"Effective Crew Scheduling Strategies on Ultra-long Range Flights."

John R Fare

Introduction

• Current and Future Demands of our Customers – Longer range Aircraft– Faster Speeds– Shorter Layovers

Alertness in the Aircraft

• Three Distinct Factors that Determine Cockpit Alertness– Circadian Rhythm– Sleep Propensity/Pressure– Sleep Inertia

Circadian Rhythm

• Reason – Regulate bodily functions

• Synchronization– Length• 25.3 hours

– Zeitgebers “time keepers”• 24 hours

– Low• 0200-0600 and 1500-1700

Circadian Rhythm (cont.)

Circadian Adjustment

• Phase Advance• Phase Delay• Resynchronization

Phase Advance

• Occurs when traveling Eastbound– Day is shortened

• Forced to “advance” to new rhythm• First sleep is short followed by

subsequent longer rest period

Phase Delay

• Occurs when travelling Westbound• Day is lengthened• Initial sleep is longer followed by

shorter sleep episode

Resynchronization

• Asymmetrical Effect– Difference between Eastbound and

Westbound

• Westbound (8 time zones or more)– 5.1 days for 95% adjustment

• Eastbound (8 time zones or more)– 6.5 days

• Circadian Synchronization –Westbound (92 minutes per day)– Eastbound (57 minutes per day)

Sleep Propensity/Pressure

• Definition• Adjusting• Performance Decrements

Sleep Propensity/Pressure

• Definition– The physiological need to sleep based

off of the last full nights rest– 16 hours awake/ 8 hours asleep–Naps improve wakefulness but do not

reset Sleep Propensity’s cumulative effect!

Sleep Propensity/Pressure (cont.)

Adjusting Sleep Propensity

• Lengthening the Sleep/Wake Cycle– 28 hour day (Westbound travel)• Greatest need for sleep at 20 hours

• Shortening the Sleep/Wake Cycle– 20 hour day (Eastbound travel with less

than 24 hours of crew rest)• Greatest need for sleep at 13 hours

Performance Decrements after 16 hours and 24 hours

Sleep Inertia

• Definition• In-flight Considerations

Sleep Inertia

• Definition– The grogginess that one feels after

waking up from a deep sleep

Sleep Inertia

• In-flight Considerations– Short Naps (NASA Naps)• Less than 40 minutes to stay out of Deep

Sleep• Effective when crew rest time is shorter

– Long Naps• More beneficial in reducing fatigue levels• More realistic during circadian low times• Afford at least 40 minutes of recovery prior

to resuming flight deck duties

Crew Types and Logistics

• Two-Pilot Crew• Augmented or Three-Pilot Crew• Crew Change

Two-Pilot Crew

• Duty/Flight Time Limitation Considerations–Normal• 14 hours duty/ 12 hours of flight (FSF, 1997)

–Circadian Low *Is flight flying through or landing between the hours of 0200 - 0600 body adjusted time or duty day starts at 0400 or earlier

• 12 hours duty/ 10 hours of flight and consider max amount of landings (FSF, 1997)

Augmented Crews

• Definition• Crew Bunk Categories and

Considerations• Circadian and Sleep Propensity

Considerations

Augmented Crews

• Three Pilots– From original point of departure?– From intermediate and or tech stop?– Supine rest available in a separated

area?• 20 hours of duty (FSF, 1997)

–No supine• 18 hours of duty (FSF, 1997)

Crew Bunk Categories

• Class I– 75% sleep opportunity credit (George,

2011)

• Class II*– 56% sleep opportunity credit (George,

2011)

• Class III– 25% sleep opportunity credit (George,

2011)

*Business Jet with separated crew rest facilities

Crew Change

• Logistics• Circadian Considerations

Crew Change Logistics

• Location!– Available Resources i.e. pilots?– Great Circle?– Airline Service for preposition?– Cost?– Time to get there?–Weather?–Handling?

