD2XC has addressed on his web page
Remember 3407 Project"
As is usual, though, ALPA played a hugely pivotal part in this- but based on the time it takes such a large organization to organize and present official information, arguing their reports as the originals is questionable. The idea base launched through my idea campaign were on point here. And we have the end results of the grass roots rabble rousing the effort achieved to thank for our regulatory break through as a result.