Airliners.net

The future probably holds more 8+ hrs narrow body flights, requiring serious rest facilities for cockpit and cabin crews. On widebodies, various underfloor, upperfloor and main deck options are available.

What are the options to accommodate 2 cockpit & 2 cabin crew members serious rest on 8hr + flights ? I know some airlines block passenger seats. The costs of that can easily be measured, real rest for crew seems questionable. What are cockpit crew rest requirements?

How do crew rest on TATL 757 flights, What will be on A321LR's ? Any new concepts / products developments? I guess you want to/ have to offer crew serious rest facilities without taking too much revenue space.. Creative solutions should be opportunities for the interior OE's. What's practical and meets the crew requirements?

Required crew rest is used to extend crews working hours. So even with the extended range the narrow body long haul flights still wouldnt get close to requiring bunks for crew. Flight crew will still only be 2, so no rest facilities required and presumably cabin crew will utilise galley jump seats as they do now.

anstar wrote:

Required crew rest is used to extend crews working hours. So even with the extended range the narrow body long haul flights still wouldnt get close to requiring bunks for crew. Flight crew will still only be 2, so no rest facilities required and presumably cabin crew will utilise galley jump seats as they do now.

The thread starter clearly said 'narrow body flights over 8 hours'. I don't know if that will ever happen, but in that case, the cockpit will obviously need a relief pilot. Whether it's in a bunk or an isolated business/first class seat would depend on the union agreements.

keesje wrote:

How do crew rest on TATL 757 flights, What will be on A321LR's ?

If needed they [will] block off and use one of the business class seats (and often block the seat next to it too).

A dense all Y 757/A321LR will probably not be flying 8 hours.

I can't think of any way you can add a crew rest in a narrowbody without taking up some revenue space. Whether that is a dedicated crew bunk or just using existing premium seating would depend on how often the crew rest would be needed. For narrowbodies, which may be flying a 4 hour flight after that 8 hour turn, that usually means its best to just block off premium seats for crew rest.

Not sure why any crewmember would need a rest area for flights that short. When I was flying we would do Toronto Barbados and back in a single duty day and there certainly wasn't any time for rest other than a quick crew meal in a jumpseat ! We did a full bar service, full hot meals both ways, 2 X comp red/white wine with the meal, 2 X coffee/tea service, duty free sales and another comp bar service before landing. Crazy long busy days but because of being so busy the day went fast !!! Crews loved it because even though it was a 13-14 hour duty day.... we would end up with almost 11 hours flying credit and therefore only had to work 7-8 days a month !

When United still flew 757s to Hamburg, on the westbound flight, which often took more than 9 hrs in air (8:40h scheduled) they used to block the DEF seats in the last row of coach for the cabin crew. They used a curtain to separate it a bit.

In Business they also blocked one seat (two if available) for the cockpit crew. Eastbound they sold all seats as the flight only took 7:45 or even less. Now on the 767 I think there is also one Business Seat blocked and 4 coach seats at the very front of the cabin.
The 3 class 767 even has these 4 Economy seats within the Business cabin.

A lot of new generation business jets have very long range capabilities, exceeding many widebody aircraft that have crew rests.

I suspect crew rest on a narrowbody will be limited to first/business class seats. That should be sufficient for 8-10hr flights with augmented crews.

A designated crew bunk area would be a waste of space considering many narrow bodies will be doing shorter haul domestic routes as well.

Not sure why any crewmember would need a rest area for flights that short. When I was flying we would do Toronto Barbados and back in a single duty day

It really depends on where the aircraft is registered. Toronto Barbados and back includes a stop. No crew rest reqd.
If the flight time exceeds 8 hours some regulatory agencies, like the FAA, require an extra cockpit crew and a rest seat. Some. like the British CAA, do not. It depends.
When TWA operated JFK ARN, the 3rd pilot sat in business Eastbound, and sat in the flight deck Westbound. (He only got paid one way!!!). BA operates UK to Eastern USA with 2 crew without problems, The FAA airlines require a 3rd pilt.

8+ hours, it would be cheaper to negotiate with unions than invest in CRAs. One set with vertical rest should be more than enough. FYI there are lot of WBs without CRAs doing 8-9hr runs.

