FAR 117 and YOU!

wheelsup said:
I will say flying at my company now I feel well rested except for red-eyes and all-nighters. Those should've been completely made illegal by 117. They are by far the most unsafe flying I have ever done from a fatigue standpoint.
Click to expand...

I have to agree here. Transcon redeyes are brutal. The ones where the sun is in your face for the last 1hr+ is especially painful. It messes me up for a entire day after I do one.
 
BobDDuck said:
I wonder if that is a side effect of taking over a bunch of what was regional flying since you left the MD88. One of the biggest drivers of bad schedules is low frequencies to a city and that is pretty much the definition of a lot of regional flying.
Click to expand...

Nah, they have the ability to make crappier trips.

We kind of "dropped the ball" after 117 implementation.
 
Seggy said:
FAR 117 certainly is an improvement.
Click to expand...
No, you're right it IS a huge improvement, but what he is saying (as he mentioned) is that while it does improve it still doesn't do anything to address the legality of crapping on circadian rhythms. I still think it's far better than what it was.

Unlike what Soku mentions, I don't think I noticed any measurable difference in the quality of my trips before or after.
 
My seniority and aircraft have changed dramatically since I started in 121 under the old rules, so I can't really compare then vs. now. That said, the only time I've ever called in fatigued under 117 rules was when crew support called me three times at 4 am to notify me of a change to my schedule that I had already been notified of.
 
Richman said:
Ok Kids....

We're almost two years into FAR 117, so the question de jour:

Do you feel more rested now, or under the old 121 rules? Please state what kind of flying you do for reference...

If you are in the pooped category, what would you change that would help (shorter duty days, weekly block hour limits, longer rest requirements, etc).

Richman
Click to expand...

Far, far better off under FAR 117. Much more rested. More efficiency in terms of greater block hours that were previously not doable with 30/7. FAR 117 was also the primary reason we created and opened a NYC base. :)
 
Last edited:
Biggest thing to me was getting rid of the 8 hour reduced rest and incorporating 8 hours at a hotel. Eight hour reduced rests were exhausting. I remember one case where there were no hotels at VPS due to a hurricane that damaged most of them. The company was sending crews to Panama City on 8 hour reduced rest overnights and calling the 1.5 hour cab ride each way "transportation local in nature". When the union complained to the company their response was, "The FAA does not define 'transportation local in nature'." The company and union went to the FAA. Their response to the company was classic. "We can define "local in nature" if you want, but do you REALLY want us to?" The company dropped those reduced rest overnights.
 
I feel more rested. There were quite a few 8.5 hour overnights. I don't get the rolling 365, though. My body is no longer affected by the hours I flew 365 days ago. I think the rolling 28 day limit would suffice as the biggest window.
 
falconvalley said:
I feel more rested. There were quite a few 8.5 hour overnights. I don't get the rolling 365, though. My body is no longer affected by the hours I flew 365 days ago. I think the rolling 28 day limit would suffice as the biggest window.
Click to expand...
I had a trip that went something like this:
Code: 
--- DAY B
REPORT 1105
DPS ARS  DEP  ARR TURN
CLD LAX 1135 1220 1:04
LAX SBA 1324 1402 0:25
SBA LAX 1427 1520 1:22
LAX PSP 1642 1738 0:21
PSP LAX 1759 1848 1:06
LAX SBP 1954 2049
LAYOVER: 8:26
--- DAY C
REPORT 0530
SBP LAX 0556 0656 2:30
LAX FAT 0926 1049 0:34
FAT SFO 1123 1226 0:21
SFO RDD 1247 1359
(layover goes here)
The layover was scheduled at 8:02. We got in 24 minutes early, so go us, but it was still not a happy thing. (That's not even the worst of it - that's just the one I could think of.)

So yeah, I think we're better off. Although with respect to the rolling 365, I sleep noticably better in MY room and MY bed than I do anywhere else, so there might be something to that for those of us who fly 4-days. (I'm pretty close to "right up against it.")
 
As a side note to your side note, the pairing they were flying would have been illegal under 117 towards the end, but would not have been at the time of the crash.
 
DE727UPS said:
As a side note to your side note, the pairing they were flying would have been illegal under 117 towards the end, but would not have been at the time of the crash.
Click to expand...
Indeed.

(Please note that I am a firm believer in ending the cargo cut-out.)
 
Snuggle said:
I have to agree here. Transcon redeyes are brutal. The ones where the sun is in your face for the last 1hr+ is especially painful. It messes me up for a entire day after I do one.
Click to expand...

I really do not understand how anyone can be remotely alert at the end of one of those flights.

I don't do them but just perusing bid packages it's incredible l how some of the trips are constructed.

7AM report on day one, 6AM van the next day, 6AM van the next day, and then an 11 hour daytime layover and right at the point that one's body will start to secrete melatonin specifically for the goal of knocking you out for eight hours, time to go to the airport to fly through the entire deep sleep portion of the night and then land during the REM sleep portion and then commute/drive home? What in the world? How utterly unhealthy in every way.

I guess I get why people might bid them vs. a trip that ends at 10PM if they commute, but jeez. Can't be good on a regular basis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top