beau222 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 107 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 5418 times:
First officer found sleeping at controls of a Transavia 737, while Pilot takes Rest Room Break. Is there a set time limit for the Pilot to return back to the Cockpit?
CalebWilliams From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 269 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 5407 times:
So pilots aren't supposed to be sleeping while they are they only pilot in the cockpit? Is this a recent rule?
pilotpip From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3084 posts, RR: 12 Reply 2, posted (4 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 5102 times:
Quoting beau222 (Thread starter): First officer found sleeping at controls of a Transavia 737, while Pilot takes Rest Room Break. Is there a set time limit for the Pilot to return back to the Cockpit?
One of the many reasons we aren't left alone up front. I know of no domestic airline that doesn't have one of the FAs sit in the cockpit while a pilot is in the back.
KC135Hydraulics From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 165 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (4 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4974 times:
So during a restroom break a flight attendant has to babysit the other pilot?
Dogbreath From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2008, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (4 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4915 times:
Quoting KC135Hydraulics (Reply 4): So during a restroom break a flight attendant has to babysit the other pilot?
I'm hoping you've made this statement with tongue firmly in cheek.
Surely the aim of any airlines SOP's, is for safety of flight. Having been in 3 airlines during my career (from Europe, SE Asia and Australia), it's been SOP in those 3 airlines, that there must be more than one crewmember in the flight deck at all times during flight.
It would seem that the FO in question here is an extremely deep sleeper, and it takes a lot to wake him up. The tone from the door mechanism on the B737 is extremely loud, and for the life of me I don't know how anyone could sleep through that. One must ask how safe was this situation? If there'd been a TCAS RA, or Fire warning, would he have slept through it and compromised the safety of flight?
If we want to call it babysitting the pilot, then go for it. Does it enhance safety? In my opinion, yes it does.
flyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 1379 posts, RR: 9 Reply 11, posted (4 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3943 times:
Quoting web500sjc (Reply 10): Remember there are two definitions of PIC, the one who is legally responsible and the one who is the sole manipulator of the controls.
PF vs. PNF?
David
Even a letdown, if it is thoroughly and final, is a step forward.
Under the definitions for PIC he would have been the sole manipulator.
As PF, I would consider him the PIC should something have gone wrong while the captain was not in the cockpit (and until such time as the Captain was fully able to take control of the situation). situations where this occurred include the B6 flight last year and the AS flight last week, or when the Captain is on his rest break.
In simple terms, The legal PIC is unable to exercise the responsibilities of PIC.
Obviously it could be a carrear ending decision to fall asleep while being the PF. Maybe things should be changed so that this does not happen, but there is no excuse for falling asleep at the controls.
bueb0g From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 547 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (4 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3899 times:
Quoting web500sjc (Reply 10): Remember there are two definitions of PIC, the one who is legally responsible and the one who is the sole manipulator of the controls.
No, there's really only one definition
Quoting web500sjc (Reply 12): Obviously it could be a carrear ending decision to fall asleep while being the PF.
Luckily for this FO, it wasn't - the airline has stated it's not taking any action against him.
Quoting web500sjc (Reply 12): but there is no excuse for falling asleep at the controls.
Well you don't know the specific circumstances. Maybe there were some fatigue issues... But then again, if there were, he shouldn't have flown.
Quoting web500sjc (Reply 12): or when the Captain is on his rest break.
The PIC is still PIC even while sleeping in the back of the plane. The PIC need not manipulate the controls for any period of the flight to be in command.
GApilot106 From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 4 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (4 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 3468 times:
Previous post: "Looks like the F/O goofed up.....Fatigue probably........Where was the FA in the Flightdeck for the Pilot during the restroom usage."
....the requirement for the F/A to be on the flight deck during this type of excerise is a U.S. regulation set by the FAA. As the article explains, rules/laws governing pilot breaks vary from country to country. Looks like the Netherlands does not have the same procedure involving the FA.
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2377 posts, RR: 7 Reply 15, posted (4 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3443 times:
It's not called PNF anymore. It's PM for Pilot Monitoring.
Quoting bueb0g (Reply 8): So during a restroom break a flight attendant has to babysit the other pilot?
At many airlines, yes, in case the remaining pilot becomes incapacitated.
Yes. And also so the remaining pilot does have to get out of his/her seat to identify the other pilot requesting entry, if the airplane doesn't have video monitoring.
HAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31228 posts, RR: 58 Reply 16, posted (4 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3315 times:
Quoting bueb0g (Reply 13):
Luckily for this FO, it wasn't - the airline has stated it's not taking any action against him.
Any Reasoning for this.
Quoting GApilot106 (Reply 14): As the article explains, rules/laws governing pilot breaks vary from country to country. Looks like the Netherlands does not have the same procedure involving the FA.
Exactly the query,when things can go wrong.....why dont certain Regulators ensure it does not by putting this safety net in place.
"The airline confirmed the incident and stated on Feb 1st 2013, that no sanctions were taken against the first officer, sanctions would only backfire."
"The airline confirmed the incident and stated on Feb 1st 2013, that no sanctions were taken against the first officer, sanctions would only backfire."
From Avherald.
If the F/O feels horrible about it sanctions might be counterproductive. The argument could be made that it is criminal negligence but on the other hand do you really want to sanction a good employee who will never do it again? Mistakes are something to be learned from.
