dracir1

So, in the Atlanta bid packet for Oct, pairing A3164 is as follows:

Base Report: 0600L
We ATL-LAS 0700-0835, LAS-SMF 0956-1139, SMF-LAS 1224-1352 Block of 746 Layover of 2348
Th LAS-DFW 1440-1941, DFW-SAN 2031-2146, SAN-LAS 2231-2359 Block of 744 Layover of 2234
Fr LAS-ATL 2333-0630 Block of 357

Trip Rig of 120 Credit 2047

Not a bad 3/4 day except - in order to obtain the 117 prescribed rest (10 hours immediately prior to flying) a pilot would need to:

Start rest Tuesday night at 2000 EST, be in bed by 2100 and sleep 8 hours. That gives him/her 1 hr to get to the airport by 0600. After landing from 7:46 of block (3 legs), the show time at the airport the next day is 1555 PST (or 1855 EST). Therefore, the crew rest period immediately preceding this would start at 0555 PST (or 0855 EST). Party time in Vegas all night trying to stay awake, I guess. Then, the crew would fly day 2 (a block of 744 on 3 legs) and land around midnight. Crew rest for day 3 would start at 0948 PST (or 1248 EST) on day 3. Show time that night would be 2248 for the red-eye back.

The crew starts day 1 w/ a report of 0600 EST, day 2 w/ a report of 1855 EST and day 3 w/ a report of 0148 EST. I like the high credit days but how is the F9 pairing builder allowed to construct pairings where the start times are 6 -12 hours different every day?

Anyone see a problem w/ this besides me (or should I stop whining)?

symbian simian

Red-eye-flip-flops. NK has those out of LAS all the time, red eye to east coast, 24hr layover, early morning to west coast, 24hr layover, early morning back midwest, back to LAS. 4 legs, 20hr credit, commutable both ends, generally do 4 per month. Very fatiguing for most.

DumboDrop

If only there was some official channel to report "fatiguing" problems like this.

OpenClimb

It's hard to discern humor and/or sarcasm on forums, but if you're serious and suggesting some ASAP or incident report will change anything, you're very naive.

These kinds of trips have been going on forever and they would've been fixed by now if someone was truly interested in making Safety #1. One of the Company's latest talking points is that "we are data driven." Since the data shows we haven't killed anyone due to pairings like this... just like we haven't killed anyone with more palatable pairings, then the data shows they're equally safe. Voila. Rationalization at its finest. Nevermind all the sleep and fatigue studies to the contrary. Those are just somebody's opinion.

doz4dllrs

I think he’s referring to a fatigue call and subsequent fatigue report. If there were more of these fatigue reports coming in then the data would suggest maybe they aren’t safe to fly. Especially with the airplane gets grounded in an out station. Let the data speak for itself in that case.

buzzer

Exactly. If enough call in fatigued, it would get changed.

DumboDrop

Thomas Jefferson said "The government you elect is the government you deserve." Your post reminded me of this quote in that if we don't use what is available to us to effect change, we deserve what we get.

JulesWinfield

If you get fatigued in the middle of a pairing, call out fatigued.

dracir1

This is a great point except…the fatigue calls aren’t happening. Plain and simple.

Why do you think that is?

emersonbiguns

People that are not bothered by that type circadian circus bid and fly them?