Captains flying with Captains - Cockpit Authority Gradient

[croc1alpha]

I would like to get some opinions on the situation when a Captain is rostered to fly with a colleague who also a company Captain. On the day, one pilot is rostered as Captain, while the colleague is rostered as First Officer. Both are qualified and current for both seats.

When the roster calls for the ‘more experienced’ Captain (say, judged by a balance of more years aviation and in the company, larger total time, more time on type etc etc) to be assigned the Left Hand Seat, I would say the authority gradient is correct. But when the situation is reversed, (i.e., the more experienced Captain sits Right Hand Seat and is acting First Officer), the authority gradient slopes the wrong way.

This ‘reversed’ authority gradient might work just fine for normal Ops, especially where the more experienced pilot sitting right has adequate respect for his colleague’s Command. But could the situation change if there was an emergency or abnormal? The pilot in the Right Hand Seat might instinctively try take over Command, since he/she has always viewed himself/herself as being “more senior” and thus subconsciously in Command?

This attempted Command reversal could play havoc with the mechanics of resolving the emergency or abnormal situation, as well as place the assigned Captain in a possible compromising situation.

I am interested to hear views particularly from the larger airline sector.

[john_tullamarine]

Never an easy situation and one which needs to be addressed in detail in the relevant Company Operations Manuals as well as crew preflight briefings. Once these are addressed, then it comes down to a normal crew discipline matter ?

[411A]

Yes John, all this sounds good, but rarely works in the actual fact.
Captains rostered with Captains...always a bad idea, to be avoided at all costs, if possible.
And, it usually is.

[john_tullamarine]

I wasn't suggesting that it was a good idea ... then, again, we have all heard the standard jokes about checkies flying with checkies ....

[chuks]

I'm not airlines, per se, but operating a regional airliner to some sort of reasonable airline standard (one hopes).

We try to avoid this 'two captains' situation, yes, but given two mature adults it does seem survivable.

Whoever is named first on the roster is in overall charge and gets to nominate PF and PNF. That seems to keep questions about who is in charge under control.

We have done quite a bit of 'two captain' flying in the sim, when one can often see oddities develop in emergencies as the other captain tries to assert his (nonexistent) authority. This is when good CRM comes to the fore, hopefully. We have often come away from a session having learned more about CRM than the aircraft systems.

I think that the stronger the personality and the better the systems knowledge then the less problems about authority enter into the mix. The weaker captains seem to have more trouble staying on the uphill side of the authority gradient.

Check the epaulettes: the guy with the shinier gold bars is usually the weaker one. Well, that's been my experience.

[Caractacus]

Hmmm. That hoary old chestnut.

Shortly after I got my command I had some flights rostered with another, vastly more experienced Captain. I had flown with the guy before which, in some ways, reduced the problem.

However, you can still run into problems. I did a nightstop with the Captain. The cabin crew were used to socialising with him (thoroughly nice geezer incidentally) and so clustered round him for the evening. The problems started the next day when the Captain 'allowed' the crew to make a shopping visit to Duty Free whilst waiting for the inbound aircraft. Needless to say they were then late and I ended up at the arriving aircraft without most of the crew, including my 'First Officer'.

Not a huge issue I suppose, but command and control are of the essence and emergency situations happen on turn rounds too.

Another time two of us were rostered together my 'colleague' suggested we fly 'leg & leg about'. Having insight into the situation I volunteered for the right hand seat for the day. However, that didn't work too well either. Try as I might to be a First Officer my Captain / Colleague seemed a bit distracted by having equal expereince in the right seat and forgot to put the gear down in the correct sequence . . .


Overall conclusion? Well you can fly two Captains together. However, even if you all know and like each other AND try and make the best of it you can run into problems.

Best avoided.

[Captain Stable]

It can get even worse than that. I know of a company which is desperately short of F/O's but the accountants won't let the DFO recruit. Consequently there are training captains rostered to fly as F/O's with qualified but not training captains because the former are qualified to fly right-hand seat.

This makes the reverse gradient steeper and is, in my personal opinion, a disaster waiting to happen.

