I am amazed by the restrictive development opportunities for First Officers as indicated above.
From my experience with one operator, First Officer participation was permitted in all operations at the Captain’s discretion. This recognised both the range of differing abilities of the First Officers and those of the Captains in performing ‘instructional’ duties short of formal training. I add that it was a small operation where knowledge of crew’s ability was known and tracked.
Our industry allows and depends on in-service training. The formal or more extreme situations are usually trained with an instructor (no pax) or in a simulator, but the extensive range of ‘normal’ operations that all pilots should be exposed to in order to develop their expertise and skills (to become a Captain) must come from everyday operations, e.g. crosswinds, low visibility, circling, difficult airports.
If we don’t allow First Officers to experience this wide range of situations and the multitude of decision options and skills required within them, then how can the industry expect improve expertise and professionalism.
Perhaps we are already seeing the effects of this policy where crews depend on automation or have difficulty in managing the unusual or in some cases not so unusual situations.
There is an interesting view of operations (which I support) in
‘Eliminating "cockpit-caused" accidents’.
Perhaps the industry should consider these aspects so that we don’t run out of suitably experienced Captains.
If not, then either we have to understand how experience may the gained / taught without being exposed to situations, or perhaps the industry needs to change the premises of a two crew operation, interaction with automation, and a First Officer’s capability for intervention / recovery in extreme situations.