Staying Sharp in the Skies
NASA Addresses the Persistent Problem of Fatigue Through Collaborative Research with Airline Pilots
By Erin Flynn-Evans, Ph.D., M.P.H., and Cassie Hilditch, Ph.D.
Fatigue risk management was first integrated into aviation safety programs more than 30 years ago, leading some to wonder why we haven’t “solved” the fatigue problem. However, this isn’t the right way to think about fatigue, which is a natural and expected human condition that can manifest for a number of reasons. Aviation operations that require work around the clock will result in some level of fatigue because even the most robust safety system and fatigue risk-management program can’t eliminate it.
As airline pilots are aware, humans have an internal clock called the circadian rhythm that promotes a strong drive to be awake during the day and a strong drive to be asleep at night. Based on NASA research and knowledge on this topic, we observe that biological drives can’t be overcome with today’s available countermeasures, including enhanced automation technologies. At NASA, we keep this fact at the front of our minds when exploring new fatigue risk-reduction strategies.
Pilot fatigue is a safety issue that’s affected pilots since ALPA’s founding—in fact, it’s one of the reasons airline pilots formed the union. In aviation, fatigue management is complicated by an ever-evolving system. For example, as advances in technology allow aircraft to fly farther and with increased automation capabilities that must be managed by the flight crew, the way that fatigue manifests can change. Fatigue risk-management systems must be able to adapt to these changes. However, that adaptation can’t be safely realized by removing a pilot, even for a short period of time, from the airline flight deck due to the resiliency and adaptability pilots contribute to the safe operation of the aircraft. Research is critical to characterizing the changing nature of fatigue risks so that new mitigations and countermeasures can be developed for the two-pilot crew. One aim of NASA’s Fatigue Countermeasures Laboratory and System-Wide Safety Project is to develop new ways to detect, monitor, inform pilots, and characterize fatigue. The results of this work allow us to develop and deploy new techniques to help mitigate fatigue in this dynamic environment. The research that we do works best when all stakeholders—pilots and labor unions, airlines, researchers, and regulators—collaborate to solve the problem.
The Fatigue Countermeasures Laboratory has been at the forefront of research to manage and mitigate fatigue for more than 40 years. Our research directly informs best practices to proactively minimize and integrate fatigue management for pilots, airlines, and regulators alike. Our effort relies on our strong relationship with pilots to provide us with data to identify areas of concern so that we can engage with all stakeholders to develop mitigations. For example, after the introduction of 14 CFR Part 117, which addresses flight and duty limitations and rest requirements, many pilots told us that it was difficult for landing pilots to obtain consistent rest on three-pilot, mid-haul flights.
After speaking with pilots, we learned that the requirement for landing pilots to take the last (third) rest break was challenging for such flights. They told us that the break opportunity was sometimes short and coincided with cabin service, making it difficult to sleep. Based on this information, NASA organized a joint study with Washington State University involving two airlines, including one with ALPA-represented pilots, to evaluate sleep and alertness at top of descent on augmented flights under 14 hours.
We surveyed 500 pilots from two airlines across nearly 800 flights and found that pilots obtained more sleep and had better alertness following the second, compared to the third, in-flight rest break. The factors that pilots reported as being the most challenging during in-flight rest breaks were cabin noise (e.g., passenger service, flight attendants), discomfort in the rest facility, and turbulence. This study provided data to the FAA as part of an alternative method of compliance application, and now pilots at the airlines that NASA studied are allowed to choose the rest break that best suits their needs. This is just one example of how we work with pilots to identify potential fatigue issues, conduct studies to gather data, and interact with multiple stakeholders to enact change.
As we look toward the future, our goals remain the same. NASA will soon finish the largest in-flight study examining fatigue in short-haul operations that’s been conducted to date. This research was also conceived based on information that we collected from 90 pilots (including those from two airlines with ALPA-represented pilots) as part of a focus group study to identify specific aspects of short-haul operations that pilots find challenging. In this study, the most frequently cited areas of concern were circadian disruption, high workload, inadequate rest opportunity, schedule changes, regulation implementation and policy issues, and long wait time between flights within a flight-duty period. We used the information that the pilots provided to us in this focus group study to design our in-flight short-haul study. Initially obtaining direct insights from pilots to inform research targets in studies like this allows NASA to focus efforts on quantifying the impacts of fatigue that pilots identify as most concerning.
In addition to this work, we’re also developing tools for pilots to use, including an app that allows us to collect data from a large number of pilots who volunteer on their own to participate. This can result in new countermeasures such as specialized lighting to help pilots adapt to consecutive early starts. NASA is also conducting studies to understand how increased automation affects pilots. Our early studies on this topic that evaluated motor vehicle drivers suggests that removing workload and requiring operators to simply monitor and supervise automation increases feelings of sleepiness and slows individual reaction time. This is one of many reasons for having two well-rested, well-trained, and experienced pilots on the flight deck at all times. Part of the fatigue-mitigation process relies on two pilots monitoring one another as well as the aircraft.
As the aviation industry changes, fatigue factors and effective mitigations change, too. NASA’s Fatigue Countermeasures Laboratory will continue to do research to help ensure that pilots are able to perform at their best, even when new challenges emerge.
