Commentary: FAA’s Proposed New Crew Rules Need Rethink

By Stephen A. Alterman

With the debate over the most effective way to reduce crew member fatigue still raging, it is vitally important to understand that the all-cargo air carrier industry continues to support changes to existing FAA regulations in this important safety area.

This reassessment, however, must take into account the operational realities of the aviation marketplace and must be firmly rooted in fatigue science as that science applies to the airline industry.The Cargo Airline Association’s (CAA) proposal for moving forward, a proposal that recognizes the impact of multiple flight segments and “time of day,” as well as affording pilots substantially greater rest opportunities and shorter duty days, takes into account all of these factors.

The CAA’s proposed rules would: Increase flight crew rest opportunities by 25-50%, depending on whether the operation is domestic or international; Decrease flight duty periods by 12.5-44%; Recognize the impact of “time of day” and multiple operational segments in the pilot fatigue equation and adjust the daily flight duty period accordingly.

The cargo industry strongly urged FAA to recognize that the various aviation industry segments have substantially different operational characteristics and the only way to ensure the highest level of safety is to tailor regulations to these unique characteristics. Perhaps the best statement of this principle was made by FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt when he stated that “in rulemaking, not only does one size not fit all, but it’s unsafe to think that it can.”

Regrettably, the rule proposed by FAA failed to acknowledge the safety records of the various segments and failed to consider the carefully thought-out CAA safety proposals. It also incorrectly assumed a mature body of scientific knowledge when, in fact, fatigue science as it applies to the airline industry is very much incomplete. And, contrary to the FAA Administrator’s admonition, the FAA proposed a “one size fits all” rule.

Any pilot fatigue rule must protect safety by taking into account the vast differences in domestic, international, scheduled, charter, passenger and cargo operations. While all pilots may have the same physiology, they do not all have the same duty schedules, cumulative flight hours and rest opportunities. The FAA’s proposed rule gave no consideration to whether a pilot is flying multiple daily short-haul commuter flights or a single, daily long-haul international cargo flight on an aircraft with private rest facilities and staffed with additional flight crews.

CAA member carriers, by design, tend to fly more nighttime and long-haul routes to meet the demands of their worldwide customer base. In doing so, we can and do provide more and better opportunities for rest than other industry segments. And our pilots already average substantially fewer flying hours each month than our passenger counterparts.

Even more important, the FAA’s proposal fails the most basic test —it does not increase safety and will not prevent accidents. As the same time, it will burden US airlines with the most restrictive and costly flight duty rules in the world. It will reduce the competitiveness of US carriers and create severe economic harm on an already fragile US economy.

The FAA’s proposed rule also utterly fails the required cost-benefit test. For the all-cargo industry, the safety benefits are virtually non-existent, while the resulting costs would be in the billions of dollars.

For every dollar of benefit, the proposed rule would impose an overwhelming $3,800 in costs. Perhaps the best evidence of the lack of material safety benefits comes from NTSB data which reveal that, since 1982, there have been only two cargo accidents in which fatigue has been a cause or contributing factor. The proposed rules would not have prevented either accident.

The FAA needs to revamp its rule to ensure that it is based on existing sound scientific principles as they relate to the aviation environment and to reflect the vastly different operating sectors of the airline industry. CAA’s proposed rules would accomplish these objectives and should be adopted in lieu of the FAA’s “one size fits all” proposal.

Stephen A. Alterman is president of the US Cargo Airline Association, based in Washington. Steve began his career in aviation in 1968 in the Bureau of Enforcement for the US Civil Aeronautics Board.

ATW welcomes commentary submissions by experts on issues of interest to the global air transportation industry. To submit a commentary or get information on submission guidelines, contact Executive Editor Karen Walker at karen.walker@penton.com or call +1 301 755 0165.