V-Flyer

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/26/trave ... ?hpt=hp_t2

According to CNN, VS appear to have confirmed that this was one of their aircraft. Due to the fact that it has been news on most channels today and they are one of the few UK airlines to operate the A330 I guess they thought it would be better to confirm their involvement before someone leaked it.

Matt

This may seem a daft question but as a non pilot, how would they know that the pilots had dozed off?

I presume they reported the incident themselves?

I believe the Cabin Crew check on the flight deck crew every so often via the intercom phone. The purpose of the check is to see if someone from the flight deck answers - they can then go on to ask if they require any refreshments.

I guess the crew only make these checks when the aircraft is at cruise altitude & the frequency of the checks will be well documented in the crew operating procedures.

Although they were sleeping, it does say in rotation, meaning one pilot was awake at all times.

The way I read the article (possibly a little between the lines) is that the pilots had planned to sleep in 20min rotations - which probably happens a lot more than we think on the shorter East-coast USA-UK overnight routes). However, at some stage the pilot who was supposed to be awake nodded off.

How this was discovered we will never know, i.e. was it by the cabin crew or by the pilot who should have been sleeping waking up & seeing the other asleep?

The main thing is that the flight landed safely. The pilots then decided to hold their hands up to what had happened to the authorities, citing the lack of sleep in the previous x hours. In doing so, I guess they sort of get "immunity from prosecution" [for want of better words] and they can only hope that company policy regarding rest periods may change.

The pilots were asleep?

Well, that confirm they don't have the new UC suites on the flight deck then...

LetThereBeFlight wrote:The pilots were asleep?

Well, that confirm they don't have the new UC suites on the flight deck then...

I shouldn't laugh at that, but I did.

slinky09 wrote:

LetThereBeFlight wrote:The pilots were asleep?

Well, that confirm they don't have the new UC suites on the flight deck then...

I shouldn't laugh at that, but I did.

Me too

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... pilot.html

The articles all indicate 325 seat aircraft which would rule Virgin out and place it firmly in Thomas Cook territory.

Well Thomas Cook and Monarch do firmly deny it was them...

Are we sure this is VS? CNN are the only ones saying it was Virgin... I wonder if the source they have is a reliable one - If not, prepare for some fun libel games with the lawyers ):

not_ordinary_more_weird wrote:The articles all indicate 325 seat aircraft which would rule Virgin out and place it firmly in Thomas Cook territory.

Assuming they haven't all just googled 'how many seats on an A330' and picked the TC config

I think you are right given all the papers are reporting this number (a subtle hint perhaps), here's looking at you Thomas Cook 8D

Kraken wrote:How this was discovered we will never know, i.e. was it by the cabin crew or by the pilot who should have been sleeping waking up & seeing the other asleep?

I think that one of the two pilots reported it to the CAA - no doubt using it as a case against the EU Parliament vote effectively cutting UK safety standards regarding flight ops.

Three changes of note:

- allowing pilots to land an aircraft after being awake for 22 hours
- pilots flying on the longest-haul flights with only two crew rather than the three at present
- pilots being forced to work up to seven early starts in a row rather than the current three

Source document downloadable here

Pretty good timing in fact for this to come out given the vote is on Monday, what a coincidence. ii)

not_ordinary_more_weird wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2432847/Both-pilots-asleep-cockpit-packed-plane-dont-worry-autopilot.html

The articles all indicate 325 seat aircraft which would rule Virgin out and place it firmly in Thomas Cook territory.

And as we know, the reporting integrity of the Daily Heil is top notch.

slinky09 wrote:And as we know, the reporting integrity of the Daily Heil is top notch.

Absolutely - particularly like the picture of what is clearly a Boeing flight deck in the Daily Heil article. Maybe some credit is due to them though, as it is a 2 engined aircraft flight deck, so they were halfway there!

Believe that, although rotation of naps is the procedure, on this occasion, both nodded off and it was for a pretty short time.

This is not as unusual as folks might think.

The CC do have a procedure of calling the flight deck every 20-30 minutes, so assuming this procedure works, that is the longest time this could happen for.

Word is the pilots reported the incident themselves - which is
very much the right thing to do.

The one good thing to cone out of this is that it highlights the need for stricter legislation on pilot rest. HGV drivers would not get away with only 5 hours sleep in 2 days and if those facts are correct it's tine for tighter regulations

It's actually not just rest (although that would be g great start!)...

It's really all about sleep rhythms.

The shifts many pilots need to operate are rarely spaced evenly such that you are going to sleep anything like 24 hours after the last time you did.

Everyone has natural highs and lows during a day, but this is ignored when rostering pilot duties.

Some airlines operate a bidding system that might aleviate some of the personal preferences in terms of times of day, but noting really solves the duty periods being unevenly spaced, not coinciding with a 24 hour day, through in timezone shifts, dehydration from altitude etc, and it's very difficult to see how legislation can solve it.

In these days of "maximise productivity", "legislation is the norm not the limit" and so on, where airlines are looking to squeeze every last penny out of their resources, being a pilot is tough on your body and family.

