What I got from the program was that Ryanair pilots have to concentrate very hard for nine hours a day 5 days a week, sometimes without breaks. Whilst I understand that this could be tiring for some people other people can do this sort of thing easily. A lot of people in a lot of jobs have to concentrate very hard for long periods of time. As for brain surgeons, in beaumont hospital the brain surgeons do surgery from 8 in the morning till 8 in the evening and beyond, now that's a lot of concentration. Flying planes is a well paid job with relatively short hours, if you can't take it, don't do it. So from Michael O'Leary's point of view, the pilot who can't handle it shouldn't be doing it. Otherwise I'm no great fan of Ryanair and would never fly with them, mainly because I couldn't hack getting stranded in Girona or whatever when they cancel a plane and only offer a refund of the ticket price.
'Prime Time' highlighting pilot fatigue
- Thread starter aonfocaleile
- Start date
M
Meccano
Guest
Gee...that would make Mick O'Lerary a liar then! I'm sure he said they don't go over two hours on RTE last night! Sorry I listened to him now - I'll be sure to take everything he says with a pinch of salt in future. Well done for pointing out his fib!
Still - you said 3.5 hours, so you were wrong too.
But anyhow, back to the fatigue thing, my pilot buddies tell me that the longer the flight is the better (within reason obviously) because constant repetitive take-offs and landings (up to 6 a day in Ryanair!) are far more tiring. Kinda makes sense really, doesn't it.
Yep, it SURE WAS!
Well, Micko said they are mostly 1 hour long on that program. Right enough - he COULD be SPOOFING AGAIN!
Yeah, but its what happens in those first 1,000 hours that really is the catch, eh? Pray you aren't down the back the day it all goes pear shaped with a 200 hr co-pilot and a 1,500 hr Captain.
Have you got much flight time then? Where did you train, and on what aircraft? What licence do you have? I must have met you!
Most of the travelling public are used to hearing about awful aircraft accidents now and then.
When they hear of no accidents from a particular company is it then correct to assume the airline is totally SAFE?
Not really, because in reality ALL airlines have 'incidents' which you never get to hear about. The media is only interested in gore - not boring technical details. Like FATIGUE leading to mistakes in handling.
As I said earlier, if I was taking a flying job it wouldn't be with Ryanair. And the Ryanair pilot I know is desperately trying to get out. He wants to go to an airline where he doesn't feel exhausted and threatened by the management all the time.
I don't even travel down the back with them.
I thought pilots these days were only really there to land the plane, as the computer does the majority of the work?
In terms of pilots "being tired", I think they need to get over themselves, as others have said there are plenty of jobs out there where long periods of concentration are required.
eg. Hospital interns, doctors, surgeons, stock market traders, recptionists, hair dressers, computer programmers, the self employed, people who do a lot of driving etc etc
Having said all that, I do know in an emergency I would rather have alert and experienced piolts in the cockpit
In terms of pilots "being tired", I think they need to get over themselves, as others have said there are plenty of jobs out there where long periods of concentration are required.
eg. Hospital interns, doctors, surgeons, stock market traders, recptionists, hair dressers, computer programmers, the self employed, people who do a lot of driving etc etc
Having said all that, I do know in an emergency I would rather have alert and experienced piolts in the cockpit
G
Guest127
Guest
the bit where the pilots complained about being on duty for 5.30 am was really stretching the 'tiredness' bit. aren't air traffic controllers up all night? dont other workers get up early too? taxi drivers/train drivers/ bus drivers. when did you last hear a train driver complain about being tired because he started at 5.30 am? if you start at 5.30 am I assum you complete you duty around 1.30pm. so whats their gripe on the early starts? personally I dont believe the majority have any, just a few moaners running to the aer lingus union. if they dont like the early starts they can do what others do - leave.
M
Meccano
Guest
I suppose you heard the old one about the fully automatic aircraft?
It takes off and then the computer announcement comes on and says "this is a fully automated flight, nothing can go wrong - click - go wrong - click - go wrong - click - ...."
Yeah - I remember the time my hairdresser fell asleep while giving me a blow dry. Lucky she wasn't driving at the time, eh?
Yeah, me too.Having said all that, I do know in an emergency I would rather have alert and experienced piolts in the cockpit
Jaysus, we all hate earlies, eh! But my mate in Ryanair tells me the problem isn't getting up at 0430, but that the next week he'll be starting at 1400 and finishing at 2200, then back to a 0530 start again. Kinda messy, and disruptive to a regular sleeping pattern, know what I'm saying?
Thank God for lie ins.
I'll be sure to pass on your helpful advice to my mate - believe me, he's trying hard!
