Reported by CNN this morning!!!!!

What have you been smoking?!?

"Dave S" wrote in message
...
Maybe NOW the feds can push through some MEANINGFUL crew rest and duty
time limitations.

On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 07:54:57 GMT, "Capt. Doug"
wrote:

The FO is certainly capable of flying the plane. However, radar services are
NOT available for much of their route and there is a lot of traffic crossing
that route. An extra set of eyes scanning for traffic is a valuable safety
asset.

And I, in the light singles I'm allowed to fly? Were I to fly that
route under part 91, would I therefore be a detrimental safety
liability, if my pax don't scan for traffic?

(And yes, I've had conversations with pilots who reported waking up in
their light single in an unusual attitude. Not fun, I'm told...)

I didn't argue that the man didn't need to be awake. I argue that it
was much worse on the company flying that leg to have a pilot get
caught doing what pilots do on occasion, and have that hit the news
("OMG! a pilot was asleep! That's worse than Palestinian Suicide
Bombers! Run the video again, Bob!") than the actual detriment to
safety warranted.

IOW, pax overreacted. Media (as usual) overreacted.

One thing's for sure, though, IMO. The age-60 rule just got itself
another point in the "pro" column, don't you think?

So while falling asleep wasn't bad for flight safety so much, it was
*very* bad for business. Wasn't he sacked?

Wrong, wrong, and wrong again. He resigned.

Nixon style, beating them to the pink slip? Or would he have kept his
job after making the national news anyway? eh?

Rob

Dave S wrote:

Maybe NOW the feds can push through some MEANINGFUL crew rest and duty
time limitations. Whats scary is riding in the back in a 135 op and
looking up to find BOTH of them guys nodding off... its happened more
than once.

Back in '72 I flew Aeroflot across the Atlantic and was shocked to see
the stewardess carrying glasses of cognac to the cabin (and later
returning with the empties). Oh well, we made it.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

"Capt. Doug" wrote in message ...
Robert Perkins said:

wrote in message I think the pilot's mistake was not so
much that he was asleep while another had the controls; the safety problem
with that is not as
critical in a 2-crew airplane at cruise. snip, snip

Cap sez:

Walker's flies a few times per week, one hour out and one hour back, always
during the day with the crew being home every night. It's not a high demand
job. Doing back-to-back red-eyes out to LAX can tax one with fatigue, but
not doing a cake job like Walker's. Besides, a professional pilot makes sure
he is well rested before taking a flight, or he calls out sick. snip, both ends

Pac sez:

Right you are Cap Doug... but, Boy, I'm not touching this one with a
ten-foot pole. But you ougtta see how many people are awake on the
flight deck of a "back door" round the world flight somewhere around
MNL to BOM. ;-) Time zones, circadian rhythm disruption, short
layovers, and fatigue from struggling to understand foreign
controllers (over 80% of communication is through facial expressions.)
NASA did sleep studies in the 90's; wired us up for six mo's. The
preliminary report concluded we "were operating in a dangerously
impaired state" from sleep deprivation "most of the time" (night cargo
ops.) Big box-hauler management got wind of this, and saw to it that
the report (which was on their property, and published voluntarily
with their consent,) was never published. UPS pilots sued, and then I
never heard what the outcome was.

Keep the door closed! Never know who's hiding in a suspicious looking
box with a camcorder!

pac "cargo dog" plyer

"Big John" wrote in message
...
Some individuals can be fully functional while 'legally' drunk. In
fact, I've seen some who were more functional after drinking.

Those individuals, however, are not as functional as a non-alcoholic who is
sober, and should probably not be flying under any circumstance.

"Capt. Doug" wrote in message
news:lP6Sa.62639

Rather, it was that he let his passengers get unsettled enough to
document it. Never scare the pax, right? They pay the bills for the
flight, after all...