[alf5071h]

My experience of two captains flying together comes from two different sectors of the industry, both with hazards. First, in a non-public transport operation, flight crews flew as Capt / Co-Capt with command rotating on each leg. Due to the nature of the operation, only a few captains were qualified to command particularly demanding flights. With a very small group the procedures were standard (if not always written down) and personal interaction was both strong and balanced. However many slips and mistakes were made, most were quickly caught and corrected, but complacency and failure to behave as a NFP led to a few interesting events.

My second experience is from investigating incidents and accidents. I saw evidence that flights with two Captains significantly increases the risk of an event. Even worst three captains on the flight deck, whether or not the jump seat pilot was in official or unofficial capacity (a caution here for check flights and LOSA, but of course everyone is flying ‘by the book’ on these sectors).

The evidence indicated that a captain NFP is not a good monitor, this also applied to a lesser extent to training captains during check flights. A monitoring captain intervened much later than would have occurred with a recently qualified first officer. Some pilots did not intervene at all. The reason for this appeared to be the assumption by the NFP that the handing pilot knew what he was doing, or at least as long as the monitoring pilot knew what was happening he assumed that he did not have to alert the Commander. This may be similar to an Instructor letting the student go too far with an incorrect course of action.

With two captains, their joint ability to detect threats and hazards appeared lower than with a balanced authority gradient; thus during an event with two captains they were at higher risk before recovery action was commenced. I wonder if this is similar to group risk theory; where a decision taken by a group of people tends to be more risky than when taken by an individual. Although CRM encourages group participation, the responsibility for any decision rests with the commander. With a level authority gradient, two captains may operate more as a group, whereas with a balance authority gradient this maintains the respect for the commander. These aspects are seen in other industries, particularly at board level.

Another aspect of incidents and accidents was that a monitoring captain was not familiar with the duties of that role, particularly standard calls and physical actions from the right seat. The lack of intervention by a captain was also apparent when there was a first officer handing; errors by the captain in these circumstances were more biased to the lack of awareness and complacency; CRM aspects.

[BlueEagle]

My experience of flying with a 'Heavy Crew', i.e. two Capt's. and one F/O was that the F/O ALWAYS sat in the RHS for take off and landing and the other Capt. only helped by augmenting the cruise sector.
At any time that you fly two captains together it is the operators, (your employers), responsibility to nominate a 'commander' and the other captain will fulfil F/O duties only.

[josephshankes]

Happens a lot in corporate aviation. The boss thinks he/she is safer with 2 four ringers up front.

If only they knew the truth.

[lomapaseo]

Happens a lot in corporate aviation. The boss thinks he/she is safer with 2 four ringers up front.

If only they knew the truth.

In that case it would help if the boss would consider just how well he/she gets along with their peers in a Sr Staff meeting to decide who among the grunts gets a raise BTDT

[M.85]

Would that just be a Captain EGO problem?

M.85

[chuks]

That's a point I had overlooked about the level authority gradient, that the captain in the right seat can be slow to detect or react to deviations. It's so, and I agree that makes for a higher level of risk.

One factor there is perhaps that a RHS captain's comments are more 'loaded' than an FO's, more of a challenge, so that one is slower to make a comment from the RHS. Mainly though, a captain is lacking in specific FO skills.

In our company relatively few people are qualified in both seats but every so often some trip comes up when we have run out of FOs for some reason or other.

I find that flying in both seats in the sim is a good way to learn things about CRM that are otherwise just theory. Of course one could question whether an hour with a normal crew composition is of more value than an hour with a captain/captain crew. I suppose that is the case.

[john_tullamarine]

There is ample evidence in the literature to support the contention that F/Os generally make better monitors in a normal crew situation. For co-captains to fly together satisfactorily, there has to be acceptance of seat position for the flight and a fairly well defined set of procedural protocols ... otherwise it inevitably ends up in anarchy to a greater or lesser extent.

And, of course, the high ego associated with the pilot fraternity introduces its own problems ...

[bafanguy]

Very simple: he who signs the dispatch release is "The Captain". This is supported in legalities, company policy, and tradition. If YOU didn't sign the release, get out your copilot hat and be a professional.

[Captain Stable]

Not quite that simple bafanguy, as many people above have testified. Yes, we'd all like things to be that simple, but it doesn't happen in the real world.

