PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Dallas Dispute - Qantas Crew stood down.
View Single Post
Old 21st Aug 2012, 01:25
  #31 (permalink)  
Anthill
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If the Captain proposes to operate the flight 1) Safely and 2) Lawfully, then the captain should have every reasonable expectation that the crew will offer their complete support.

If there is a breach of safety or SOP, the crew must speak up. If a crew member can see a more efficient way of doing things, then they should offer the suggestion to the other crew. The Captain then makes an assessment on what is the best plan of action (even if not his/her idea) and implements it.

There are some crew out there in aviation land who think that the captain must automatically incorporate ideas, however impractical, that are raised by the SO/FO. This is not good CRM. The captain is the decision maker and the subordinate crew are there to support the captain in the safe and lawful operation of the aircraft. The perspective that an FO/SO can over-ride a safe and lawful command decision is not limited by generation, but is the by-product of poor CRM culture.

Some years ago, a FO over-rode my command decision to land a B737 on RWY 14 BN. This FO stated that use of that RWY was "non-standard" (ie: he hadn't.. "seen anyone else use it" before). When I pointed out in ERSA that it was lawful and the wind of 100/25 made it the safer option (not to mention that radar vectors for RWY 01 would mean 5-6 mins additional flight time), he still refused to budge as he still felt that RWY 14 would breach SOPs. After landing on RWY 01 (my command decision that all crew must be on the same page ), I asked him to show me where in the AIP/SOPs/ERSA/JEPPs that RWY 14 was illegal. He couldn't. I explained that his lack of knowledge had resulted in cost to the company and a degraded standard of safety; It is the responsibility of subordinate crew to know their friggin' stuff!!

I do not know what has happend on the QF8. The focus on what is right takes precedance over who is right. Either the use of the TO performance computer was safe and lawful or it wasn't. To cast 'blame' at this stage is premature. To say that the Captain has a "track record" may or may not be true. In any case, previous history has no relevance to what did or did not happen in Dallas. The facts will eventually come to light and until then, it is all second guessing.

(PS, The SO in QF1 at BKK did NOT get fired. This sounds more like another aviation myth).

Last edited by Anthill; 21st Aug 2012 at 01:29.
Anthill is offline