Blocked section of Economy Sleeper (like NZ SkyCoach) section could be an option. No NB going to fly with 189 passenger on 8+ hours trips. Sell few sleeper seats and block few for crew. No need to carry the dead weight of CRA.

Same narrow body can do short-haul at full capacity without any changes to cabin.

If available, the last row/s will be held for crew use to eat, sit and relax, read or just get out of the way of others.
On a flight I took last summer PHL-SNN, the crew re-seated me to a forward row when I was assigned the last row in Y.
I got a nice 3 seat row to myself in the front cabin and they appreciated the empty seats in the back to relax in when they could.
The flight was only 5 hrs 43 minutes so their time eating, relaxing, reading etc was limited after a beverage service, dinner, beverage service and then the continental breakfast service prior to landing.
If full, they make use of jump seats to eat and "stay out of the way" until a service is required, but most report flights from PHL and JFK are quick and the flight time goes by quickly.

Lots of widebody aircraft fly 8-10 hour sectors without crew rest area. Airlines block off a few (business class) seats for the crew.

I believe Sunwing does have 3 crew on flights from western Canada to points in the Caribbean. It's not always about the length of the flight, more about the duty day itself...

And then, there's this gem available on the market - reportedly fulfilling all the regulations.

https://www.assystem-germany.com/maerkt ... crew-rest/

All I can say, the day I see it on the airplane will be the day of my resignation.

8 hour 1 leg should still be legal for a single crew. You can get additional time by adding a 3rd pilot to the flight deck, but rest is not required.

NB doing 8-9 hour trips? How many of those are out there? That would be cruel to the passengers in regular economy seats; come to think it, anyone on a NB.

RetiredWeasel wrote:

anstar wrote:

Required crew rest is used to extend crews working hours. So even with the extended range the narrow body long haul flights still wouldnt get close to requiring bunks for crew. Flight crew will still only be 2, so no rest facilities required and presumably cabin crew will utilise galley jump seats as they do now.

The thread starter clearly said 'narrow body flights over 8 hours'. I don't know if that will ever happen, but in that case, the cockpit will obviously need a relief pilot. Whether it's in a bunk or an isolated business/first class seat would depend on the union agreements.

Not really - I believe in the EU pilots can be a 2 moan operation for flights of around 10 hours so no crew rest required at all.

727200 wrote:

NB doing 8-9 hour trips? How many of those are out there? That would be cruel to the passengers in regular economy seats; come to think it, anyone on a NB.

Are the seats different on a NB vs a WB in economy?

727200 wrote:

NB doing 8-9 hour trips? How many of those are out there? That would be cruel to the passengers in regular economy seats; come to think it, anyone on a NB.

I rather enjoyed the UA 752 Y cabin on a 8 1/2 hour flight OSL-EWR - no remarkable difference from flying 767s or A340s TATL. But, each to his or her own!

As DLHAM said, United put 4 economy seats in business. Blocking off seats seems a simple solution. But also an expensive one.

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/United_Airlines/United_Airlines_Boeing_767-300_B.php

I can imagine that when 2-3 class 4000NM ranged A321LR's become frequent Airlines will start looking for solutions. Maybe improving current crewrests from functional folding into comfortable seats?

zeke wrote:

A lot of new generation business jets have very long range capabilities, exceeding many widebody aircraft that have crew rests.

Business jet crews are not under the same regulations as commercial flight crews.

727200 wrote:

NB doing 8-9 hour trips? How many of those are out there? That would be cruel to the passengers in regular economy seats; come to think it, anyone on a NB.

Give me a break. We flew on NB jets worldwide for years. The seats are the same & the pitch is the same on a 777 with United or a 757 with United. So why would coach be cruel to passengers in regular Economy only on the NB aircraft?

DLHAM wrote:

When United still flew 757s to Hamburg, on the westbound flight, which often took more than 9 hrs in air (8:40h scheduled) they used to block the DEF seats in the last row of coach for the cabin crew. They used a curtain to separate it a bit.