Incidentally, and to add to the evidence presented above, in my former company over a six month period we had a small spate of four runway incursions. Three of these happened with Training Captains in the right-hand seat and qualified Captains in the left.

[alf5071h]

Good points Captain Stable, multi-crew flying is not simple legalities or policies. Even the traditionalists would have to agree from the history of accidents that the individual human element and human interaction (or lack of it) dominate causal factors.

Those people still in the industry must continue to strive for professionalism; it is of little value in being a professional Captain / Commander if you are not going to be a professional co-pilot (as a Captain) when in the right seat. It is both the recognition of the change of role and the additional joint professionalism that a two-captain crew requires in order to defend against the hazards identified in this thread.

[bafanguy]

alf5071h,

I guess that's what I was trying to say in 25 words or less...but YOU said it much better. If one calls oneself "professional" he must demonstrate that no matter the seat or his unfortunate turn of career events. It's all in the attitude.

[planoramix]

Flying with another Captain is definetely a learning experience.
If in the right seat, as difficult as it may appear, I try to make myself a F/O in every sense. Trying to go back to the feeling I had when that was my role and I did my best for my Captain.

Yes, most of the times I would use a different approach on many issues during the flying day but that goes with the Captain personality.
Concentrating on being a good F/O makes it an interesting day anyway.
Also if small details only, I always discover something that, on my next flight, will help to make my F/O feel more confident and at ease.

[beamer]

I fly LHS for a major charter airline. I have spent most of the winter flying with other Captains because:

a. We do not have enough F/O's per se
b. We have allowed some F/O's to fly with other operators to save costs over the winter
c. Some F/O's have taken part-paid additional leave - again a cost saving measure.

It is not a major problem in itself - our SOP's work well and I fly from a small friendly base. However, there are inevitably problems with regard to cabin crew and handling agents who don't quite know who's in charge. More importantly however, mistakes are made due to endlessly swapping seats - invariably only minor things but the day will come.............

For reference the CAA have decided that a single engine circuit, single engine go-round and single engined landing in the sim every six months will prove our expertise in the rhs with the recent addition of a LVP approach.

[Max Angle]

We are doing it quite a lot in our company (bmi) at the moment as we are little over crewed with skippers. (the company's judgement, not mine I might add!) We also did it quite a bit in the early days of the airbus fleet when we had more Captains checked out than FO's. I contrast to what everyone else seems to be saying I have never found it a problem and always found it a pleasant, stress free day out. I admit that I have never had to deal with as serious problem whilst doing so but again I don't see it as a issue. The guy who signs the tech. log is the captain and we normally swap seats and command half way through the day. If you are professional about it's not a big deal at all. The only people who perhaps don't like it are the ego merchants.

[FWA NATCA]

During on of my last FAM's both pilots were Captains (the one in the right seat was senior but filling in for a sick FO). I was impressed during the pre-brief that when they discussed if an emergency occured that the Left Seat Captain would fly the airplane, and the Right Seat Captain would handle the emergency, radios, and check list.

Everything was pre-planned, and professionally done. The key is to establish the procedures in advanced to prevent problems during the flight, should Mr. Murphy decide to make an appearance.

Mike
NATCA FWA

[Miles Magister]

We fly with 2 captains alot of the time. Most of our captains are qualified in both seats and it makes life much easier and pleasant. Every one knows their duties and sticks to them, there are no egos to satisfy and no one trying to prove them selves.

It is a good idea that makes life much more pleasant if the company culture is right for it.

[GlueBall]

According to our SOPs: For every flight there is only one (1) designated captain in the cockpit who has ultimate command authority and responsibility. This operational designation is not debatable and it has no bearing on whether or not another more senior or more experienced captain is assigned to fly in the right seat. :ooh:

[Miles Magister]

I agree with glueball. There is always a designated captain. Only trouble is, today I flew with another training captain and neither of us had enough hands on practice on the FMS to use it properly and take less than many goes to get it right!

I revise my earlier statement and now think a descent co-pilot should always be carried if only to work the FMS.

However I still think the most valuable flight deck member is a proper hairy old flight engineer!

Looking at the past though rose tinted specs.