They weren't unsettled. They were giggling. They don't pay the bills
either.
The island is huge tax write-off for a big corporation. Those passengers
will likely be back. The one on CNN said as much.

A difference without distinction.

So while falling asleep wasn't bad for flight safety so much, it was
*very* bad for business. Wasn't he sacked?

Wrong, wrong, and wrong again. He resigned.

See above

pac plyer wrote:

Take a nice nap on the way to Oshgosh! Just make sure your rated co-pilot doesn't do it the same time you do!
(sorry, your wife or dog do not qualify.) ;-)

Uh, *some* wives do: Margy Natalie, Sydney Hoeltzli, Tina Marie (ok, so technically she isn't married...). And
some husbands do not. And the spelling is "Oshkosh". :-)

Russell Kent

I saw the same CNN report. They specifically reported that the FAA said your
hands do NOT have to be on the controls at all time.


"Toks Desalu" wrote in message
news:3f182685@shknews01...
Guys!
You could not believe what I saw on CNN before I left for work. I
missed
the beginning of the segment, but I understood the whole story. A
passenger
was fliming during the flight. That film was showing on CNN. The pilot got
caught sleeping while flying. The pilot did not wear the headset. I
noticed
that he was wearing a ear plug. You could see his head tilt backward with
his left eye closed. The passenger claimed that he was filming him
sleeping
for about one hour. At the end of segment, the CNN went to FAA for
comments
and the FAA claimed that it was against the regulation. FAA claimed that
the
pilot must be awake and his must be on the control at all the time. There
is
no way to tell what kind of aircraft but, it was pretty clear that it is
under general aviation, a high wing with mulit-engine(propeller) aircraft.
Also, because of pilot's uniform, and other passengers, it indicated that
it
is under part 121 operation. But, I could be wrong. I have no idea where
the
flight was but the reporter said he/she was reporting from West Palm
Beach,
Florida.
Here my questions:
Can you believe this?
I studied regulation back in college and don't remember any specific
regulation that said the hand must be at control at all time. Anybody can
point it out?
Why they really want to make us look bad?
Feel free to comment on this.

Toks
PP_ASEL

On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 13:12:34 GMT, Dave S wrote:

Maybe NOW the feds can push through some MEANINGFUL crew rest and duty
time limitations. Whats scary is riding in the back in a 135 op and
looking up to find BOTH of them guys nodding off... its happened more
than once.

Dave PPSEL

Toks Desalu wrote:

Guys!
You could not believe what I saw on CNN before I left for work. I missed
the beginning of the segment, but I understood the whole story. A passenger
was fliming during the flight. That film was showing on CNN. The pilot got
caught sleeping while flying. The pilot did not wear the headset. I noticed
that he was wearing a ear plug. You could see his head tilt backward with
his left eye closed. The passenger claimed that he was filming him sleeping
for about one hour. At the end of segment, the CNN went to FAA for comments
and the FAA claimed that it was against the regulation. FAA claimed that the

I think they must have misrepresented it to the FAA. I don't think
it's against the rules for one to take a nap while the other
flys..then again.


pilot must be awake and his must be on the control at all the time. There is

The pilot can not be on the controls when the copilot is operating as
PIC.

no way to tell what kind of aircraft but, it was pretty clear that it is
under general aviation, a high wing with mulit-engine(propeller) aircraft.
Also, because of pilot's uniform, and other passengers, it indicated that it
is under part 121 operation. But, I could be wrong. I have no idea where the
flight was but the reporter said he/she was reporting from West Palm Beach,
Florida.
Here my questions:
Can you believe this?

I studied regulation back in college and don't remember any specific
regulation that said the hand must be at control at all time. Anybody can
point it out?

If it is, virtually every pilot I know has been violating...what if he
has to take a pee? I think some one over reacted.

Why they really want to make us look bad?
Feel free to comment on this.

Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)


Toks
PP_ASEL

"Big John" wrote in message
...
Are we into apples and oranges?

Yes, I believe you are.