The practice of putting a student pilot in the right seat of a commercial jetliner is troubling and its implications need addressing.I dont agree with it and yet I know many airlines get away with it year after year.Aircraft are so reliable these days.Its not just that the poor guy is woefully unprepared for the huge workload and cognitive decision-making in the event of a LHS incapacitation.The real issue is that it creates a steep gradient between left and right seat.All US majors reject this model and for good reason.For CRM to function as IT WAS INTENDED WAY BACK WHEN,the gradient should be shallow enough to ensure that:
i)the "junior" pilot has a database of knowledge and experience which enables him/her to communicate any concerns about the flight.This communication can vary between timely and helpful advice to direct contradiction.
ii)the "senior" pilot,mindful of the experience of his/her colleague,will readily and confidently use and manage the resources of the right seat.
This model represents the perfect CRM model and I dont pretend that it exists in all US majors,but they certainly aspire to it.This model,when manifested in its purest form,will in fact perform miracles,as in the case of the DC-10 crash at Sioux city,where 182 people escaped certain death.
Increasingly,there seems to be a new model; communication of the type given in (i) is now based on the desire to conform to a politically-correct flightdeck(an anathema to pure CRM).Advocacy and assertion is there but now there's no database to back it up.Or alternatively,the communication is not forthcoming at all,because quite rightly,the first officer feels he/she is ill-equipped to advocate or assert anything.
Pilots wanted:college grad,3000 hours,1000 turbine,must have seen a bit of life.