In Business they also blocked one seat (two if available) for the cockpit crew. Eastbound they sold all seats as the flight only took 7:45 or even less. Now on the 767 I think there is also one Business Seat blocked and 4 coach seats at the very front of the cabin.
The 3 class 767 even has these 4 Economy seats within the Business cabin.

UA blocks a seat for crew rest both directions. Even though flight like IAD-LHR only need two crew, duty time limits and the longer westbound departure has them crew with three pilots both directions. a business seat blocked as a crew rest both directions.

rbavfan wrote:

Business jet crews are not under the same regulations as commercial flight crews.

As a blanket statement that is not true, there are other countries in the world apart from the US.

rbavfan wrote:

727200 wrote:

NB doing 8-9 hour trips? How many of those are out there? That would be cruel to the passengers in regular economy seats; come to think it, anyone on a NB.

Give me a break. We flew on NB jets worldwide for years. The seats are the same & the pitch is the same on a 777 with United or a 757 with United. So why would coach be cruel to passengers in regular Economy only on the NB aircraft?

Yup, flew JFK-GIG-JNB & back on 707's back in 1970, it was one of the roomiest coach flights I've been on.

rbavfan wrote:

Give me a break. We flew on NB jets worldwide for years. The seats are the same & the pitch is the same on a 777 with United or a 757 with United. So why would coach be cruel to passengers in regular Economy only on the NB aircraft?

Looks like you've only been an a.net member for two years so maybe you've missed some of the threads. This board has a small but vocal group of nuts that think it is horror bordering on torture to consider being on long flights, especially trans-Atlantic ones, on an airplane with less than two aisles. It doesn't really matter to them that they'll only set foot in one of the two aisles and if the seat width, seat pitch, and even the seat itself is exactly the same -- it's still awful. Make sense? No, but it's one of the most debated topics on a.net.

The only thing I didn't like about my CO flight HAM-EWR was that row 4 was a little cold. But the BF seat was more comfy than on the EWR-FRA leg on the 777, and deplaning was easier.

If you fly over 8 hours the seating arrangement will leave space for an extra business seat to block off.

Wait till they have CRJ's flying over 8 hours. They will block off the bathroom for crew rest!

Could the third / instruction seat in the cockpit be replaced by a seat comfortable enough (with earplug/ eye blankets) to do a nap?

The cockpit should be reshuffled / enlarged a bit behind the pilot seats. probably make the jumpseat smartly moveable.. Add a curtain..

727200 wrote:

NB doing 8-9 hour trips? How many of those are out there? That would be cruel to the passengers in regular economy seats; come to think it, anyone on a NB.

Seats are the same. The percentage of passengers close to a window/aisle is higher on a NB than a WB.

On a all Y 189 seat NB 33% are in middle seats. On a load restricted long haul this % will go down even further.
On a 2 class A380 with 615 seats, 42% are in middle seats.

Why not a module in the cargo hold? I guess a narrow-body can't lift much cargo on these long flights anyway.

zeke wrote:

A lot of new generation business jets have very long range capabilities, exceeding many widebody aircraft that have crew rests.

There isn't one corporate jet , Gufstream or smaller, that has a crew rest facility or seating that would pass the FAA & ALPA requirements. For the most part they remain nothing more than a best effort to comply. Even the 737BBJ's are typically inadequate. When you move up in scale 757/767 and larger you have the room needed for significantly better designs.

keesje wrote:

Could the third / instruction seat in the cockpit be replaced by a seat comfortable enough (with earplug/ eye blankets) to do a nap?

The cockpit should be reshuffled / enlarged a bit behind the pilot seats. probably make the jumpseat smartly moveable.. Add a curtain..

A lot of the 767-300ER have what Boeing calls the Xtra Comfort jumpseat. Very hard to get any rest and remain on the flight deck.

The FAA has three different categories of crew rest facilities for pilots:

Class 1 crew rest is basically a separate bunk room.
Class 2 crew rest is a lie flat seat in business class with a curtain separating the pilot from the cabin
Class 3 crew rest is an old "barcalounger" style business class seat that is not lie flat.


