# I Dowlohnes
March24,2011

Docket Operations, M-30 U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Room W12-140 'West Building Ground Floor Washington, D.C. 20590-000 1



## Re: Flightcrew Member Duty 

### & Rest Requirements, Dockeú No. F AA-2009-1093 To Whom It May Concem: Enclosed please find a study conducted by the Air Force Institute ofTechnology, dated J antary 4,2011, èntitled "CRAF Crew Rest Study: Proposed FAA Changes," as well as a letter of transmittal from General Duncan J. McNabb, united states Transportation command 

### - u.s. Air Force, to FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt, dated Febru aty 75,2011. The study analyzed 2,264 missions flown by commercial airlines between May and septernber 2010, and 

### it shows the number of missions that would be infeasible under the proposed Part 117. The National 

### Air Carrier Association 

### ('NACA") respectfully submits these materials to the above-captioned docket as relevant to this proceeding. Thank you for yo¡r attention to this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions. lonathan B. Hill Ð 2o2.776.272\ E ihill@dowlohnes.com

r2oo New Hañpshire Avenue, NW, Suite 8oo Washington, 0C 20036-6802 1 202.Z762000 t 202.7762222 

### .\ ^.t , ;/ 

### òr+cerery, 

## . /// 

# I ¡/¿ l,þ,/{ '\ J//¡., /l) ú Y '////J.Ü./T/ 

## '' ¡' Jonathan B. 

### Hill 

## / Counsel for 

## / National Air Carrier Association

Dow Lohnes PLLC www.dowlohnes.com WASHINGToN, DC ] A.TLANTA, GACenter for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)



# CRAF Crew Rest Study: Proposed FAA Changes

AFIT Dr. James Moore 

# Ms. Jessica Leslie Ms. Tiffany Harper Mr. Jordan Goldmeier 

# January 4, 2011Center for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) 

# Problem Description

• FAA has proposed changes to flight crew member duty and rest requirements

– How will these changes effect the CRAF program and organic flight operations? • Will current CRAF routes need to be altered? • Will CRAF require more aircrew augmentation? 

# • Will the CRAF aircrew run out of duty day under the new rules if there is a delay enroute?Center for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)



# Daily Flight Time

• Current:

– 8 hour limit for un -augmented operations

– Extended to 12 hours for 3 flightcrew members

– Extended to 20 hours for 4 pilots (or 3 pilots and 2 flight engineers), but must have an FAA-approved rest facility 

# • Proposed:

– Un -augmented flight time

– 16 hour limit for augmented operations

Time of Start (Home Base) Maximum

Flight Time (Hours) 0000-0459 8 0500-0659 9 0700- 1259 10 1300- 1959 9 2000-2359 8Center for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) 

# Flight Duty Period

• Current: 16-20 hours • Proposed:

Time of Start (Home Base or Acclimated) Maximum Flight Duty Period (hours) for Lineholders Based on Number of Flight Segments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7+ 0000-0359 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0400-0459 10 10 9 9 9 9 9 0500-0559 11 11 11 11 10 9.5 9 0600-0659 12 12 12 12 11.5 11 10.5 0700- 1259 13 13 13 13 12.5 12 11 1300- 1659 12 12 12 12 11.5 11 10.5 1700-2159 11 11 10 10 9.5 9 9 2200-2259 10.5 10.5 9.5 9.5 9 9 9 2300-2359 9.5 9.5 9 9 9 9 9 

## 2-hour extension (3- hour extension for augmented operations) for unforeseeable circumstances once in 168- hour periodCenter for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)



# Augmentation

• Current: • Flight time extended to 12 hours for 3- man crew • Extended to 20 hours for 4 pilots (or 3 pilots and 2 flight engineers), but must have an FAA-approved rest facility 

# • Proposed:

Time of Start (Home Base or Acclimated) Maximum Flight Duty Period (hours) for Lineholders Based on Rest Facility and Number of Pilots Class 1 Rest Facility Class 2 Rest Facility Class 3 Rest Facility 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 0000-0559 14 16 13 14.5 12 12.5 0600-0659 15 17.5 14 15.5 13 13.5 0700- 1259 16 18 15.5 17 14 14.5 1300- 1659 15 17.5 14 15.5 13 13.5 1700-2359 14 16 13 14.5 12 12.5 

