Ual-SWA Jumpseat Incident

[warbirdfinder]

Any updated information on the UAL pilot, who was riding a SWA jump seat, who supposedly turned in a SWA pilot to the FAA?

[ozbiggles]

Yeah, the update is so called professional pilots should do some basic fact finding before posting drival.

[warbirdfinder]

The update is the UAL pilot did nothing wrong and did not contact the FAA. Apparently, she told a "trusted friend" in confidence of what transpired, and without telling the UAL pilot, the friend notified the FAA,

[olster]

This is beyond outrageous. Riding in the cockpit in another airline is a privilege and should be respected. As a former B737 captain we would sometimes authorize jump seats in the cockpit. It is a confined and sometimes very busy environment. Frankly it can be a pain to have someone else there but we did it to ‘help out’ when needed. Apart from (of course) a very serious safety issue the jumpseat protocol is to STFU. Speak only when spoken to. If reports are correct, the safety issue here is a non event and confusingly describes normal operations in terms of speed brake use. To report to the FAA is frankly jaw dropping and spectacularly ungrateful to a captain helping another airline crew member’s commuting. I can not blame SWA captains banning UAL pilots from their flight decks.

[safetypee]

Did this event involve a transgression of a recommendation (manufacturer), or the judgement of a standardising procedure (operator), or an erroneous violation of a hard limit?

Whilst failing to report the latter is of concern to the SMS advocates, it could have been judged as an error without consequence (aircraft design safety margin), often seen in LOSA.

Alternatively independent reporting of lesser categories could be detrimental to safety, the principles, professionalism, and knowledge of the concept of safety by the reporter, which erodes trust.

Edit: from a web based report

• A fairly junior United first officer was flying in the jump seat of a Southwest 737 from San Francisco (SFO) to San Diego (SAN)
• The jump seater noticed that the first officer flying (who was also a fairly new hire) was using speed brakes without flaps, and recommended that he may want to add flaps
• The captain told the first officer to add power and cut the speed brakes, and then he deployed flaps
• The captain thanked the pilot in the jump seat for bringing this to their attention; the flight landed without incident, and everyone went on their way

But … reporting was by a third party, and the FAA appears to have reacted to 'hearsay'
https://onemileatatime.com/news/jump...ama-southwest/

[olster]

I think, reading between the lines that is possibly a potentially low speed event with speedbrake and detiorating energy plus Captain temporarily distracted. Hence the call for flaps and more thrust plus cancelling speedbrake. However, all conjecture. Unacceptable to disrespect the courtesy shown by reporting to the Feds. Also the digital recording would have downloaded any exceedance of parameters. I also strongly suspect that the partner / friend angle might be an @rse saving exercise.

[waito]

Originally Posted by olster

I think, reading between the lines that is possibly a potentially low speed event with speedbrake and detiorating energy plus Captain temporarily distracted. Hence the call for flaps and more thrust plus cancelling speedbrake. However, all conjecture.

I read it the same way.
Only based on the webpage statements - speed on the way towards minimum clean speed, by the time the CPT responded he felt like now there's power necessary. Another reason to add power could have been too low speed in the traffic flow, without coming close to to Vzf

[Sailvi767]

They were above clean and put out speed brakes. Clean goes up with the brakes extended. She pointed out the error as she should have and it was corrected. That should have been the end of the story.
There are multiple versions about how her story got to the FAA. Most don’t make sense and the average lay person would not even be able to relay the story to the FAA. She had a strong social media presence but has chosen not to comment. That may be both union and company advice.

[waito]

This is from the guy on X who first reported about that story.

Even he states the following is not known to be the thruth. Sounds plausible, so we should NOT come to conclusions now. Let's see if FAA will say one word in the first place.



​​​​​​

[IRRenewal]

Message to all pilots: don't take anyone on the jumpseat if there is no legal requirement to do so.

[dhorgan]

I totally agree

[warbirdfinder]

IRRenewal said: Message to all pilots: don't take anyone on the jumpseat if there is no legal requirement to do so.

Do you mean to say to not allow anyone on the jumpseat unless it is someone like an FAA inspector or checkpilot?

If so, that is ludicrous statement. Literally thousands of pilots rely upon the jumpseat to travel and I welcome another set of eyes in the cockpit.

[blorgwinder]

The jumpseater is famous!!!!! For all the wrong reasons.

Thanks for messing up a really good thing. Helped lots of crews out....

[Rusty1]

“They were above clean and put out speed brakes. Clean goes up with the brakes extended. She pointed out the error as she should have and it was corrected.”

Would you care to explain the error in this and why a jump seater should interfere in the NORMAL cockpit operation or were they looking for more social media notoriety !!!!

[dr dre]

Did anything seriously bad come out of the reporting? As far as I’m aware the pilots involved were never stood down or have lost their jobs. The FAA simply contacted them to find out what happened, after an explanation the case was closed with no further action, as even the FAA knew it wasn’t that big of a deal.

Was the ‘friend’ wrong to report it to the FAA without having witnessed the incident themselves? Yes, but I would rather a culture of reporting of incidents that may not have safety implications vs a culture of cover ups and turning a blind eye to normalised deviations.

[Lookleft]

It looks like Qantas pilots will be also banned from the jumpseat with that last post.

[172_driver]

"I am from the FAA and I am here to help"

A culture where events can be reported without reprecussions is nice but sometimes you don't need to wake up a sleeping bear.

[Junkflyer]

All was well until said jumpseater informed "trusted friend" of the non-incident.
Makes me think of a couple of old sayings. "Loose Lips Sink Ships" and "Its better to keep remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.

[IRRenewal]

Originally Posted by warbirdfinder

IRRenewal said: Message to all pilots: don't take anyone on the jumpseat if there is no legal requirement to do so.

Do you mean to say to not allow anyone on the jumpseat unless it is someone like an FAA inspector or checkpilot?

If so, that is ludicrous statement. Literally thousands of pilots rely upon the jumpseat to travel and I welcome another set of eyes in the cockpit.

Don't allow them in the flightdeck unless you have to, there will normally be a seat of some description available in the cabin.

Your company rosters two sets of eyes to be there and that should be enough to keep your flight safe. That third set of eyes also comes with a third mouth to talk and distract you, not to mention they can drop you in it as illustrated in this thread.

[island_airphoto]

Wow!
I relied on jumpseats to get around back in the day and I would have NEVER dropped a dime on the crew unless I seriously thought they were going to kill me.
(nothing like that ever happened and the speed brake thing barely gets a 1 on a 1 to 10 scale of hose-ups)