Fatigue reported by the PIC on a company pairing that limits rest periods and maximizes duty hours.

Attributes
ACN	610044
Time
Date	200403
Day	Wed
Local Time Of Day	0001 To 0600
Place
Locale Reference	airport : cyul.airport
State Reference	PQ
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Environment
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Commercial Fixed Wing
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : preflight
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : cfi pilot : flight engineer technician : airframe technician : powerplant
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 25000 flight time type : 1500
ASRS Report	610044
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Events
Anomaly	other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa other flight crewb
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Supplementary
Problem Areas	FAA Company Cabin Crew Human Performance Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Company

Narrative:

I am enclosing a copy of my pairing (mar/mon-wed/04) for your examination. Please note day #2, specifically the 14 hour 0 min hour duty day (maximum allowed to the min). The 9 hour 45 min layover (minimum allowed to the min), and a layover in canada that requires a trip through customs each way! It is obvious that my employer has no regard for the fatigue factor and its very real historic effect on safety. This type of pairing scheduling is not unusual with my company. We got to the hotel at XA00 and had a van time of XB00 (after we moved it back from XA45). The following day I did not get adequate rest. It is my request that the safety issues presented here -- and in all minimum layovers -- be brought to my airline's attention and to ask other airlines also -- again. Fatigue is not a figment of my imagination. Pairings of this type are not safe. Please try again to effect a change before another accident occurs.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FATIGUE RPTED BY THE PIC ON A COMPANY PAIRING THAT LIMITS REST PERIODS AND MAXIMIZES DUTY HRS.

Narrative: I AM ENCLOSING A COPY OF MY PAIRING (MAR/MON-WED/04) FOR YOUR EXAMINATION. PLEASE NOTE DAY #2, SPECIFICALLY THE 14 HR 0 MIN HR DUTY DAY (MAX ALLOWED TO THE MIN). THE 9 HR 45 MIN LAYOVER (MINIMUM ALLOWED TO THE MIN), AND A LAYOVER IN CANADA THAT REQUIRES A TRIP THROUGH CUSTOMS EACH WAY! IT IS OBVIOUS THAT MY EMPLOYER HAS NO REGARD FOR THE FATIGUE FACTOR AND ITS VERY REAL HISTORIC EFFECT ON SAFETY. THIS TYPE OF PAIRING SCHEDULING IS NOT UNUSUAL WITH MY COMPANY. WE GOT TO THE HOTEL AT XA00 AND HAD A VAN TIME OF XB00 (AFTER WE MOVED IT BACK FROM XA45). THE FOLLOWING DAY I DID NOT GET ADEQUATE REST. IT IS MY REQUEST THAT THE SAFETY ISSUES PRESENTED HERE -- AND IN ALL MINIMUM LAYOVERS -- BE BROUGHT TO MY AIRLINE'S ATTN AND TO ASK OTHER AIRLINES ALSO -- AGAIN. FATIGUE IS NOT A FIGMENT OF MY IMAGINATION. PAIRINGS OF THIS TYPE ARE NOT SAFE. PLEASE TRY AGAIN TO EFFECT A CHANGE BEFORE ANOTHER ACCIDENT OCCURS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.