## Reduce by 30 minutes if crew is not acclimated. Acclimated operations 

# capped at 16 hours for 3-man crew and 18 hours for 4-man crewCenter for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)



# Assumptions
Data Source • Analysis is based on 5 months of GDSS Data (May-Sept. 2010) Assumptions • In the analysis, Block to Block time from GDSS is the Flight Time as defined in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) 

# • Pilots report for duty 1.5 hours prior to scheduled flight departure (page 43 of NPRM and SME knowledge of Maj Eric Bucheit (pilot)) • Not considering credits earned for split duty period • CRAF carriers group together and share credits • All crew members are assumed to be acclimated • Assume pilots showed up at report time and were not on callCenter for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) 

# Analysis Summary

• Number of Missions Analyzed: 2264 • Missions were analyzed by segmented Flight Duty Period (FDP) 

# • The flight duty period was split by crew swaps or crew rest. Each split for swaps or crew rest is considered a mission segment in our analysis. • For example: 

## Mission Segment 1 – CONUS to Europe Mission Segment 2 – Europe to Theater (Middle East) to Europe Mission Segment 3 – Europe to CONUS 

# • Mission Feasibility

*Infeasible missions have a flight duty period beyond the maximum allowable FDP.

Current Proposed

No Rest Facility Class 3 Class 2 Class 1

3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots Feasible 2181 427 886 1065 1315 1800 1676 1988 Infeasible* 83 1837 1378 1199 949 464 588 276Center for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) 

# Infeasible Missions

This chart depicts the distribution of time exceeding a mission’s FDP. 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

0- 1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9- 10 10- 11 11- 12 12- 13 13- 14 14- 15 15- 16 16- 17 17- 18 18- 19 19+ Number of Infeasible Missions



## Time over FDP (hours) Current Proposed No Facilities Proposed Class 3 Rest Facility 3 Pilots Proposed Class 3 Rest Facility 4 Pilots Proposed Class 2 Rest Facility 3 Pilots Proposed Class 2 Rest Facility 4 Pilots Proposed Class 1 Rest Facility 3 Pilots Proposed Class 1 Rest Facility 4 PilotsCenter for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) 

# Infeasible Missions

This chart is a condensed version of the previous slide to better depict the distribution of missions from 0- 10 hours over FDP 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

0- 1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9- 10 10+ Number of Infeasible Missions



### Time Over FDP (hours) Current Proposed No Facilities Proposed Class 3 Rest Facility 3 Pilots Proposed Class 3 Rest Facility 4 Pilots Proposed Class 2 Rest Facility 3 Pilots Proposed Class 2 Rest Facility 4 Pilots Proposed Class 1 Rest Facility 3 Pilots Proposed Class 1 Rest Facility 4 PilotsCenter for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)



# Region Specific Mission Comments

• 40 missions from the NW Pacific to Diego Garcia NSF to Bahrain and back, round trip

• 20 missions from CONUS to Europe to Manas and back, round trip Current



### Rules Proposed Rules 

### No Rest Facility Class 3 Rest

Facility Class 2 Rest

Facility Class 1 Rest

Facility 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots # Infeasible Missions 0 20 20 18 10 0 0 0 Avg. Hours Over - 3.75 1.44 1.94 2.62 - - - Max Hours Over - 4.27 2.17 2.67 3.15 - - -

Current Rules Proposed Rules 

### No Rest Facility Class 3 Rest

Facility Class 2 Rest

Facility Class 1 Rest

Facility 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots # Infeasible Missions 20 40 40 40 39 23 24 21 Avg. Hours Over 6.75 10.52 8.00 7.50 7.19 10.48 10.41 9.94 Max Hours Over 7.28 18.28 15.28 14.78 14.28 12.78 13.28 11.28Center for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)



# Region Specific Mission Comments

• 20 CONUS to Africa and back, round trip

• 30 missions from CONUS to Europe to Africa and back, round trip Current

Rules Proposed Rules No Rest Facility Class 3 Rest

Facility Class 2 Rest

Facility Class 1 Rest

Facility 

### 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots # Infeasible Missions 0 22 17 6 2 0 0 0 Avg. Hours Over - 3.27 0.71 1.14 1.30 - - - Max Hours Over - 4.20 1.33 1.83 2.00 - - -

Current Rules Proposed Rules No Rest 

### Facility Class 3 Rest

Facility Class 2 Rest

Facility Class 1 Rest

Facility 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots # Infeasible Missions 1 28 5 2 2 2 2 2 Avg. Hours Over 3.25 4.20 5.45 7.03 6.53 5.03 5.53 3.53 Max Hours Over 

### 3.25 12.43 10.93 9.93 9.43 7.93 8.43 6.43Center for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)



# Region Specific Mission Comments

• 47 missions CONUS to Europe and back, round trip

• With a crew swap at any location, missions would become feasible since all stops are in regions where carriers typically operate. 