The thing is though, when he leaves for greener pastures - the problem remains here. He'll be kicking his heels up in Emirates but his buddies will still be flying around exhausted, and YOU"LL still be down the back, oblivious to the danger.
Ciao Ciao!
From yesterdays Irish Times :In a statement, the Irish Aviation Authority (IAA) said it carried out “extensive and detailed surveillance on all Irish airlines”. “Fatigue has not been cited as a primary or contributory cause to any incident investigated by either the IAA or the Air Accident Investigation Unit in the recent past.”
.....which pretty much supports my view that the substantive issue of the Prime Time programme was rubbish . It probably also explains why O Callaghan gave such an inept display - hard to argue your point when you don't have conviction imo .
.....which pretty much supports my view that the substantive issue of the Prime Time programme was rubbish . It probably also explains why O Callaghan gave such an inept display - hard to argue your point when you don't have conviction imo .
I have to say that surely if the pilots REALLY feel that fatigue is really causing serious safety concerns, then they have a responsibility to speak out publically (not blacked out faces with actors voices) or to the proper authorities even if that means that are likely be 'punished' in some way by Ryanair. From the way the programme was presented, I got the feeling the pilots were looking for a 9-5 Monday to Friday Job with time for a siesta in the afternoon. They came out of it very badly as did Prime Time itself.
And can I just also point out that I have alot of respect for pilots as the job is difficult and not just a case of pressing a few buttons and sitting back enjoying the scenery. It's the same with Train Drivers.
And can I just also point out that I have alot of respect for pilots as the job is difficult and not just a case of pressing a few buttons and sitting back enjoying the scenery. It's the same with Train Drivers.
M
Meccano
Guest
I agree with you there Sunny, that would be better, so WHY don't they?
What possible reason do they have for not coming out in the open and expressing their legitimate concerns?
Commercial pilots can be held PERSONALLY liable to prosecution and imprisonment if they are found to be in any way responsible for an accident. At the very least they could lose their livliehood - their pilots licence. At worst they could be dead, along with a lot of other people.
If a Commercial Pilot doesn't bring his concerns on his fitness to fly to his employer AND the IAA he is actually BREAKING THE LAW.
In the past that system worked very well, and it was a responsibility that was taken seriously, and on trust, by both the employer and the pilot and the regulators.
Nowadays however, the Ryanair guys have an employer who isn't interested in hearing any such concerns. They are commercially inconvenient.
When presented with an employee who dares express a concern the response is at best ridicule (as on the program the other night) or more likely DISMISSAL as with the previous victim mentioned on the program.
In the US they have 'whistle blower' protection laws. But not here in Ireland. And without a union to speak for them collectively the responsibility for safety in the airline falls to lone individuals.
So, human nature being what it is - of course they simply clam up. Or try to get the message out through whatever channels they can. The IAA unfortunately have washed their hands of regulation in the industry.
Would YOU accept the certain outcome of losing your job and probably being forced to look for work abroad in such circumstances? Would YOU go back to your wife and kids and tell them - "Honey, I chose to speak out and got fired today. So pack your bags, we're off to Saudi Arabia to look for work"?
Why stick YOUR neck out to be chopped off?
I wouldn't.
I'd probably do exactly what the majority of those Ryanair guys are doing. Shut up, keep the head down and the fingers crossed, and hope that when the day finally comes, and the system snaps, it won't be me who buys the farm, please God.
Oh, and keep looking for work elsewhere, naturally.
Quite a dilemma, eh?
If I felt strongly that mine and my company's actions were placing a couple of hundred lives at risk on a single flight, I would like to think I would speak out and quiet happily buy the missus a new dress to cover herself up in Saudi...
I guess you never know until you are in the situation
M
Meccano
Guest
Yeah, well if the wing was hanging off or something - obviously.
Thats rather different to saying you feel exhausted and can't go on.
Anyhow, the real problem here is lack of regulation.
The IAA have a lot to answer for. If they were doing their job this wouldn't even be an issue.
Thats rather different to saying you feel exhausted and can't go on.
Anyhow, the real problem here is lack of regulation.
The IAA have a lot to answer for. If they were doing their job this wouldn't even be an issue.
Would that not be preferable to the other inferred outcome?
Would employment law as it currently stands no offer protection to those wanting to speak out?
You seem here to be contradicting your earlier comment saying that the regulations that are in place were adequate, and where you blamed Ryanair for the situation, rather than the IAA.
M
Meccano
Guest
I blame the IAA for letting things get to the stage where this important issue has become a public football.
This is a SAFETY issue - not some petty scandal for the likes of PrimeTime to cynically exploit as a ratings booster.
