As noted above, that is Part 121, not 135, and was two pilots

New Message Alert

Author: That’s What They Claimed But Date: 7/4/2022 9:22:57 AM +0/-0 Show Orig. Msg (this window) Or In New Window

There was no evidence to support their claim. It would have been IMPOSSIBLE for both pilots to miss that many ATC calls without them both being asleep. They were tired, fatigued, against biorhythm, and ASLEEP. They were very lucky to not have lost every life on board.

Reply Return-To-Index Display Full Msg Thread Rules of Engagement Terms of Use

Q: How many accidents can you think of that are attributed to Part 135 (NT) +1/-1 Duty/Rest violations or issues? 6/28/2022 2:33:44 PM

Q: How many accidents can you think of that are attributed to Part 135 +0/-0 You Might Be Too Tired For Your 6/28/2022 3:21:17 PM

I'll count your response as a NONE that you know of (NT) +1/-1 Anonymous 6/28/2022 3:27:03 PM

Q: How many accidents can you think of that are attributed to Part 135 +0/-0 NWA Flight 188 6/30/2022 2:23:29 PM

Again, not Part 135, and not Duty/Rest issue. They were distracted (NT) +0/-0 by PDAs and schedule/bid planning 6/30/2022 2:39:58 PM

Duty/Rest violations? (NT) +1/-1 none 6/28/2022 3:46:59 PM

Accidents are due to pilot fatigue (NT) +1/-0 Duty/Rest attempts to mitigate fatigue 6/28/2022 3:54:22 PM

OK, so cite some accidents/incidents related to this causal (NT) +0/-0 factor. lots of examples, right? 6/28/2022 10:42:37 PM

Duty/Rest accidents have been studied +5/-0 And it is a factor 6/28/2022 3:59:49 PM

IOWs, nothing conclusive here! Looking for actual accidents, not +0/-1 "data suggests" 6/28/2022 10:52:33 PM

Why aren't you including 121? (NT) +0/-0 Anonymous 6/28/2022 5:58:21 PM

Because 135 flying and 121 flying are different, obviously! +0/-0 ~We work in 135, not 121 6/28/2022 10:59:18 PM

Because 135 flying and 121 flying are different, obviously! +0/-0 #$%%^ 6/29/2022 7:11:51 PM

Again, not a Part 135 flight! And, crew was within the Part 121 duty +0/-0 requirements. Seems FO abused... 6/29/2022 11:39:37 PM

Q: How many accidents can you think of that are attributed to Part 135 +0/-1 666 6/28/2022 8:38:05 PM

Q: How many accidents can you think of that are attributed to Part 135 +0/-0 I know 6/29/2022 12:12:40 AM

Name some of them please (NT) +0/-0 Anonymous 6/29/2022 9:05:23 AM

Name some of them please +1/-0 Colgan air 6/29/2022 9:25:32 PM

First, that's 121, not 135. Second, what makes this +0/-0 duty/rest issue? 6/29/2022 11:25:50 PM

Although this one is a Part 121, interesting fatigue investigation +0/-1 Just me again 6/30/2022 10:10:53 AM

But, the FAA admitted there weren't any rule violation issues (NT) +0/-0 here. Not FAR's or GOM factors... 6/30/2022 2:33:46 PM

Q: How many accidents can you think of that are attributed to Part 135 +0/-0 NWA Flight 188 6/30/2022 4:50:11 PM

Q: How many accidents can you think of that are attributed to Part 135 +1/-0 The reason the limits 6/30/2022 10:33:11 PM

Can you cite any accidents occurring 12 and beyond? (NT) +0/-0 Does the FAA/NTSB even know? 6/30/2022 11:11:39 PM

Can you cite any accidents occurring 12 and beyond? +0/-0 More 7/2/2022 8:54:22 AM

One will do ! (NT) +0/-0 Anonymous 7/2/2022 12:31:53 PM

One will do ! +2/-0 The FAA Is Very Clear On Their 7/2/2022 8:47:44 PM

Clear policy on vagueness! (NT) +0/-0 Anonymous 7/3/2022 8:58:52 AM

Was looking for accident citations, not generalities (NT) +0/-0 Do you have any? 7/3/2022 7:50:59 PM

Was looking for accident citations, not generalities (NT) +0/-0 NWA Flight 188 For Starters 7/3/2022 10:49:25 PM

As noted above, that is Part 121, not 135, and was two pilots (NT) +0/-0 playing on their phones/PDAs 7/3/2022 11:52:46 PM

As noted above, that is Part 121, not 135, and was two pilots +0/-0 That’s What They Claimed But 7/4/2022 9:22:57 AM

your opinion is not evidence..... (NT) +0/-0 just sayin' 7/4/2022 1:22:47 PM

"... it would be impossible..." +0/-0 Anonymous 7/4/2022 7:10:38 PM

"... it would be impossible..." +0/-0 Have You Ever Flown In Class “A” 7/4/2022 8:00:29 PM

In a Part 135 helicopter?? No, have you? (NT) +0/-0 Please reread OP request again!~ 7/4/2022 9:00:49 PM

In a Part 135 helicopter?? No, have you? +0/-0 No, Not In A Part 135 Helicopter 7/4/2022 11:37:32 PM

The OP (me) posted on a helicopter site asking for Part 135 accidents +0/-0 that were duty/rest related. do... 7/5/2022 12:01:32 AM

".. just as in this example." Can you somehow explain how +0/-0 this is related to Duty/Rest Part 135 7/5/2022 12:03:54 AM

NWA Flight 188: The Rest Of The Story +0/-0 (Which isn't about REST/Fatigue at all) 7/5/2022 8:36:59 AM

NWA Flight 188: The Rest Of The Story +0/-0 What You Have Found On This 7/5/2022 9:23:48 AM

There was nothing "found" on this thread even remotely related +0/-0 to DUTY/REST Part 135 accidents or 7/5/2022 12:36:47 PM

There was nothing "found" on this thread even remotely related +0/-0 Maybe You Could Be Helpful And 7/5/2022 12:39:47 PM

Actually, I'm seeking supporting references/citations that legitimize someo +0/-0 else's opinions & recommendations 7/5/2022 12:49:42 PM