http://www.house.gov/transportation/aviation/hearing/08-03-99/08-03-99memo.html 다소 길지만 중복되는 얘기가 많고 전문가가 아니어도 이해할 만한 영어입니다. sagang님께서는 참조 바랍니다. 항공업계에 종사하고 계시는 aileron님은 이미 비행시간과 관련해서는 노조의 주장을 "당연히 그래야 한다고" 하셨으니 되었고. parkeb님은 비행시간 축소는 동의하나 수당을 왜 달라고 하느냐고 하셨는데, 노조측에서는 비행시간 축소(편승시간 포함)를 전제로 수당은 현재처럼 75% 받는 것은 합의가 가능하다고 나온 것으로 알고 있습니다. 훈련받은 조종사라면 그정도 비행시간정도는 감당할 수 있어야지 무슨 엄살이냐고 사석에서 주장한 정신나간 Robotec군도 꼭 읽어보길 바랍니다. 과연 이 문제가 안전운항과 관련해서 간과해도 되는 문제인지 모두 다시 생각해 볼 기회가 되었으면 합니다. ------ 패널 참석자 중 NTSB(National Transportation Safety Board)측에 의하면 현재 관련 법규의 수정을 요구하였으나 고쳐지지 않았다는 것을 불평하고 있습니다. With the failure of the ARAC participants to reach a consensus on changing the regulations, and following the Safety Board's reports and recommendations from the Guantanamo Bay and Kansas City accidents, the FAA announced that it would develop and promulgate the necessary regulatory changes without assistance from the external parties. In December 1995, the FAA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to revise the flight and duty time regulations of 14 CFR Part 121. The NPRM had several favorable aspects, including: * Inclusion of standby reserve time, deadheading time, and all duties performed for the airline as duty time in the determination of flight, duty, and rest time requirements; 항공사들을 대표해서 나온 이의 발언도 참조 바랍니다. As you know, pilot flight and duty time is highly regulated by both FAA requirements - and far more extensively by collective bargaining agreements between airlines and pilots' unions. The important feature of these agreements, of course, is that they permit the fine-tuning of time limitations to fit the widely varying requirements of carriers and crews that fly vastly different missions - from short hops to halfway around the world. They avoid the dangers of a "one size, fits all", cookie cutter approach - and the safety record proves that they work. Importantly, under these agreements, unions and carriers have worked consistently with the regulators to try to bring the best-proven thinking on fatigue management into practice. Extensive training on fatigue and NASA's Alertness Management Program are part of routine training - with special programs in place for long-haul, international carriers dealing with training on diet, sleep patterns, exercise and alertness. At some carriers, union representatives actually screen bid packages to look for ways to address fatigue concerns. 조종사노조연맹측에서 나온 이의 발언입니다. 어디서 많이 읽어본 얘기같다는 느낌이 드실 것입니다. Pilot fatigue is equally as important to flight safety as metal fatigue, wiring insulation fatigue, and other aircraft component fatigue. The FAA has a statutory responsibility to prescribe minimum standards to prevent all fatigue that impacts safety. While the agency is being responsive to mechanical fatigue, it's been movingat a snail's pace to address the issues surrounding pilot fatigue. There is no question that pilot fatigue is present in our commercial airline operations. ALPA receives daily reports of scheduling that causes pilots to be virtual "zombies" at the end of the day. To illustrate, I would like to share one schedule that is "legal" under the current rules and has been assigned to pilots. The pilot reports to work at 7:10 AM and is released from duty at 9:15 PM for a 14-hour/5-minute scheduled duty period. During that time the pilot made 12 landings flying to and from a major hub airport. While the scheduled duty time was 14+ hours, in the reality of today's flight environment, this duty period is often extended to 16 hours due to weather or ATC delays. Once the pilot is released, he must travel to the hotel and take care of his personal requirements before going to bed. This particular schedule was repeated for four days so the pilot had to awaken, dress, and travel to the airport on each of those days for a 7:10 AM report time. As a practical matter, this pilot's sleep opportunity was six hours, from approximately 11:00 PM to 5:00 AM. To fly this schedule once is fatiguing and the pilot has to be extremely tired on his last leg of the day. To repeat this schedule four days in succession results in cumulative fatigue which increases on each of the following three days. Under such conditions, science and common sense has told us that pilots are more prone to making mistakes that could result in a serious incident or accident. Pilots are continuously subjected to onerous scheduling, such as I just described, because the FAA regulations on flight and duty time are simply not based upon current scientific principles and are not adequate to prevent fatigue. The supplemental and international flight time rules have not been substantively addressed for nearly 50 years. These rules were implemented when the DC-3 airplane was state-of-the-art. It carried 28 passengers 1,000 miles at a speed of 170 miles per hour. Today, we have the Boeing 747-400 airplane, which carries over 400 passengers 7,000 miles at 600+ miles per hour. Times and equipment have changed but the rules have not. They are not designed to cope with the modern environment and equipment. While the domestic rules were amended in 1985, the FAA has acknowledged that these revisions did not completely resolve the problem of fatigue. The FAA said at that time that NASA was conducting a study of factors that affect pilot fatigue. The FAA promised to review that study and use it to determine what changes to the flight time limitation regulations should be made. That study has long been completed, and even though it establishes that the current rule is inadequate, the FAA has taken no action.