What was the point of bringing Michael O'Leary and the President of IALPA onto the show for? It was simply to get some sparks flying and create some entertainment. Mr.O'Leary and Mr.Cullen are bitter adversaries in an Industrial Relations dispute. No reasonable benefit could have been gained from pitting them against each other in this forum. In fact, it has probably set back any hope of a resolution to a very important issue. This was not responsible journalism.
The IAA stayed away from the show - probably to their credit! But I expect they were WATCHING it. And I also hope - for the sake of all the travelling public - that they now DO something to address the issue in the proper arena. The REGULATORY process.
It should NOT be up to INDIVIDUAL PILOTS to sort out SYSTEMIC problems by hanging themselves in public.
This fatigue issue impacts individuals - but it is not an INDIVIDUAL problem. It is a SYSTEMIC PROBLEM which the IAA needs to address. Individual pilots HAVE been complaining, directly to the IAA and through IALPA, but the IAA has simply dismissed their concerns and ignored them - which leaves them exposed to the vengeful wrath of their employer, and all for nothing.
Nor is it solely a Ryanair issue - so why O'Leary? I'm hearing the same concerns from Aer Lingus pilots about their rostering - which if anything is even MORE disruptive than the Ryanair one.
When the Flight Time Limits were set in Law 50 years ago they were set as MAXIMUMS.
Now, they have become THE NORM.
They were never envisaged to be sustainable on a continuous basis, but that is what they've become. Thanks mainly to Ryanair.
Whatever Ryanair does TODAY every other carrier has to do TOMORROW, if they are to compete.
In a 'race to the bottom' environment - SAFETY IS INEVITABLY A VICTIM.
This is a SAFETY issue - not some petty scandal for the likes of PrimeTime to cynically exploit as a ratings booster.
What was the point of bringing Michael O'Leary and the President of IALPA onto the show for? It was simply to get some sparks flying and create some entertainment. Mr.O'Leary and Mr.Cullen are bitter adversaries in an Industrial Relations dispute. No reasonable benefit could have been gained from pitting them against each other in this forum. In fact, it has probably set back any hope of a resolution to a very important issue. This was not responsible journalism.
The IAA stayed away from the show - probably to their credit! But I expect they were WATCHING it. And I also hope - for the sake of all the travelling public - that they now DO something to address the issue in the proper arena. The REGULATORY process.
It should NOT be up to INDIVIDUAL PILOTS to sort out SYSTEMIC problems by hanging themselves in public.
This fatigue issue impacts individuals - but it is not an INDIVIDUAL problem. It is a SYSTEMIC PROBLEM which the IAA needs to address. Individual pilots HAVE been complaining, directly to the IAA and through IALPA, but the IAA has simply dismissed their concerns and ignored them - which leaves them exposed to the vengeful wrath of their employer, and all for nothing.
Nor is it solely a Ryanair issue - so why O'Leary? I'm hearing the same concerns from Aer Lingus pilots about their rostering - which if anything is even MORE disruptive than the Ryanair one.
When the Flight Time Limits were set in Law 50 years ago they were set as MAXIMUMS.
Now, they have become THE NORM.
They were never envisaged to be sustainable on a continuous basis, but that is what they've become. Thanks mainly to Ryanair.
Whatever Ryanair does TODAY every other carrier has to do TOMORROW, if they are to compete.
In a 'race to the bottom' environment - SAFETY IS INEVITABLY A VICTIM.
ubiquitous
Registered User
- Messages
- 3,782
I don't really understand this debate.
I wonder could someone please clarify the following:
1. Do the IIA adhere to the same level of standards, enforcement etc that pertains in the US, Continental Europe, Australia etc? If not, why not?
2. Low-cost airlines are pretty much a global phenomenon. On the face of it Ryanair's business model does not seem to vary that much compared to other operators like Easjet and the US low-cost carriers. I presume this assumption is correct?
3. Are global air accident rates falling or rising?
I would have thought that
(1) general health & safety standards in Ireland should, more or less, comply with global standards. Hence I would expect the IAA to be as health & safety oriented in respect of air travel as say the HSA are in respect of industry, workplaces etc.
(2) If Ryanair's peers all over the world are facing similar safety v. efficiency issues, then their safety record when compared to those of their peers should give us either reassurance or cause for alarm.
(3) If global air accident rates are rising this would indicate that there is a serious worldwide problem with low-cost carriers. Any other trend would indicate that the issue is exaggerated.
I wonder could someone please clarify the following:
1. Do the IIA adhere to the same level of standards, enforcement etc that pertains in the US, Continental Europe, Australia etc? If not, why not?
2. Low-cost airlines are pretty much a global phenomenon. On the face of it Ryanair's business model does not seem to vary that much compared to other operators like Easjet and the US low-cost carriers. I presume this assumption is correct?
