What a coincidence. These identical sentiments were echoed by a 727 F/E (former RAF Hastings flight engineer) of my acquaintance over a beer somewhere or other. He then gave an example of his awesome power (authority) to call an abort (Royal Air Force ). He was F/E on a RAF Hastings taking off from Darwin. Nearing lift off he noticed an oil pressure anomaly and called "STOP". The captain rejected the take off and after parking the brake said "Why did you call "STOP?" The F/E replied he thought he saw a falling oil pressure needle on one of the engines.
The captain was annoyed and said next time you call "STOP" make sure it is for a good reason. With that, the captain back-tracked for another take off and lined up. Meanwhile the F/E seethed with indignation.
Down the runway they went and again the F/E yelled "STOP".
True to SOP which gave the authority for the F/E to call "STOP" the captain hauled off the throttles and stood on the brakes. Turning to the F/E he said "WTF did you call "STOP" for this time?
The F/E said I called "STOP" because you did not use the full length of the runway and started the take off run well down the runway. That was illegal by RAF SOP so I called "STOP" as I am authorised to do so, SIR.
Draw your own conclusions...but it may explain why as a civilian F/E you are not authorised to make the decision to reject and why a crew member calling "STOP" should never mean the captain must therefore stop blindly without having any idea why the call was made in the first place...
The Boeing FCTM covers this nicely by stating "The PM should closely monitor essential instruments during the take off roll and immediately announce abnormalities such as "Engine Fire", "Engine Failure", or any adverse condition significantly affecting the safety of flight. The decision to reject the take off is the responsibility of the captain...
Or perhaps it's down to the generally lower selection and training standards in civil aviation?
