Home / Sources / Select Committees / Transport Committee / Flight time limitations
Select committee inquiry

Flight time limitations

Closed

Transport Committee · Opened 5 July 2013 · Closed 1 April 2012

7 recommendations
Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗

What the inquiry looked at

“Further information Report: Flight time limitations (PDF version 918 KB) Previous inquiry page: Flight time limitations”

The committee's words, from the inquiry page on parliament.uk ↗.

What it found

In the committee's words, from the summary of 6th Report - Flight time limitations: follow up (Report, together with formal minutes and written evidence) ↗

In July 2013, Member States of the European Union voted strongly in support of a draft proposal on flight time limitations by the European Commission. This triggered a three-month scrutiny of the new draft regulation. As part of the process for UK parliamentary scrutiny of the EU proposals, the European Scrutiny Committee referred the draft regulation to us for an Opinion.

We looked at flight time limitations last year, following the publication of a draft proposal for EU regulations by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). Following the publication of the Government’s response to our report we also led a debate in Westminster Hall on this important subject. While we recognise that the Commission’s draft regulation represents an improvement on the EASA proposal, we retain concerns over several areas, in particular the use of scientific evidence in developing the regulations and the arrangements for oversight and active management of the new regime. It is also disappointing that a consensus with crew and pilot representatives has not been reached on the draft regulations.

We recommend that the European Scrutiny Committee request that the European Commission address the matters we have raised in this report, including ensuring effective monitoring of the new flight time regulation. We also recommend that the European Scrutiny Committee requests the European Commission provide an assessment of the regulation two years after its implementation.

What the government said

The government responded on 11 September 2012.

Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response.

The Government states that it believes the current draft of the EASA proposals "will not lead to a diminution of safety in the UK", welcomes several of the Committee's aims, and declines to press for a lower night-time flight duty period limit.

  • On operator responsibilities, the Government "welcomes" the new requirements and says the CAA will train its staff and develop guidance on fatigue management.
  • On discretion to extend flight duty periods, it "acknowledges the desirability of a stricter limit than that proposed" and says it will raise the issue in EU discussions.
  • On night flights, it is "not planning to seek further changes" to the EASA limit, citing broad consistency with current UK provisions.
  • It "accepts the recommendation to investigate the potential under-reporting of pilot fatigue", noting the CAA is already considering this. On publishing commander's discretion data, it does not believe a single figure or average would "provide any safety benefit".

Read the government's response ↗ Read the report ↗ Report an error

How the inquiry ran

Each dot is a dated item listed on this page, from 11 September 2012 to 11 September 2013.

  1. Report 11 Sep 2013
  2. Government response 11 Sep 2012

What it recommended 7 recommendations · 0 conclusions

The committee's own words. Open an item to read it in full.

1The Government should continue to press for a limitation of the number of flights exceeding...
Recommended (the committee's words)
The Government should continue to press for a limitation of the number of flights exceeding the maximum flight duty period that is below the proposed level of 33%. The Civil Aviation Authority should set out in detail how it will enforce active management by operators of the programmed flight duty period.
2The potential under-reporting of pilot fatigue must be properly recognised if it is to be...
Recommended (the committee's words)
The potential under-reporting of pilot fatigue must be properly recognised if it is to be effectively tackled. We note the continuing concerns regarding the CAA’s ineffectiveness in this regard. We recommend that the Government set out what steps it has taken to implement our 2012 recommendation on pilot fatigue since it accepted that recommendation as well as the steps to plans to take to ensure proper recognition of and action to combat pilot fatigue in the future.
3We are disappointed that the Government chose not to press for a lower limit for...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We are disappointed that the Government chose not to press for a lower limit for the flight duty period at night in accordance with the scientific evidence on this matter. However, we welcome the new requirement for fatigue management of night duties over 10 hours that encroach or overlap the period 2200-0400. We recommend that the Government presses for national and EU-wide monitoring to examine whether the 11 hour limit is at least as safe as the current regime.
4We recommend that the Government provide a progress report on the CAA’s review of its...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that the Government provide a progress report on the CAA’s review of its position on the publication of information on the use of Commander’s discretion. A regular, periodic pattern of publication should be established, together with an assessment of the impact of the use of discretion.
5While we remain concerned about the length of the duty that is theoretically possible, we...
Recommended (the committee's words)
While we remain concerned about the length of the duty that is theoretically possible, we note the Government’s assurances that this will be monitored. We recommend that the Government ensures that the Civil Aviation Authority has the power to act if very long periods of duty become anything but an exception.
6We reiterate our earlier conclusion that the Government should seek to ensure that scientists have...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We reiterate our earlier conclusion that the Government should seek to ensure that scientists have a more central role in further work by EASA as it finalises its flight time limitations proposals and in its assessments for the future.
7We continue to have concerns on the proposed changes to the regulations.
Recommended (the committee's words)
We continue to have concerns on the proposed changes to the regulations. We recommend that the European Scrutiny Committee request that the European Commission address the matters we have raised in this report, including ensuring effective monitoring of the new flight time regulation. We also recommend that the European Scrutiny Committee requests the European Commission provide an assessment of the regulation two years after its implementation.