3. Are global air accident rates falling or rising?
I would have thought that
(1) general health & safety standards in Ireland should, more or less, comply with global standards. Hence I would expect the IAA to be as health & safety oriented in respect of air travel as say the HSA are in respect of industry, workplaces etc.
(2) If Ryanair's peers all over the world are facing similar safety v. efficiency issues, then their safety record when compared to those of their peers should give us either reassurance or cause for alarm.
(3) If global air accident rates are rising this would indicate that there is a serious worldwide problem with low-cost carriers. Any other trend would indicate that the issue is exaggerated.
M
Meccano
Guest
Enforcement? Definitely not. Why? Who knows. Commercial pressure probably.
No it's wrong, because other airlines allow pilots to form professional associations to represent them.
Ryanairs 'model' calls that 'unionisation' and they fight vehemently to stop it.
The result is zero communication, except by decree from above.
Aircraft accident rates worldwide are roughly flat for the last 10 years. They dropped significantly with the introduction of jets in the 1970's, then further as technology improved over the last 20 years.
It is accepted FACT that while they are now flat - mechanical failure represents only about 25% of all accidents.
The cause of the other 75% of aircraft accidents these days is PILOT ERROR.
If the downward trend had continued since the 70's we'd be near zero accidents statistically now.
So, why has the Human Error cause remained high? Why are accidents still happening? Why has pilot error proved difficult to eliminate?
Probably because commercial pressures have increased the demands made on the crews and led to regular fatigue, rushing etc which - when also mixed with inexperience - leads to persistent pilot errors and accidents.
AS the machines have become more reliable, the human at the controls seems to have become less so. Improved aircraft reliability has in effect masked, or compensated for the underlying trend in pilot error.
Interestingly, the surge in Low Cost Carriers has also been in the last 10 years. See a connection here?
Ha! Such naiiveté.
Are you REALLY serious?
Yes. Read this: ValuJet Flight 592.
Or it might indicate we've been lucky.
The rise in Pilot Error as THE causal factor in 75% of all accidents is a warning staring us in the face.
I guess when it happens, and people get killed, I can say "I told you so", and you can say "oh, right, we'd better shut the barn door now the horse has bolted".
Its an old saying - safety lessons must be paid for in blood.
Why do we never learn?
G
Guest127
Guest
are accident rates 'flat' as a percentage of flights or flat as compared with 10 years ago?
ubiquitous
Registered User
- Messages
- 3,782
How do the IIA's safety standards and enforcement regime compare with, say, the UK?
I don't think you're comparing like with like. The question asked by ubiquitous related to safety versus efficiency considerations amongst other low cost carriers.
This plane didn't crash because of pilot fatigue, pilot falling asleep, or because the pilots didn't form a union.
ubiquitous
Registered User
- Messages
- 3,782
This site... http://www.airsafe.com/events/regions/europe.htm yields the following statistics
Fatal Events and Fatal Event Rates of Airlines in Europe Since 1970
Europe 54.55 million flights - 29 crashes
US & Canada 147.03 million flights - 58 crashes
Not much evidence of a problem there, methinks?
Fatal Events and Fatal Event Rates of Airlines in Europe Since 1970
Europe 54.55 million flights - 29 crashes
US & Canada 147.03 million flights - 58 crashes
Not much evidence of a problem there, methinks?
M
Meccano
Guest
The IAA allow Ryanair (and others) to do things the UK CAA forbid!
For example, UK Crew Flight Time restrictions are more limiting that those imposed by the IAA - and the UK CAA enforces the rules.
Listen to yourself. What lunacy.
I've already tried to explain to you that the indicator is INCIDENTS - the NEAR accident rate - which is ignored by you and the gore obsessed media.
The difference between an INCIDENT and an ACCIDENT is often just pure dumb LUCK.
No, but it crashed because commercial pressures in an exponentially expanding airline drove responsible people to do irresponsible things for the sake of expediency. Putting oxygen generating equipment into the baggage hold, because even though they knew it was ILLEGAL and DANGEROUS (fatally so in this case sadly) they went ahead anyhow. The oxygen generators were needed as spares elsewhere and commercial pressure dictated they had to get there - by hook or by crook.
The FAA grounded ValueJet after the accident, and cited their rapid and disorganised expansion as contributory factors to the accident. It was a Low Cost Carrier, where the culture of safety had been replaced by a culture of 'ah, sure it'll be grand' and 'get the job done, whatever it takes'.
Sound familiar?
I feel like I'm going round in circles here, although its not actually my job to convince you people. I'm just a hobby pilot!
Lets just agree to disagree then, as someone already said, we'll continue the great experiment until it reaches the inevitable conclusion.
Thats the only way people EVER listen.
At least I know that ME and MY FAMILY won't be victims.