# • 201 missions from CONUS to NE & NW Pacific Current Rules Proposed Rules No Rest Facility Class 3 Rest

Facility Class 2 Rest

Facility Class 1 Rest

Facility 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots # Infeasible Missions 0 47 39 39 39 38 38 38 Avg. Hours Over - 8.04 5.59 5.11 4.64 3.21 3.71 1.75 Max Hours Over - 10.23 7.30 6.80 6.30 4.80 5.30 4.15

Current Rules Proposed Rules 

### No Rest Facility Class 3 Rest

Facility Class 2 Rest

Facility Class 1 Rest

Facility 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots # Infeasible Missions 9 190 188 180 171 138 149 96 Avg. Hours Over 3.82 6.67 4.58 4.33 4.13 3.47 215.00 2.89 Max Hours Over 8.28 23.70 23.70 23.70 23.70 23.70 23.70 23.70Center for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)



# Region Specific Mission Comments

• 635 one way missions into Theater (Middle East)

• These missions “ended” in theater but had to be repositioned. The repositioning time was included in the FDP. 

# • 1,008 missions from CONUS to Europe into Theater (Middle East) and back, round trip

Current Rules Proposed Rules No Rest Facility Class 3 Rest

Facility Class 2 Rest

Facility Class 1 Rest

Facility 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 

### # Infeasible Missions 11 605 512 430 323 142 215 39 Avg. Hours Over 8.44 3.30 3.18 3.48 3.86 5.24 4.65 5.75 Max Hours Over 16.17 17.20 15.17 14.67 13.67 12.70 13.17 14.70

Current Rules Proposed Rules No Rest Facility Class 3 Rest

Facility Class 2 Rest

Facility Class 1 Rest

Facility 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots # Infeasible Missions 38 852 538 467 347 110 147 72 Avg. Hours Over 8.69 5.30 4.70 4.82 5.60 12.21 10.32 14.45 Max Hours Over 39.53 50.53 47.53 47.03 46.53 45.03 45.53 43.53Center for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)



# Summary

• The current rules require augmentation to any mission over 8 hours of flight time 

# • The proposed rules allow for possible increased flight time of 8- 10 hours based on the mission’s departure time • Increased flight time reduces augmentation costs for specific flights 

# • The proposed rules allow for better fatigue mitigation but possibly increase congestion • The number of infeasible missions increase under the proposed rules and will need to be addressed by the addition of crew swaps and/or crew rest on the routes as currently configured, or by changing the current route 

# configurations.Center for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)



# Summary

• These findings suggest that the airlines are currently running optimally. They run as close to the maximum 

# limitations as possible to increase profit. As the limitations change, it would be assumed they would again find the optimum solution to continue the missions.

• It appears the NPRM and/or FRMS have given more fatigue credit for Class 2 rest facility and 4 pilots than a Class 1 rest facility and 3 pilots. • Our assumption is that with 4 pilots you can completely rotate the crews; 2 pilots rest while 2 pilots fly, allowing for a better quality of rest.Center for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)



# Summary

• Class 1 rest facilities appear to have the maximum benefit for long haul missions.

• For anything less than 4 hours over the maximum FDP, it appears that if there are resources available to swap 

# crews, that would be the ideal choice.Center for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)



# Sources

• NPRM. FAA-2009- 1093; Notice No. 10- 11, RIN 2120-AJ58. Flight Member Duty and Rest Restrictions, Notice of proposed rulemaking 

# (NPRM).Center for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)



# Backup SlidesCenter for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) 

# Infeasibility Summary

Route (all round trip unless otherwise specified) # Missions Information Current Rules Proposed Rules

No Rest Facility Class 3 Rest Facility Class 2 Rest Facility Class 1 Rest Facility