Fatigue Study

• Overview• Assumptions• Limitations• Methodology• Treatment of Data• Results• Conclusion

Overview

• Background– Fatigue Management Program for our

SMS– Justify or refute our current policies

• Geographic Representation– Europe, Asia, South America

• Participants– Pilots and Flight Engineers

Hypothesis

• Three-Pilot Crews are less tired than Two-Pilot Crews during the last two hours of a flight to include top-of-descent, approach, landing, and post-flight

Assumptions

• All participants were operating during or through their circadian low

• All pilots afforded supine rest • Two-Pilot Crews– Two pilots and one Flight Engineer– Flight Engineer data from augmented flights

considered two-pilot crew

• Three-Pilot Crews– Three pilots from original point of departure

Limitations

• Human Factors–Health, emotional stability, family life,

quality of sleep, alcohol/substance abuse

• Meteorological– Day, Night

• In-flight Conditions– Turbulence, Convective Weather

Methodology

Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS)

Treatment of Data

• All Duty Start Times Adjusted to “Body Adjusted Time”– Eastbound• 57 minutes per day

–Westbound• 90 minutes per day

Results

• SSS Mean for the Last Two Hours of Duty

• Crewing Technique vs. SSS• SSS Mean for Entire Flight vs. Start

Time of Duty Day• Crew Rest Sleep Percentages vs.

Duty Hour

SSS Mean for the Last Two Hours of Duty

2 Pilot 3 Pilot2.05

2.1

2.15

2.2

2.25

2.3

2.35

2.4

2.45

SSS During Last 2 Hours of Duty

Hour 1Hour2

Conclusion

• Three-Pilot Flight Crews are Less Tired than Two-Pilot Crews

Crewing Technique vs. SSS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 200

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Crewing Technique vs. SSS

2 Pilot3 Pilot

Conclusion

• SSS Levels Separate at Duty Hour 11/ Flight Hour 9

• Johnson & Johnson Aviation Lowered its Circadian Low Duty Limits to 9 Hours of Flight with a Max of 2 Landings

SSS Mean for Entire Flight vs. Start Time of Duty Day

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 23 240

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

SSS vs. Adjusted Start of Duty Day

SSS

Conclusion

• Start time does correlate to SSS levels of augmented crews

• There is a significant increase in SSS with start times between 1800 and 0700

Crew Rest Sleep Percentages vs. Duty Hour

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 190

20

40

60

80

100

120

SleepAwake

Conclusions

• Physiological need determines success

• Most sleep attained between duty hour 9 and 18

• Strategic “rostering” – PF gets the most consideration

Practical Approaches

• Two Pilots – KTEB – LFPB – KTEB –Minimum Layover– Off Duty Prior to Circadian Low

• Three Pilots– KTEB – RJTT– Fuel Stop in PANC

Europe “Quickturn”

• Two Pilots–Depart KTEB @ 1800 Local–Arrive LFPB @ 0630 Local• 10 hour rest period + 2 hours for travel and “unwinding”

–Depart LFPB @ 1830 Local–Arrive KTEB @ 2030 Local

Three Pilots to Tokyo

• Three Pilots – Depart KTEB @ 0800 Local– Arrive RJTT @ 1300 Local the next day

Summary

• Three-pilot crews are less tired than two-pilot crews on extended circadian low flights!

• Sleep propensity needs to be considered when augmenting

• Have a plan!– Rostering– In-flight fatigue countermeasures

• Learn from your Experiences

ReferencesBilliard, M, & Kent, A. (2003). Sleep: physiology, investigations, and medicine. New

York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Caldwell, John A., & Caldwell, J. Lynn (2003). Fatigue in Aviation: A Guide to Staying Awake at the Stick. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing LimitedCEriksen, C.A., Torbjorn, E., & Nilsson, J.P. (2006). Fatigue in trans-atlantic airline

operations: Diaries and actigraphy for two- vs. three-pilot crews. Aviation, Space, and

Environmental Medicine, 77(6), 605-612.Gander, P.H., Gregory, B.S., Miller, D.L., Graebner, R.C., Connell, L.J., & Rosekind, R.

(1998). Flight crew fatigue V: Long-haul air transport operations. Aviation, Space, and

Environmental Medicine, 69(9), B37-B48Gander, P.H., Rosekind, M.R., & Gregory, K.B. (1998). Flight crew fatigue VI: A

synthesis. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 69(9), B49-B60.George, F. (2011, February). Fatigue risk management. Business & Commercial

Aviation, 32-37.Miller, J. C. (2005, May). Operational Risk Management of Fatigue Effects (AFRL-HE-BR-TR-2005-0073). : United State Air Force Research Lab.Neri, D., Oyung, R., Colletti, L., Mallis, M., Tam, D., & Dinges, D. (2002), Controlled

Breaks as a Fatigue Countermeasure on the Flight Deck. Aviation, Space, and Environmental

Medicine, 73(7) United Kingdom Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), Safety Regulation Group. (2007).

Aircrew fatigue: A review of research undertaken on behalf of the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA PAPER 2005/04). Retrieved from http://www.caa.co.uk