line captains flying RHS
Only half a speed-brake
EASA, actually 4 NAAs, all no problems. Provided all is properly trained and currency maintained.
I think the reqiured training is 3 landings and one EFATO in level D sim. Would need to check Part FCL.
Cheers, FD.
I think the reqiured training is 3 landings and one EFATO in level D sim. Would need to check Part FCL.
Cheers, FD.
I think the reqiured training is 3 landings and one EFATO in level D sim. Would need to check Part FCL.
Last edited by StudentInDebt; 10th Oct 2015 at 22:21.
NZ CAA it is only approved if the Captain is RHS qualified via a simulator check.
Once you are qualified you need to do 3 takeoffs and landings every 6 months in the RHS and every second simulator check should be in the RHS.
Once you are qualified you need to do 3 takeoffs and landings every 6 months in the RHS and every second simulator check should be in the RHS.
If 'CASA Eastern' do not allow it, then someone needs to be told quite firmly to butt out.
Provided that the operator writes something in their operations manual to cover RHS recency and recurrent, nothing in legislation says two Line Captains can't fly together.
What the legislation does spell out quite clearly is that the operator must designate only one person as the PIC. That could be whoever is in the LHS for that sector (usually) or the more senior of the two Captains, or the one with blue eyes etc etc.
Plenty of examples of 'heavy crew' operations out there, where for some sectors two Captains will fly together, with the F/O sitting that one out for rest purposes.
That then leads into how is the flight time logged on heavy crew operations? For simplicity, one operator allowed two thirds of the day's total, plus all of the duty for determining following rest. No one had a problem with this, including CASA.
Provided that the operator writes something in their operations manual to cover RHS recency and recurrent, nothing in legislation says two Line Captains can't fly together.
What the legislation does spell out quite clearly is that the operator must designate only one person as the PIC. That could be whoever is in the LHS for that sector (usually) or the more senior of the two Captains, or the one with blue eyes etc etc.
Plenty of examples of 'heavy crew' operations out there, where for some sectors two Captains will fly together, with the F/O sitting that one out for rest purposes.
That then leads into how is the flight time logged on heavy crew operations? For simplicity, one operator allowed two thirds of the day's total, plus all of the duty for determining following rest. No one had a problem with this, including CASA.
Last edited by Mach E Avelli; 10th Oct 2015 at 21:03.
Nunc est bibendum
Qantas had approval for this on the 767 in the last couple of years of operation.
A sim covering all the normal stuff. Then you were cleared for 12 months. It was a non landee role thoug so you couldn't actually fly approaches in the aeroplane but therefore no decency requirement either.
A sim covering all the normal stuff. Then you were cleared for 12 months. It was a non landee role thoug so you couldn't actually fly approaches in the aeroplane but therefore no decency requirement either.
In my old operation often the Captain would opt to fly his/her sector from the RHS simply for a change of pace. Unless prohibited by the operator there is no harm in that. It is not a big deal; in fact probably useful practice for the day when the old mate/matess next to you succumbs to the food.
I don't know about now of course, but during my time in the RAAF covering the Fifties and Sixties era it was common practice for pilots to simply swop seats if the co-pilot was given a take off or a landing. There was no automatic leg for leg then. It was purely a captain's prerogative if he decided to swop seats and let his co-pilot fly from the left seat. No special qualification or training was needed. The aircraft captain retained normal command responsibility for the duration of the flight. There was nothing about recency. The system worked well as far as I recall. In other words no big deal. Today it seems everything is a "big deal" in the eyes of the regulator.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: 日本
Posts: 456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We quite often fly captain/captain, especially if they're running low on FOs because of leave etc and the JCAB (Japanese CASA) have no problems with it at all. Until fairly recently there were no checks or training done and we just got on with it. However, an IOSA(?) audit suggested this was not a good idea and we now have to do an annual EFATO, 1 eng ILS and G/A followed by a 1 eng ILS to land, from the right seat. Normally if we're scheduled to fly capt/capt then the PIC is in the left seat and we normally just keep it as PF from the left seat as well. During the day/days together you'd both be in the left seat, so you're going to get to drive at some point but, occasionally, we'll mix it up and do a bit of PF from the right seat and try to remember how to pull and push with the other hand 
Originally Posted by Centaurus
Today it seems everything is a "big deal" in the eyes of the regulator.
while some new things are overkill IMO, not having to explain to a family how the untrained "captain" in the RHS used the wrong control inputs and flipped his aircraft after a cut at 50ft AFTO seems reasonable to me.
Take the average A320/Boeing twin. Both can be flown from either seat by pilots with a command type rating. . Presumably both pilots are current on the aeroplane having completed cyclic checks and have current IPC. The cyclics no doubt will have included engine failures after V1. if the pilot in the RH seat be he captain or F/O, cannot handle an engine failure on take off simply because his recent flying has been from left seat, then what does that say about the competency of the training system? And worse still about the competency of the pilot. As one contributor said: It is all no big deal.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unless there is a specific reason such as only the LHS having a tiller and/or brakes and the FO isn't checked to operate these then I'm not sure why that would be an issue.
I also agree with Judd about competency. It should also go to reason that said captain would have spent considerable time in the RHS before they progressed to the LHS and has done his/her fair share of OPC's whilst a FO, so a quick RHS check should only be a formality to get that muscle memory going again if it's been a while since flying in the RHS.
I also agree with Judd about competency. It should also go to reason that said captain would have spent considerable time in the RHS before they progressed to the LHS and has done his/her fair share of OPC's whilst a FO, so a quick RHS check should only be a formality to get that muscle memory going again if it's been a while since flying in the RHS.
All this debate is suggesting is that from a manipulative view point it is not a problem to have a pilot simply jump into the RHS and off you go. That is just one aspect of two crew airline flying. What about the CRM aspect? I had a Capt. who was RHS endorsed say to me that there was only one thing worse than flying with an F/O who will never get a command and that was flying with an F/O who already had one. Spoken in jest but a certain element of truth about it. It is recognised as a CRM red flag that if the cockpit gradient goes from right to left then there are potential problems.