Learn More
If you’d like to learn more about NASA’s research, visit hsi.arc.nasa.gov/groups/fatigue/ and nasa.gov/aeronautics/what-is-the-fatigue-countermeasures-lab/.
Fighting Fatigue
By Capt. Doug Marchese (JetBlue), Chair, ALPA Flight Time/Duty Time Committee
Fatigue is something everyone has experienced. As ALPA’s Flight Time/Duty Time (FT/DT) Committee chair, our work overlaps safety of flight and industrial labor concerns. Science-based fatigue regulations to optimize FT/DT while effectively combating fatigue have always been a top priority for the Association. FAR Part 117 was written and based on human physiology and was targeted to implement better practices to help mitigate fatigue.
While these regulations were written to help reduce fatigue, it can never be eliminated. Pilots understand just how detrimental fatigue can be to safety. They stay vigilant to proactively mitigate personal fatigue, monitor and engage with the other pilot to combat fatigue, and assess how fatigue can impact situations like extensions of duty.
While strides have been made to adopt science-based regulations, our work is far from complete. Certain operations in the airline industry have been carved out from fatigue regulations despite pilots flying the same equipment in the same airspace with some of the most fatiguing schedules. Cargo carriers have the option to voluntarily adopt Part 117 regulations; and in Canada, Medivac pilots don’t fly according to updated, science-based prescriptive fatigue rules. ALPA will continue to advocate for one level of safety for all members.
In a broader sense, all North American pilots face similar challenges when it comes to fatigue and the rules that govern fatigue. Prescriptive regulations intended to support fatigue science and address extended periods of wakefulness are often misinterpreted and/or misused by air operators. There’s a general lack of consistent standards and effective guidance to support clear, adaptable, and safe practices to bolster the science behind fatigue rules.
Advancements in aircraft technology have driven innovation, but with it, the potential for more fatiguing operations. As our operating environment becomes busier and more complex, fatiguing situations become more common. As pilots, we perform our jobs safely and do our best to adapt to ever-changing schedules. The challenges of shifting with changing time zones, sleeping at inopportune times, and continuously changing environments add additional physiological stressors. It’s frustrating to think that even with extensive knowledge of fatigue, many of the same challenges that ALPA has steadfastly raised since its founding nine decades ago still exist today.
This is why it’s so important that NASA is conducting vital research. The agency’s current work on short-haul operations is shining a light on issues that pilots have long known about but that haven’t been quantified. NASA research will help the industry, airlines, and pilots provide context behind many of these topics that have been discussed on flight decks and in crew rooms. It will allow for the development of data-driven mitigations and countermeasures and contribute to a safer operation by supporting our pilots’ needs. ALPA continues to advocate for robust fatigue risk management with collaborative input from pilot fatigue experts. The work conducted at NASA’s Fatigue Countermeasures Laboratory helps further identify where fatigue risks truly exist and support continuing conversations on how to most effectively develop mitigations.
Dr. Flynn-Evans and Dr. Hilditch, authors of the accompanying NASA article, have pointed out that it’s not just through aviation research but in other areas as well that we can learn about how factors like workload can create risk. It may not seem intuitive that reducing workload can increase reaction time, but it can unmask sleepiness. Monitoring is a task that requires sustained attention, which can become challenging over long periods of time, and increasing automation can have the adverse effect of increasing risk.
Those who argue that automation would allow for a reduction in the number of qualified pilots on the flight deck don’t understand the impact additional automation can have on pilots, and neglect to recognize how two pilots working together on the flight deck contribute to the safety of every flight. As scientists have said, technologies aren’t in place to mitigate the need for two pilots. We should always strive to improve the margins of safety, and research is vital to understanding how technologies affect pilots on the flight deck. The assumption that new or enhanced automation will reduce pilot fatigue isn’t backed by data and isn’t a valid solution.
As Flynn-Evans and Hilditch have shown, fatigue can’t simply be erased. There’s nothing that can eliminate the realities of fatigue. While some aviation entities are advocating for technological and operational concepts that they believe could mitigate fatigue, including reducing the number of pilots on the flight deck, the remaining and inescapable fact is that technology will never achieve the uniquely human ability to adapt and innovate in an environment in which no two scenarios are ever alike. As new technological schemes for reducing or replacing pilots are introduced, we must remember that every layer of added technology creates an added pathway for failure, and two pilots are there to share the workload as they address those failures and create a safe outcome.
Fatigue risk mitigation comes from understanding how operations and technology affect pilots, and how to build resiliency by managing risks and introducing mitigations that improve safety. NASA’s work helps move us ever closer to safe solutions that reduce risk and make our operations safer for passengers, shippers, and our crews.
ALPA’s FT/DT Committee will continue to engage with research bodies and regulators to ensure that regulations reduce fatigue for pilots. Our operations are global, and so is our advocacy for global regulatory improvements that truly address fatigue issues before the operation even begins. Having at least two fully qualified, highly trained, and well-rested pilots on the flight deck is the best mitigation for fatigue’s effects and is aviation’s strongest safety asset.