In augmented crew ops the pilots' max duty time is predicated on both the number of pilots and the type of crew rest available:



I believe (but don't quote me on this) the premium seats on both NAI and WOW would qualify as Class 3 crew rest under US regulations, however have no idea what European regs require.

united has a few class 3 737s they take up 4 seats from inventory and are used only on gum island hopper I believe. seats must recline 40°.

I would be interested to know how rest was handled in the Gen. 1 narrow body planes like the VC-10, 707-320 or the mighty DC-8 which I beleive had the longest lets of them all back in the day.

Also, per post 36, is there really a "gum Island" or should we presume Guam in the Pacific?

lat41 wrote:

I would be interested to know how rest was handled in the Gen. 1 narrow body planes like the VC-10, 707-320 or the mighty DC-8 which I beleive had the longest lets of them all back in the day.

Also, per post 36, is there really a "gum Island" or should we presume Guam in the Pacific?

Actually there is a Gum Island airport. A private 2500' grass strip in Texas- I never knew United flew there.

https://www.airnav.com/airport/3TE1

.
.

To get decent rest, a lie-flat business class seat separate from other passengers by an aisle is the minimum. Not only the legal minimum in my jurisdiction, but really the physiological minimum. No way you're getting proper rest even in just a wider business class seat that is not life-flat (think US domestic first class seats).

At my airline, time in a business class seat is credited towards rest but not at the same rate as time in a bunk. This makes sense as being in the cabin, with service, people walking around, lighting and so on is nowhere near as "restful" as being in a dark and quiet bunk.

BravoOne wrote:

A lot of the 767-300ER have what Boeing calls the Xtra Comfort jumpseat. Very hard to get any rest and remain on the flight deck.

Indeed. It's not peaceful at all.

On patterns with two consecutive overnight sectors my airline will in some cases (depending on crew's body clock etc) roster a third pilot even if this is not legally mandated. Just to take some of the load off on particularly fatiguing patterns. If you're lucky you get a business class seat. Otherwise the middle jump seat can be pivoted 90 degrees and then reclined. You get a pillow and a blanket, insert earplugs, put on an eyemask, and put your feet up on the left side console. So now you're vaguely horizontal, but every time someone needs to enter or leave the cockpit you have to move since your legs are blocking passage. Another option is to make a nest of blankets and pillows on the floor behind the FO seat. Either way not ideal and not legally a rest seat in our jurisdiction.

rbavfan wrote:

zeke wrote:

A lot of new generation business jets have very long range capabilities, exceeding many widebody aircraft that have crew rests.

Business jet crews are not under the same regulations as commercial flight crews.

Long range corporate jets, which can have a range of up to 15 hours usually have a small crew rest compartment just aft of the cockpit which has a seat that can extend to a bed, also they have a small galley and a small lav for crew use, this way they do not have to disturb the passengers, who probably will be sleeping sometime during the trip if any of the crew needs to go to the aft lav.

Corporate jets, if they are not being operated as a charter operate under Part 91 which is less stringent than the airlines Part 121 regulations.

JetStar

Privatair 737 crewrest (SAS flights)



As Starlionblue describes on the 767 airlines have been implementing solutions, good or bad as they may seem, often neither efficient or very effective.

An A321LR and probably MoM will be doing lonegr flights on a more structural basis. Maybe expanding the cockpit with say 20 inch behind the pilot seat on one site to create something comfy, dark & undisturbed could be an option.

On widebodies crew rests are below the maindeck. On NB's the height is very limited, 114cm. width seems sufficient for 2 flat beds but access should be so that you can enter from the top. Question is under which conditions this could be turned into an acceptable crew rest option. But than, 1 flat cockpit crew rest seems sufficient and 1 place for cabin crew is on the low side. Long NB won't carry much cargo so underfloor space seems available.

[quote="keesje"

On widebodies crew rests are below the maindeck. On NB's the height is very limited, 114cm. width seems sufficient for 2 flat beds but access should be so that you can enter from the top. Question is under which conditions this could be turned into an acceptable crew rest option. But than, 1 flat cockpit crew rest seems sufficient and 1 place for cabin crew is on the low side. Long NB won't carry much cargo so underfloor space seems available.

