If the first officer is legally second in command then surely he should be certified competent (by being tested in the simulator) on all sequences that the captain is certified competent on. Obviously this is not so in USA!
Actually, much to the chagrin of many in the US, you are correct. However, I have taken the time to read through what the FAA has submitted as a proposed rule change ... but they seem to be dragging their collective feet in doing something/anything about what they are proposing.
Anyway, the new proposal was clear … that both pilots in the airplane would be required to perform exactly the same tasks, to the same level of competency, and, as a result would be qualified to operate the airplane in revenue passenger/cargo operations under the existing regulations in the US. In addition, the proposal went as far as to say that if the F/O had logged the requisite number of hours (i.e., at that time, 1500 hours) and had already taken and passed the written examination for the Airline Transport Pilot Certificate – and had been trained on the accomplishment of all of the tasks required of a Type Rating Candidate, that F/O would be eligible to be issued not only a Type Rating on the specific airplane type, but also the Airline Transport Pilot Certificate.
However – and apparently in the US government, there is always a “however,” … nonetheless, however, the requirement for actual operation of the airplane in that revenue passenger/cargo operation (in accordance with the existing authorities granted to individual airlines), each airline makes a decision as to what pilot will actually conduct the rejected takeoff, if rejecting the takeoff becomes necessary during an actual, live, for-real, takeoff. The thought behind this is that apparently at least some in the FAA believe that only the Captain of the flight should be given that level of authority, and because of the potential seriousness of the result, only the Captain should be authorized to initiate and complete that task. Of course, this means that should the F/O actually be making the takeoff and something were to occur prior to V1 speed indicating that continuing the takeoff might not be safe, it would fall to the Captain to take control away from the F/O (of course the F/O would have to positively relinquish the control – as it might easily serve contrary purposes if both pilots were on the controls at the same time) and then execute the rejected takeoff.
I am told that there was a significant argument within the FAA about whether this was a proper and/or a necessary function – some indicating that the F/O lacked the experience for making such decisions and that the F/O lacked sufficient control of the airplane to safely execute such a task (the thought being that the F/O did not have access to “nose-wheel steering”). I do not know how this particular disagreement was settled, if, indeed, it was settled. However, it seems remarkable to me that anyone would (or could, logically) believe that a F/O had all the necessary training and had demonstrated all the necessary skill through proficiency checks or tests to warrant his/her being authorized to operate the airplane through all that F/O’s typically operate … takeoffs, climbs, cruise, descents, approaches, landings, go-arounds if required, etc., yet do not have the sufficient training or skill to reject the takeoff.
Now apparently, the US Congress has entered the discussion through the passage of a law –
requiring the FAA to establish a requirement that F/Os be issued some sort of Airline Transport Pilot Certificate – or that they have a minimum of 1500 hours of logged flight time before they are allowed to operate as a F/O (that specific point was not clear to me) – although there seems to be some conflicting interpretations about one or both of these so-called “requirements” … at least to the degree, it has been heard, that internal discussions within the halls of the FAA are on-going – some centering on what the “cost” will be to the individuals involved or to the airlines – but effectively stalling the finalization of what it will be that the FAA will require of airline pilots and whether or not there will be a differentiation between the Captain and the F/O with respect to qualification, experience, training, testing results, and so forth. Some observers might even get the impression that when the regulator can’t seem to get its priorities straight or make a logical decision … it will be next to impossible for airlines and individual pilots to come even close to complying with whatever it is they are to face.
My question is … who’s running the regulatory program in the US – the FAA, the Congress, the airlines, the public, the press, ??? … and this list can apparently go on to an embarrassing length.