De Facto, this isn't the first time we start discussing. From what I've read in this and other posts, you appear to be someone who sticks to rules and SOP in what I consider to be an extreme way.
Although I wouldn't mind being a pax on your Boeing, I'd still prefer the cockpit crew of a
slightly more flexible kind. I'm pretty sure that if you really ALWAYS blindly stick to the procedures and written rules, you would too often ground a plane and cause unnecessary inconvenience to your pax and financial losses for your airline.
If you are an experienced airline captain, which I can believe you are, surely you must have come in situations before where you could have said: "I'm grounding this plane" and have something on paper that would back you up, but where you didn't after using some intelligence. If that never happened in your career, but instead you used a written rule as an excuse EVERY time you saw something allowing you to ground the A/C, that might explain why you (have to?) fly in China.
I despise cowboys in the cockpit. I do not like nitpickers without any flexibility either. Following rules blindly without thinking and any flexibility can sometimes be disastrous as well!
Do I follow rules and SOP's. YES, I DO... but not like a robot. Isn't that what we call airmanship? Have I made (minor) mistakes in my career? Yes, and I'm sure I will make some more in the days, weeks and years to come. I even dare to say that I haven't made a single PERFECT flight in my whole life, even if I try it every single time! I think the difference between you and me is that I will more easily admit that I'm not infallible.
Happy flights!
Originally Posted by John R
other captains in the situation you describe would have opted not to operate the flight.
Absolutely, and I wouldn't criticize a captain for doing so. Of course that's also a safe option. But the question is: Is that
the best option? Me thinks not. (trying to look at what a mess it would be trying to put up 180 pax and 6 crew in hotel beds...that weren't available.)