[/quote]

On most widebodies crew rest is in the crown, not below the maindeck. However I don't really care where it is as long as it is dark and quiet.

For underfloor, you would need a seriously sized entrance from the top. On a NB galley area, that seems a challenge already.

For cockpit it seems if you move wall behind starboard cockpit seat it would be possible to create something acceptable.

For cabin crew.. Maybe create two high comfort crew seats in a (slightly enlarged) part of the galley that you can shield off?

In another thread, on a MoM like big narrow body, I included high comfort crew rest after the last row. With a part of the rear gally that can be shut off for a few hours and doesn't include a lavatory. For cockpit I slected a more convention business class with curtains solution for seat 1CD. Assuming you need two seats. I one seat is enough 2A or 1F could be isolated.

keesje wrote:

The future probably holds more 8+ hrs narrow body flights, requiring serious rest facilities for cockpit and cabin crews. [...]

What will be on A321LR's ?

I agree that we in the near future will see more 8+ hours narrowbody flights, probably accelerating with the introduction of the A321LR.

But the 8 hour limit only applies for operators with an US AOC?

As I understand it EASA has a slightly different philosophy for protection against pilot fatigue, focusing more on total duty time, maximum duty time during a week and monthly, and mandates longer rest periods between daily and weekly duty time (ex. at least 36 hours of continues rest once during a week). EASA also takes into consideration adjustments to different time zones, night time flying, number of sectors flown in a duty shift etc. and it seems like they have stricter requirements for rest facilities.

If the pilot doesn't start duty before 6 AM and have just had an extended rest period, and if the pilot is adjusted to the departure time zone, and will only have one flight during the shift, the flight duty limitation is 13 hours. Another difference between EASA and FAA regulations are that EASA have the same restrictions for flight crew on cargo aircraft, while FAA less stringent rules on cargo planes.

Have I misunderstood the regulations?

There isn't any space onboard an A321LR for proper crew rest facilities, without seriously reducing revenue potential. I could see US AOC holders having a third pilot in a business class seat for 8+ flights, while EU AOC holders significantly extends rest time and off duty time between flights.

Norwegian will this summer start flights between the US and EU with the 737-8 MAX. One of the longest sectors is from PVD to BGO, a scheduled flight time of 7 hours and 45 minutes westbound. They will have 189 economy seats onboard, so there will definitely not be any crew rest facilities. With a slight delay the 8 hour limit will be exceeded. Does the FAA regulations apply when a EU AOC holder departs from a US airport, or does the FAA and EASA mutually approve each others regulations, making it simpler for airlines?

lat41 wrote:

I would be interested to know how rest was handled in the Gen. 1 narrow body planes like the VC-10, 707-320 or the mighty DC-8 which I beleive had the longest lets of them all back in the day.

Also, per post 36, is there really a "gum Island" or should we presume Guam in the Pacific?

Both Pan Am and TWA would block off two the rear most FC seats and have a privacy curtain that surrounded these two seats, Far from todays standards but the the 707 and DC8 seldom exceeded 12 hours which was the threshold back in those days Also in the case of Pan Am during the 60's and early 70's there were two different unions representing flight deck crews, each with their unique set of work rules. When operating with a three man crew< Capt., F/O and FE things were different regarding when you needed to add a 3rd pilot or another FE.

When I was doing charter flights to Banjul and Cape Verde on an A320, our crew rest were the last two rows (both sides), as we carried Augmented crew so we could operate the flight as a turn around. 1 Relief Captain, 1 Relief Senior CCM, and 1 regular CCM. We also carried an engineer but they checked in as pax.
It was horrible, no curtain, no privacy

keesje wrote:

Could the third / instruction seat in the cockpit be replaced by a seat comfortable enough (with earplug/ eye blankets) to do a nap?

The cockpit should be reshuffled / enlarged a bit behind the pilot seats. probably make the jumpseat smartly moveable.. Add a curtain..

Probably not possible while maintaining the visibility requirements. Advisory Circular 120-83 has rather rigid design requirements for that seat. A moveable seat designed for comfort may not meet all the FAA requirements.

5. OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS AND STANDARDS. The observer seat must meet all the requirements for occupancy as prescribed by the pertinent sections of part 25. However, because the Type Design Certification Basis of the airplanes into which observer seats are installed vary widely, newer airplanes may have more stringent requirements applied to observer seats than older airplanes. If necessary, the resources noted in paragraphs 2 and 4 should be used as the basis for determining if the requirements of part 25 have been met. The following standards shall be met:

a. Observer Seat Location. The location of the observer seat should allow the observer a clear unobstructed view of the aircraft instrument panel to determine the pilot’s compliance with operating rules and standards. The location must not impede flight deck crewmember or observer emergency egress routes from the flight deck to the cabin or flight deck windows (if they are used as escape routes) and flight deck escape hatches. The observer seat location must account for both tall and short individuals occupying it, based on use of existing part 25 height, weight, and human factors requirements. The observer seat location needs to provide adequate leg and foot clearance to prevent leg impingement with adjoining structure or other crew seats during crew seat adjustments.

d. Visibility from Observer Seat. The observer seat should also provide a clear view through the flight deck windows with the observer seated fully upright. The observer should be able to assist the flightcrew in seeing other aircraft during all phases of flight.

j. Safety and Security. The observer seat should be designed so that it cannot be retracted while seated. Downward collapsing observer seats that employ suspension type hook arrangements are not desirable where inadvertent movement of the locking devices could cause the observer seat to collapse. Observer seats should not be designed with sharp edges or finger entrapment locations. Placarding of instructions for observer seat deployment and stowage should be provided for observer seats whose operation is not obvious. Observer seat release and stowage control handles should be identifiable with a contrasting color to the general background.

The observer seat must requirements when there is an observer. When it is an observer seat. Just like the jumpseats on NB's.

Keesje, I am not sure I understand what you are proposing. Crew Rest facility requirements are outlined in AC117-1. There are three types of crew rest facilities as described by N353SK. The better the crew rest facility, the more hours the crew can fly. Unless an observer seat has 40 degrees or more of recline and a leg rest, it won't count as a class 3 crew rest and won't give any extra hours of duty time over the regular jump seat configuration with an augmented crew. There simply isn't space in the flight deck to have such a large seat especially when FAA guidance is that a crew rest should have 1 square meter of space and have a physical barrier for light and sound reduction. A blind fold and a slightly more comfortable observer seat won't earn more hours according to the FARs.

Very few narrowbodies have a class 1 crew rest. That is usually ok since airplane endurance is limited. Class 2 crew rests with lie flat seats are enough for most narrowbody or 767 flights. Most of your proposals in the cabin are class 3.

AC117

a. Class 1 Rest Facility. Means a bunk or other surface that allows for a flat sleeping position and is located separate from both the flight deck and passenger cabin in an area that is temperature-controlled, allows the flightcrew member to control light, and provides isolation from noise and disturbance (§ 117.3, "sound" definition Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Aerospace Recommend Practice (ARP) 4101/3 and "horizontal flat" definitions, SAE ARP 4101/3).

b. Class 2 Rest Facility. Means a seat in an aircraft cabin that allows for a flat or near flat sleeping position; is separated from passengers by a minimum of a curtain to provide darkness and some sound mitigation; and is reasonably free from disturbance by passengers or flightcrew members (§ 117.3).

c. Class 3 Rest Facility. Means a seat in an aircraft cabin or flight deck that reclines at least 40 degrees and provides leg and foot support (§ 117.3).

f. Significance of Rest Facility Classification. Each rest facility has a classification ranking from one through three that defines the maximum flight duty period (FDP) limits predicated on the flightcrew member's start time, the number of pilots and the classification of rest facility to be used for augmented flightcrew operations. A class 1 facility provides for the longest FDP, a class 2 provides for the second longest FDP, and a class 3 provides for the third longest FDP.

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/med ... _117-1.pdf

AC117 also provides guidance that the space needs to be 1 square meter per person and 1.85 square meters total. That would be a challenge to obtain below deck on a narrowbody. I don't know if getting a 1.85 sq meter space is possible. It would also be oddly placed in a narrowbody since the galleys are not always located above the cargo holds.