Why Sleeping Pilots Shouldn't Be Disciplined
Do high-flyers who microsleep deserve to have their reputations and possibly careers ruined if this episode became public knowledge?
Do high-flyers who microsleep deserve to have their reputations and possibly careers ruined if this episode became public knowledge?
DALLAS - There have been two reported incidents involving flag carriers in the last few months in which both pilots have fallen asleep at the controls. Rather than being isolated occurrences, these will likely be a recurring theme.
The most recent incidents involved an ITA Airways (AZ) flight from New York (JFK) to Rome Fiumicino (FCO) and, more recently, an Ethiopian Airlines (ET) flight from Khartoum (KRT) to Addis Ababa (ADD). Fortunately, neither of these occurrences resulted in anything more sinister.
When both pilots fall asleep at the same time, they should not be disciplined. Before you dismiss such a viewpoint as overly tolerant, I have yet to hear of two pilots agreeing in advance to sleep at the controls at the same time. Aviators, to whom you entrust your safety, make significant sacrifices to achieve and maintain their position on the flight deck.
The never-ending stream of simulator assessments, medical checks, and grasping constantly evolving technology and procedures necessitates a high level of dedication and professionalism. Those with a carefree attitude don't last long.
While it cannot be denied that having both pilots asleep at the controls is undesirable, do competent pilots suddenly transform into reckless beings when this occurs? Are they no longer qualified to be considered professionals? Consider a hypothetical situation in which a flight is being operated by the best Captain and First Officer of an airline. Imagine that this duo excels in every way.
Unfortunately, both dozed off for a few moments together in an ill-timed microsleep. Do these high-flyers now deserve to have their reputations and possibly careers ruined if this episode became public knowledge?
[wlm_private "Airways Premium"]
Rather than focusing on individuals and chastising them, the industry should take a more holistic approach. Instead, the focus should be on the root cause, which is: Why are both pilots falling asleep in the first place?
The subject is contentious, and no airline wants to deal with it. It could be interpreted as an admission that there is a problem within their own company. This could be a tacit confession that their crews are not as vigilant as they should be, and it would almost certainly snowball into a public relations disaster. One that is likely to raise more questions than it answers.
Furthermore, it is unlikely that a national regulator would intervene. Such action could raise concerns that their current oversight of pilot fatigue and how it is managed is perhaps not as robust as it should be. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," as the saying goes.
However, the system for managing pilot fatigue is broken. Crew duty limitations and the rules in place to protect crew are frequently used as efficiency targets rather than safety limits by airlines around the world. Furthermore, the reasoning behind many existing limitations can be traced back to the days when flight decks were manned by flight engineers and navigators.
Are such outdated guidelines still relevant today, and what testing data is available to support their relevance in the present age?
It's impossible to deny that the operational landscape of the airline industry has changed beyond recognition. On the one hand, the job of an airline pilot has become more sedate, thanks to increased reliability and automation. On the other hand, we can see that many pilots now fly more hours than could be imagined in previous decades.
With most modern airliners, the physical workload on the flight deck is relatively low between the takeoff and landing phases. Several operators allow one pilot to take a short nap in a controlled environment on the flight deck, but the remaining pilot must maintain regular contact with the cabin crew.
This was said to be the case with the AZ incident. However, the pilot who was supposed to remain awake ended up falling asleep alongside his colleague. We must ask how this can happen and, more importantly, how it can be avoided in the future.
It is impossible to ignore the fact that fewer pilots will be required in the future. While pilotless aircraft with hundreds of passengers are currently a distant dream, large jets flown by a single pilot are arguably not so farfetched. This possibility highlights the importance of investigating how crew members can be kept alert on the flight deck when the crew complement is eventually reduced to a single pilot.
The European Aviation Safety Agency has already begun research into allowing single-pilot operations during periods of lower workload (EASA). If the concept gains traction, we may see it being implemented just a few years from now, paving the way for entire flights to be manned by a single pilot in the years that follow.
There should be no stone unturned in determining what can be done to help keep the crew focused and engaged while at the controls. Nutrition, flight-deck lighting, and sound exposure may appear to be frivolous, but each may play an important role in increasing alertness.
Can any of these factors be enhanced to improve alertness? Should pilots be allowed to monitor ATC communications with one ear while listening to unobtrusive music in the other, if it keeps them awake and alert? A thought that may send shivers down the spines of traditionalists, but if it keeps pilots focused and engaged, is it such an absurd suggestion after all?
A number of airlines still prohibit their pilots from using their own personal electronic devices on the flight deck, with the philosophy behind such rules being to avoid untimely distractions. With so many of us turning to portable electronic devices to read books, magazines, and newspapers, such a policy may actually be a hindrance. Preventing a pilot from accessing reading material that could be useful in providing some stimulus, reduces rather than improves flight safety.
Perhaps it's time to make a radical departure from conventional norms and do it in the name of safety. Being unconventional does not mean being unsafe, but this is a mindset with which the industry will struggle to align.
Adopting a traditional stance is the most convenient way of thinking for both airlines and regulators. However, unless pilot fatigue on and off the flight deck is given the attention and research it deserves, we have not seen the last incident in which both pilots on the flight deck fall asleep at the same time.
[/wlm_private]
Featured Image: Boeing 737-800 flight deck. Photo: By Cory W. Watts - Wikimedia Commons - CC BY-SA 2.0.
.webp)
David H. Stringer, the History Editor for AIRWAYS Magazine, has chronicled the story of the commercial aviation industry with his airline history articles that have appeared in AIRWAYS over two decades. Here, for the first time, is a compilation of those articles.
Subjects A through C are presented in this first of three volumes. Covering topics such as the airlines of Alaska at the time of statehood and Canada's regional airlines of the 1960s, the individual histories of such carriers as Allegheny, American, Braniff, and Continental are also included in Volume One. Get your copy today!
