Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Monitoring the Effectiveness of Fatigue Risk Management: A Survey of Pilots' Concerns.

INTRODUCTION: Airlines are required to monitor the effectiveness of their pilot fatigue risk management. The present survey sought the views of all pilots at Delta Air Lines on fatigue-related issues raised by their colleagues participating in regular airline safety audits.

METHODS: All 13,217 pilots from 9 aircraft fleets were invited to participate in an anonymous online survey. Questions related to aspects of scheduling, fatigue mitigations, and fatigue safety culture.

RESULTS: There were 1108 pilots who completed the survey (response rate = 8.4%). On 7/9 fleets, most pilots thought 5- to 7-d rotations were too long (exceptions: B747, median = 14 d; A330 median = 8.5 d). In the previous year, on average across all fleets, 60.6% of pilots had worked up to or beyond their personal rotation limit (minimum, B747 = 6.3%; maximum, MD88/90 = 75.9%). Rotations where duty periods start progressively earlier were considered highly fatiguing by 73.8% of pilots, compared to 14.7% for rotations where duty periods started progressively later and 1.6% for rotations with successive duty periods starting at the same time. The median optimum break length between rotations was 3-4 d. On 7/9 fleets, fewer than 20% of pilots tried to build their monthly schedules with back-to-back rotations (exceptions: B747, 43.8%; A330, 34.3%). Awareness of fatigue and perceptions of company fatigue risk management activities varied widely among fleets.

DISCUSSION: The findings identify possible improvements in fatigue risk management and highlight that care is needed when extrapolating from one operational context to another. As a safety assurance exercise, we recommend repeating the survey biannually, or sooner if warranted by specific circumstances.Gander P, Mangie J, Phillips A, Santos-Fernandez E, Wu LJ. Monitoring the effectiveness of fatigue risk management: a survey of pilots' concerns. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2018; 89(10):889-895.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app