3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots 3 Pilots 4 Pilots NW Pacific to Diego Garcia NSF to Bahrain 40 # Infeasible Missions 20 40 40 40 39 23 24 21 Avg. Hours Over 6.75 10.52 8.00 7.50 7.19 10.48 10.41 9.94 Max Hours Over 7.28 18.28 15.28 14.78 14.28 12.78 13.28 11.28 CONUS to Manas 20 # Infeasible Missions 0 20 20 18 10 0 0 0 Avg. Hours Over - 3.75 1.44 1.94 2.62 - - - Max Hours Over - 4.27 2.17 2.67 3.15 - - - CONUS to Africa 22 # Infeasible Missions 0 22 17 6 2 0 0 0 Avg. Hours Over - 3.27 0.71 1.14 1.30 - - - Max Hours Over - 4.20 1.33 1.83 2.00 - - - CONUS to Europe to Africa 30 # Infeasible Missions 1 28 5 2 2 2 2 2 Avg. Hours Over 3.25 4.20 5.45 7.03 6.53 5.03 5.53 3.53 Max Hours Over 3.25 12.43 10.93 9.93 9.43 7.93 8.43 6.43 CONUS to Europe 47 # Infeasible Missions 0 47 39 39 39 38 38 38 Avg. Hours Over - 8.04 5.59 5.11 4.64 3.21 3.71 1.75 Max Hours Over - 10.23 7.30 6.80 6.30 4.80 5.30 4.15 CONUS to NE & NW Pacific 201 # Infeasible Missions 9 190 188 180 171 138 149 96 Avg. Hours Over 3.82 6.67 4.58 4.33 4.13 3.47 215.00 2.89 Max Hours Over 8.28 23.70 23.70 23.70 23.70 23.70 23.70 23.70 One Way Missions to Theater (Middle East) 635 # Infeasible Missions 11 605 512 430 323 142 215 39 Avg. Hours Over 8.44 3.30 3.18 3.48 3.86 5.24 4.65 5.75 Max Hours Over 16.17 17.20 15.17 14.67 13.67 12.70 13.17 14.70 Missions to Theater (Middle

East) 1,008 # Infeasible Missions 38 852 538 467 347 110 147 72 Avg. Hours Over 8.69 5.30 4.70 4.82 5.60 12.21 10.32 14.45 Max Hours Over 39.53 50.53 47.53 47.03 46.53 45.03 45.53 43.53 Other 261 # Infeasible Missions 1 33 14 12 11 6 8 1 Avg. Hours Over 11.95 3.63 5.15 4.88 4.72 3.23 2.88 14.42 Max Hours Over 11.95 20.92 18.92 18.42 17.92 16.42 16.92 14.42 2264 Missions Analyzed Total # Infeasible = 80 1837 1373 1194 944 459 583 269 % Infeasible = 4% 81% 61% 53% 42% 20% 26% 12%Center for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)



# Specific Examples of Impact on CRAF Vast majority of AMC missions operate during 1700-0600 • 2 hour FDP reduction during this time will call for increase in crewmembers and reduce ability to continue a mission that has been delayed Flight segment from Leipzig, Germany to Ft. Campbell, KY that proceeds onto Ft. Hood, Tx will require a crew change in Ft. Campbell, regardless of whether it is a 2, 3, or 4- man crew departing from Leipzig 

# • FDP is well within the limits, but the short last flight segment does not allow the 2 hours of in -flight rest for the flying pilot WOA MD11 Freighters utilized for AMC missions do not have crew bunks and no credit given for coach seats 

# • Without aircraft modification shorter segments will be required to switch crews leading to lengthier mission durations • Similar problem reported by Miami Air leading to inability to support CRAF missionsCenter for Operational Analysis (COA), Department of Operational Sciences (ENS), Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)



# • Fischer, Ross (CEO- Miami Air International). Email: Impact of Flightcrew Member Duty and Rest Requirements NPRM. October 7, 

# 2010. • Global Aviation Holdings. Briefing: Impact of FAA’s Proposed Flight, Duty and Rest Changes to the AMC Mission. October 2010. • National Airlines. Impact of FAA NPRM for Flight Crew Member 

# Duty and Rest Requirments . October 6, 2010. • Ryan International Airlines. Cost Estimate for Implementing Flightcrew Member Duty and Rest Requirements. October 7, 2010. • United States Transportation Command, Command Acquisition. 2010. Final Uniform Rates and Rules for International Service.



# Sources