Quote:
Originally Posted by bike21  Good points, you have been at the end of your rope too it sounds on certain days. So lets say hypothetically, that 10 hours (block) is allowed for 3 legs or less a day. What if those legs are extended big time due to delays? And lets say it is your last leg of the day, you are legal to start so off you go. Now you have been waiting for a ground stop at your destination, and are just within legal limits to depart. Off you go with a few minutes to spare on the 16 hour duty limitation (upon reaching destination). Now once enroute, you start getting delay vectors, then run around thunderstoms, do some holding once closer in and finally are on approach with weather down to mins, wind is howling, etc.
How safe does you feel? |
And those are valid points as well. If a change in the regulations can be written to make flying safer or at least as safe, while increasing flight time allowed then I say go for it. The trick is going to be writing that regulation in such a way that companies don't find a way to abuse it. I believe that there are schedules where the flight time can be increased and the operation will be as safe or safer than current. I can also see situations in which we're just expanding a boundary and pushing closer to an unsafe operation. The devil is in the details.
As another poster mentioned - if we're going to fly more than 8 then we've got to get maximum duty reduced (for at least more than 8) and if, from time to time, that causes JBLU to end up with a plane and crew in LAX who aren't legal due to duty time limitations to bring the plane back, well so be it, that's the risk the company takes for playing on the edge.