I suppose you could argue both ways.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
Fatigue is very quickly becoming the number one cause of air accidents. Airlines that ignore this are doomed to become less safe. Sometimes it takes an actual accident or incident to see this, or sometimes it just takes an occurrence like this.
What the airline does NOT want the F/O to do, is to become public on how he came to be fatigued. An airline that thinks it is solely the crew member's fault that he is fatigued is very naive, and I doubt that Transavia is naive.
Airlines are starting to understand that pilots are not robots that can shut off and then start up and be fully functional. As this is a somewhat extreme case, I would be curious of what the F/O's duty looked like the previous 7 days. All days, then all nights ... early mornings, then late nights .... or how about assign him an early check in, then at 0400 reassign him the following night for an all-nighter to Greece and back. Who knows?
Does the airline have a fatigue management program? Who knows? I am not saying it applies in this case, but some airlines' fatigue management is simply ... "You are not allowed to be tired".
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
HAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31228 posts, RR: 58 Reply 21, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2937 times:
Quoting bueb0g (Reply 17): "The airline confirmed the incident and stated on Feb 1st 2013, that no sanctions were taken against the first officer, sanctions would only backfire."
There is a need for a rectification program.....maybe a guidance class , whats stops this from occuring to others.
longhauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4313 posts, RR: 36 Reply 22, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2873 times:
Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 21): There is a need for a rectification program.....maybe a guidance class , whats stops this from occurring to others.
It really depends on how committed the airline (any airline) is to safety. "Safety, as long as it doesn't cost anything" at one end of the scale, to "Safety, at any cost" at the other end.
The airline at which I fly recently had a fatigue caused incident that became very expensive. It did not take all that much arguing to make the "accountants" see that sometimes money has to be spent to be saved. I would like to think most airlines think the same way, but alas ... often we see evidence otherwise.
We have a Fatigue Assessment Committee, which is a volunteer/union committee. Every pairing is assessed using a "fatigue program", and fatigue spots are searched looking to be avoided and eliminated. Then air crew are encouraged to file fatigue reports, so they can be tracked and pairings adjusted if trends start to appear. Finally, air crew are allowed to simply "not fly-fatigued", without any reprimand. However, they are not paid for the flying not completed, and they are required to file a fatigue report. In this way, again, fatigue can be minimized or avoided.
I wasn't just kidding when I mentioned that fatigue is a huge safety issue that must be addressed. And airlines that do not have a Fatigue Management Program, will find that decision to be very expensive, if not fatal.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
HAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31228 posts, RR: 58 Reply 23, posted (4 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2418 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 22):
I wasn't just kidding when I mentioned that fatigue is a huge safety issue that must be addressed. And airlines that do not have a Fatigue Management Program, will find that decision to be very expensive, if not fatal.
Im surprised that there could be airlines that do not have a sms program in their organisation.
longhauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4313 posts, RR: 36 Reply 24, posted (4 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2371 times:
Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 23): Im surprised that there could be airlines that do not have a sms program in their organisation.
It is all dictated by the aviation governing body of each country. And .. there is safety management, and there is fatigue management ... I think the two are related, some airlines do not.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
longhauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4313 posts, RR: 36 Reply 26, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2132 times:
Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 25): Are you saying some regulatory authorities do no consider sms important........
What they "consider" and what they enforce are often two different things. However, as a requirement to fly into some countries, (US and Canada for example), the governing body of the visiting airline must have some sort of sms program, or a "promise" to start one.
The point I am making is that Fatigue Management is not a requirement and not normally included in the sms programs, although some airlines (not countries) see its value, some do not. The regulatory authorities do not go any further with regard to Fatigue Management than to set duty day or crewing restrictions. And often, the airlines' own pilot unions are more restrictive.
For example the United States accepts the duty day and crewing restrictions of other countries, even though they are not the same as what the FAA dictates.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
Geezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1467 posts, RR: 2 Reply 27, posted (3 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1718 times:
After having read this thread for the second time now, two things come to mind; First......from now on out.....anytime I'm booking a flight on a carrier I'm not familiar with, (VERY slight chance, that), I will definitely inquire as to whether that carrier has a "sop" requiring a minimum of two people on the flight deck at ALL times. Second......I will probably never know how I ever managed to "wake up" all of the dozens of times that I felt the right steering tire depart the pavement, while going from point A to point B in a 40 ton tractor-trailer truck, ( and always, somehow, resumed driving on the pavement, rather than into the ditch ).
Charley
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
HAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31228 posts, RR: 58 Reply 28, posted (3 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1387 times:
Quoting Geezer (Reply 27): First......from now on out.....anytime I'm booking a flight on a carrier I'm not familiar with, (VERY slight chance, that), I will definitely inquire as to whether that carrier has a "sop" requiring a minimum of two people on the flight deck at ALL times
Geezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1467 posts, RR: 2 Reply 29, posted (3 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1211 times:
Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 28): And where will that Info be available?.
I'm not sure if I understand your question ? I doubt seriously that I'll ever need to worry much about it, as I doubt if I will be taking any trips out of the country, and the carrier that I have non-rev privileges on pretty much goes any place I'm likely to want to go to.
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined May 2005, 107 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15904 posts, 
From India, joined Jan 2001, 31228 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2008, 240 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 1379 posts, 
From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4313 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
