The Colgan flight 3407 families will be remembered for their exceptional hard work and dedication. Most crash families form a support system to handle the tragedy. Their typical result is making the air carrier pay and creating a memorial to the family members, they lost. The response from the 3407 families has far surpassed anything we have seen before. They turned their grief into action and took on the airlines and Washington to make sure the causes for their accident are not repeated. Three years later they are still fighting for passage of the final rules. It is important that when we discuss PL 111-216 / Airline Safety and FAA Extension Act of 2010, we remember that a tragic accident drove the need for this legislation.
The Airline
Safety and FAA Extension Act of 2010 directs the FAA to make a number of
changes. These changes include strengthening flight and duty time,
mandating safety management systems and improving flight training in addition to
other safety enhancements. The flight
and duty time rules were finalized in December 2011 and lengthen pilot rest
periods from 8 hours to 10 hours. Other parts of this legislation are awaiting
rule finalization. These parts include crewmember
training and the ATP certificate requirement.
Section 212 of this
legislation covers pilot fatigue. This
ruling will affect my career because it will change the ways crews are
scheduled. During many schedules, the
last crew in takes this first flight out.
The last flight comes in at 10:00pm and the crew heads to the hotel. With the present 8 hour rest, they return for
a 6:30am outbound. By 2014, they will
require a 10 hour rest with 8 hours dedicated to sleep. They will no longer be available for the
6:30am outbound. A second crew will be
required to overnight in order to cover the first outbound. If I am in operations, I will have to manage this
additional scheduling burden. The
benefit to this section is that crew members should be better rested to fly. This will make flying safer because the crew
will be more awake and alert. It will
also drive some quality of life improvements that current regional airline
contracts do not cover. This section
will increase the need for additional pilots. These changes will not be free. Less pilot productivity drives higher expenses
for the air carriers. Regional Costs. Regional carriers
have very tight profit margins and their service agreements are not easily
negotiated. They will need to find a way
to cover these added expenses while still providing their contracted levels of
service.
Section 217 covers ATP
Certification. At a high level, it
requires a minimum of 1,500 total flight hours and an ATP certificate. Flight hour credits can be given for specific
academic training courses. EMU will need
to be ready to meet these requirements in order to remain a viable flight
school. I feel this section is trying to
answer the question: If the flight 3407 pilots had 1500 hours and an ATP before
flying for Colgan would they be better prepared to handle the icing conditions
they encountered? It is impossible to
know for sure. The benefits of this
section include better-qualified pilots, based on hours. This looks good on paper but it has some
significant downsides. The first one is
cost. How does a student pilot pay for
1500 hours in terms of time and money?
The longer training will defiantly slow down the number of available
pilots. This could lead to a pilot shortage
with pilot fatigue rules (section 212), pilot retirements, and regular
attrition are driving the need for pilots.
This legislation is
necessary even through sections 212 and 217 increase the demand and reduce the
supply of pilots. The regional airline
world is a race to the bottom in terms of costs. The major air carriers are constantly playing
one carrier against the other to reduce costs.
Here is an example where Delta is currently forcing Pinnacle to demand
more concessions from their pilots. Delta forces Pinnacle cuts. Additionally, when the
supply of pilots was limited during the RJ boom, carriers were taking pilots at
250 hours. RJ Boom 1999. My opinion
is that 250 hours is not enough time for right seat regional operations.
The Flight 3407 families
fought hard for this legislation. They
recognized the problems with the regional airline industry in terms of pilot
training and protections from the corporate race to the bottom. This legislation is not perfect but it will help
redefine the rules and provide for a safer regional industry.
So is it the victims' families who want the 1,500 hour minimums?
ReplyDeleteThe families are advocating for stronger training requirements. The reaction from the flight crew was a significant factor in this accident.
ReplyDeleteThe actual count of 1500 hours probably came from the FAA. My guess that the proposals for these requirements have been floating around the FAA for sometime. Without the advocacy from the 3407 families, this requirement would have been watered down or eliminated from the bill by the air carrier lobbies.
I don't think students are going to pay for an additional 1,250 hours of flight time. Current costs for training are high enough.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure if increasing the hours is going to improve safety. History has shown that pilots with thousands of hours still make mistakes. I do agree that 250 hours is low for an airline pilot.
You bring up a good point in stressing how the families of the victims of 3407 are very much responsible for much of this legislation. Jason, I agree...students would be hard pressed to afford an additional 1250 hours of flight time...actually, I think the number would be more like 300 (if the reduction for 141 flight training is implemented and taking into consideration that most get hired around the 600/700 hours mark). But the reality is that most students can't afford ANY additional time. What's the solution?
ReplyDelete"I feel this section is trying to answer the question: If the flight 3407 pilots had 1500 hours and an ATP before flying for Colgan would they be better prepared to handle the icing conditions they encountered? It is impossible to know for sure."
ReplyDeleteIts a good question. But I feel that most government responses would be something like "the chances would have been better had they been more prepared" which is entirely true
I feel very bad for the families and their losses.
ReplyDeleteWith that being said, there are fatalities every day and every year that result from driving, working, dieting, etc. The aggressive legislation might not be the best reaction for an accident. I feel this accident had more to do with personal issues the pilots had (poor training or making themselves tired or texting while taxiing) as well as poor supervision and training on the airline's part. Maybe the regulation should have just concentrated more on what an airline should demand from their pilots during a flight.
I don't think the source that you cited said airlines ever hired at 250 hours..... They mentioned some universities may start funneling pilots at 800 hours, and it would still be LEGAL because the regulations only require 250....
Another thing I keep reading (not from your blog, but other's blogs and comments on your blog) is that students cannot afford these additional hours. I am very confused by this. Once a person has a CFI, they don't "pay" for hours anymore. The number of hours a student pays for should NOT change. A person could still take a job flying at "250" hours for that matter, just not with the airlines. Go fly corporate jets, cargo, take pictures, whatever. You can still MAKE money after 250 hours while building time....
I'm glad you brought up the families from the Colgan Air accident. I didn't consider those ramifications and how they handled their losses. Increasing safety is quite important, but I'm not sure that the PL really concerned itself with the problems of the actual accident. Hours didn't seem to be the main issue.
ReplyDelete