Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 27, 2025

Collecting Sleep, Circadian, Fatigue, and Performance Data in Complex Operational Environments
Published on: August 8, 2019
Flight crew fatigue risk assessment for international flights under the COVID-19 outbreak response exemption policy
Junya Sun1, Ruishan Sun2, Jingqiang Li3
1College of Safety Science and Engineering, Civil Aviation University of China, Tianjin, 300300, China. sunjunya68@163.com.
Background:
In response to the COVID-19 outbreak, the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) has formulated Implementation Measures for Exemption of Crew Duty Periods and Flight Time Restrictions during the COVID-19 Outbreak. This exemption policy imposes temporary deviations from the approved crew duty periods and flight time restrictions for some transport airlines and regulates the use of multiple crews for continuous round-trip flights. However, no research has been conducted on flight crew fatigue under this exemption policy. That is, the exemption policy lacks theoretical analysis and scientific validation.
Methods:
Firstly, flight plans for international flights under both the exemption and the CCAR-121 Policy schemes (with three flight departure scenarios: early morning, midday and evening) are designed, and flight plans are simulated based on the SAFE model. The Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) and the PVT objective test of alertness, both of which are commonly used in the aviation industry, are then selected for use in an empirical experimental study of flight crew fatigue on two flights subject to the exemption and CCAR-121 policies.
Results:
The SAFE model simulation found that the fatigue risk results based on flight crews for flights departing in the early morning (4:00), at noon (12:00) and in the evening (20:00) indicate that the fatigue risk levels of flight crews operating under the exemption policy are overwhelmingly lower than or similar to those operating under the CCAR-121 policy. However, there were a few periods when the fatigue risk of crews flying under the exemption policy was higher than that of crews flying under the CCAR-121 policy, but at these times, the crews flying under both policies were either at a lower level of fatigue risk or were in the rest phase of their shifts. In the experimental study section, 40 pilots from each of the early morning (4:00), noon (12:00) and evening (20:00) departures operating under the exemption policy were selected to collect KSS scale data and PVT test data during their duty periods, and a total of 120 other pilots operating under the CCAR-121 policy were selected for the same experiment. First, the KSS scale data results found that flight pilots, whether flying under the exemption policy or under the CCAR-121 policy, had overall similar KSS scores, maintained KSS scores below the fatigue risk threshold (i.e., KSS score < 6) during the flights and that the empirical KSS data and the model simulation results from the KSS data were overall identical at the test nodes during the flight and had nearly identical trends. Finally, the results of the PVT objective test indicators showed that the overall change in 1/RT of the crews flying under the exemption policy was less than or similar to that of the crews flying under the CCAR-121 policy, while the maximum change in 1/RT of the crews under both policies was between 1 and 1.5. This indicates that the overall level of alertness of the crew flying under the exemption policy is higher than or similar to that of the crew flying under the CCAR-121 policy, while the change in alertness level of the crew before and after the mission is relatively small when flying under either policy.
Conclusion:
Based on the model simulation results and the results of the empirical study, it was verified that the overall fatigue risk level of flight crews operating under the exemption policy is lower than or similar to the fatigue risk level of flight crews operating under the CCAR-121 policy. Therefore, the exemption policy in response to the COVID-19 outbreak does not result in an overall increase in the level of flight crew fatigue risk compared to the original CCAR-121 policy.
Related Concept Videos
Fatigue
Transmission-based Precautions II: Airborne and Protective Environment
Airborne precautions:
Use airborne precautions when treating patients known or suspected to have diseases that spread through the air—for example, tuberculosis or measles. These organisms are present in smaller droplets expelled by an infected person and...
Insufficient Sleep and Sleep Deprivation
Sleep deprivation is a more severe form of sleep loss...
PPE Use in Healthcare Settings II: Doffing
Stress: General Loading Conditions
The shearing force, possessing potential directionality within the plane of the section, is simplified into two component forces running parallel to the x and y axes....
Stress Concentrations
The stress...