Ok, so maybe legislation might change things a little, and I hope it does, but for every legistlator, there are 100s of others trying to find creative ways around it.

Ultimately, and I'm sorry to say this, it is going to take a serious event before the airline management really take note (and I'm not saying it hasn't already, it's just there are often many factors involved, most of which wil be more quantifiable than broken sleep).

I respect these pilots, who ever they are, for reporting this incident - yes, maybe they have an agenda, but reporting it is the only way for it to gain attention.

More pilots should do so...because, I wouldn't mind betting that there are several such incidents every single day all over the world.

I suggest that this article is the hyped-up result of a leaked Flight Safety Human Factors Occurence Report or 'I learnt about flying from that' - which would indeed be the pilots themselves holding their hands up to an incident from which others are invited to learn from. It's a good system and the reports can be annonymous if the person submitting it wishes it to be so. It's also used on the ground in Air Traffic and throughout the aviation world both military and civilian. It doesn't mean the author is 'immune from prosecution' as one poster suggests, it's honest admission of an incident which can be investigated further if necessary. Open reporting also helps build a statistical database which can be used to improve safety and efficiency. |:)

Pilot fatigue is well documented - and pilots are human! Shift patterns are monitored and working time directives are adhered to but you can't legislate for disrupted sleep or trying to get the all important sleep at irregular times. Hotel fire alarm testing is my personal favorite!! !

Flight crews do look after each other and whilst the headline will scare the masses I venture that the time both pilots were actually asleep at the same time was a matter of minutes. Not ideal, obviously, but unlike driving, if you're tired, you can't pull over to the side of the road or dive into the next service station. The ultimate safety net is a pilot who declares themselves unfit to fly before they get airborne thereby grounding the whole flight. That will get some hot topics and TR's in this forum!

Commend the piolts for their honesty and let others learn or take note from the circumstances that led to the incident. oo)

as long as George was awake

In a safety critical environment, employees are actively encouraged to report incidents such as this because the last thing you want is fear culture when things get swept under the carpet. So contrary to popular belief these pilots are unlikely to face disciplinary action.

That said I do dislike the way that airlines on the shorter routes such as DXB, NYC, BOS etc only run 2 flight deck crew. It's still a heck of a long day and the short night legs can be brutal as a passenger never mind flying them (I imagine!)

If you are looking for peace and quiet on long haul flights get a job as a pilot, relax, sit back and have a sleep. ):

joeyc wrote:Well Thomas Cook and Monarch do firmly deny it was them...

Are we sure this is VS? CNN are the only ones saying it was Virgin... I wonder if the source they have is a reliable one - If not, prepare for some fun libel games with the lawyers ):

not_ordinary_more_weird wrote:The articles all indicate 325 seat aircraft which would rule Virgin out and place it firmly in Thomas Cook territory.

Assuming they haven't all just googled 'how many seats on an A330' and picked the TC config

I think you are right given all the papers are reporting this number (a subtle hint perhaps), here's looking at you Thomas Cook 8D

Oh dear all the finger pointing at Monarch & Thomas Cook has suddenly gone quiet. So "the reporting integrity of the Daily Heil " was right after all |:) ):

Ahhh Hev, not heard from you in a while over here... all good?

Hev60 wrote:

joeyc wrote:Well Thomas Cook and Monarch do firmly deny it was them...

Are we sure this is VS? CNN are the only ones saying it was Virgin... I wonder if the source they have is a reliable one - If not, prepare for some fun libel games with the lawyers ):

not_ordinary_more_weird wrote:The articles all indicate 325 seat aircraft which would rule Virgin out and place it firmly in Thomas Cook territory.

Assuming they haven't all just googled 'how many seats on an A330' and picked the TC config

I think you are right given all the papers are reporting this number (a subtle hint perhaps), here's looking at you Thomas Cook 8D

Oh dear all the finger pointing at Monarch & Thomas Cook has suddenly gone quiet. So "the reporting integrity of the Daily Heil " was right after all |:) ):

VS admit it was them... ok, good for them. They didnt have to ):

Have to say it was not the case yesterday and I still stand by my view that the only reason the pilots came out with this has to be that one month prior to the initial report to the CAA the EU rejigging of flight regs was released. Sceptical perhaps but tbh I would prefer that the pilots were allowed sufficient opportunity to rest up so such an occurrence would not cause such concern, as such I do for once support a union :$

Not to be pedantic but the Daily MAIL were wrong actually, 325 seat count for an A330 is Thomas Cook, not VS

P.S - speaking on pilot incapacities this makes for some troubling reading.

joeyc wrote:Ahhh Hev, not heard from you in a while over here... all good?

Hi joey, Yeap still "lurking" around the v-flyer site but having defected to the other side don't have a lot to comment on. However on reading my copy of the Daily Mail tonight ): I notice Sir Richard admitted it was their aircraft/pilots .. But supposedly being quoted as denying both pilots were asleep at the same time Having read that, I thought I'd do a comment just to get back in the game again