CAA NZ PPL Human Factors study materials
CAA NZ PPL Human Factors study resources

The Last 35 Minutes: Fatigue on a Weekend Charter

CAA NZ PPL Human Factors · Put your knowledge to work in context.

All case studies

The Last 35 Minutes: Fatigue on a Weekend Charter

You hold a PPL and work full-time. You are rostered to fly two passengers from Ardmore to Napier, departing at 0600. The previous evening you attended a family function until 2300, slept about 4.5 hours, and woke at 0430 feeling flat but had two coffees. The first leg is uneventful. After a two-hour stop you depart on the second leg and level at 3500 ft. Within 20 minutes you notice heavy eyelids, repeated yawning, and the altimeter drifting plus or minus 150 ft. You miss a routine radio call and then come to unsure what happened in the last 30 seconds. The passengers are quiet and the weather is fine. Destination is 35 minutes ahead; fuel and aircraft serviceability are not issues. You consider continuing because it is only 35 minutes.

1. Identify the fatigue-related cues in this scenario and explain why 'only 35 minutes to go' is a weak justification for continuing.

Read the worked answer

The cues are cumulative, not isolated:

  • Sleep debt and timing: about 4.5 hours of sleep after a late event, with an early wake. The current time is likely mid-morning, but the pilot already shows impairment after a short stop, suggesting the sleep loss is significant.
  • Physical signs: heavy eyelids, repeated yawning, and an altitude drift of 150 ft show degraded attention and motor control.
  • Cognitive signs: a missed radio call and a 30-second lapse are the most serious cues. That lapse is consistent with a microsleep, not simply boredom.

The 35-minute argument fails because risk is not proportional to time remaining. The last 35 minutes contain the highest-workload phase: descent, checks, radio calls, traffic, configuration and landing. A microsleep during approach or landing is far less recoverable than one at cruise. Fatigue also impairs self-assessment, so the pilot is a poor judge of how impaired they are. The thought 'only 35 minutes' is itself a warning sign of plan-continuation bias: the plan is being defended rather than reassessed. The correct question is not how long the flight is, but whether the pilot can reliably perform the next 35 minutes.

2. Apply a structured decision-making process and state a safe course of action, including what you would tell the passengers and what you would do to prevent recurrence.

Read the worked answer

A simple detect-estimate-choose-act sequence works:

  1. Detect: recognise the microsleep, missed call and altitude drift as a fitness-to-fly problem, not a minor concentration lapse.
  2. Estimate: the probability of another lapse is high, and the consequence during arrival is severe. Continuing has little operational benefit.
  3. Choose: divert to a suitable aerodrome short of destination, or land at the nearest suitable one, and stop flying for the day or take a substantial rest before any further flight.
  4. Act: reduce workload immediately, use the autopilot if serviceable, and request priority or assistance from ATC if symptoms are severe. Do not press on to the planned destination simply because it is close.

Passenger communication should be brief and honest: 'I am not fit to continue safely, so we are landing at [place] to rest.' Passengers do not need a technical lecture, but they do need to know the decision is deliberate. After landing, record the event and review the duty-planning failure: a late family event before an 0600 departure, insufficient sleep, and no personal fatigue limit. Prevention includes a personal rule not to fly early after less than a defined amount of sleep, planning the previous evening around the flight, using a strategic nap before duty, and treating a microsleep as a stop-flying event rather than a warning to push through.

3. How would you distinguish this from hypoxia or carbon monoxide poisoning, and would the distinction change your immediate actions?

Read the worked answer

At 3500 ft in an unpressurised aircraft, significant hypoxia is unlikely in a healthy pilot. Hypoxia would normally worsen with altitude and improve with descent or oxygen, and it is often accompanied by tingling, visual disturbance, euphoria or headache rather than a clear sleep-debt pattern. Carbon monoxide is also less likely here because there is no report of heater use, headache, nausea or a sleepy passenger; the dominant signs are yawning, eyelid heaviness and a lapse after short sleep.

The distinction matters for diagnosis but not for the conservative action. If there is any doubt, treat it as a physiological problem: open fresh-air vents, turn off the heater if it is on, use supplemental oxygen if available, descend and land as soon as practicable. Do not continue while symptomatic. After landing, do not fly again until symptoms have resolved and the cause is understood. If carbon monoxide were suspected, medical assessment and aircraft inspection would be mandatory before further flight.