MM

[fireflybob]

Max Angle, maybe a slip of the typo on your part but "The guy who signs the tech. log is the captain..." - I was under the impression that it was the operator who specified who the aicraft commander was - ie whoever's name is in the "Commander" column on sign in is precisely that - the Commander.

Cabin crew can unwittingly get confused when two four ringers are flying together (ask any Training Captain) but it should be made clear to them in training that there is only ONE commander on the a/c.

Captains flying together tends to be less than ideal and Training Captains flying together can be even less ideal!

[4dogs]

Folks,

When two captains fly together, the most difficult task befalls the person designated as the FO.

It is he/she who must pack up the ego and the "must be in charge" tendencies and devote all his/her skills to being the best FO with whom the Captain could hope to be rostered. That person must ensure that he/she does everything to ensure that there is no confusion on anyone's part as to who the operator has designated as PIC.

The next most difficult task is for the designated PIC to understand that the person acting as FO is in an unfamiliar environment doing things that he/she normally only supervises and therefore a double dose of patience and vigilance is required.

Instead of banning the practice, I would advocate making it mandatory - it is great for self-awareness, humility and self-discipline. Don't avoid the difficulties - do it to ensure that you do not become the problem!!!!

Stay Alive,

[BOAC]

It always helps if the RHS four-striper puts on 2 (ok, then, 3 :D ) - it sets the scene for the rest of the crew and ground staff and helps with the 'mental conditioning' for the RHS. iIt is a nice touch and helps the 'gradient' considerably from the outset.

[Captain Stable]

Excellent idea, BOAC - I like that one.

[fireflybob]

BOAC - brilliant idea - me like too!

[Johnman]

Responsibility can be shared but not authority, one commander for the flight only. A flight is a mission to be accomplished safely and definition of roles is extremely important.

[too low flaps]

Where I work it happens from time to time that CDR's are flying together. If it's planned from the beginning. The guy with the highest seniority gets the left seat. On the other hand, if there is no F/O available due to eg. a sick F/O, and no other F/O's available to replace him, the captain who is called on sby gets the R/H seat, and functions as a F/O regardless of seniority -even if this is the chiefpilot himself.

I have been a captain for seven yrs, and have no difficulties to have a more senior colleague as F/O. Nor do I have any problems
to serve as a F/O to a less senior captain.

In a situation if I as a CDR is making a bad decision, I expect the
F/O to correct me. I will not "loose face". I would rather greet him for doing his job.
In my world, this is what CRM is all about.

Likevise, when I read flight occurency reports, I try to learn from
other people's mistakes. Not condemn the guys involved.

Blue skies!

[Pablo K]

I am a check-captain and instructor...
Therefore often happens that I operate as the F/O on some flights.
xxx
My personal preference is to give a line check (or simulator check) from a jump seat, rather that occupying a position as required crewmember. I see differences with some captains having "a real" F/O, or in having me occupying the RH seat...
xxx
Probably psychological... honest, no difference for me.
Since I am management, I am not on regular flight crew roster, and I am permanently "reserve"... so I accept any flight given, rather than flying a desk in the office, or bored to be home. And I know that many captains do request me to go along with them if their favorite F/Os are not available...
xxx
I am lucky if I fly one or two trips per month...
And I even ask to make a landing as well... Rusty old fart here...
xxx
Happy contrails
:D

[411A]

Likewise, as with PK above, always prefered to administer line checks from the obs seat.
Could always get the true picture from there...and could renew line qualification for the Capt and First Officer on the same series of flights.
Much more efficient....and a friendlier atmosphere.
Occasionally, if the roster allowed three (or more) flights in one day) two check Captains and a First Officer would be rostered for these.
Presto...three line checks done.

[maxy101]

The other issue of checking from the RHS is it makes it virtually impossible to fail the other guy without failing yourself too. (In the multi crew environment)

[Hudson]

I recall a bad situation while I was captain (and handling pilot) of a 737 descending towards a tiny Pacific island at night. It was really black. I was undergoing a scheduled route check. The check pilot (from the Sub-Continent) on the jump seat decided that he wished to occupy the RH seat for the instrument approach and landing.

Accordingly the first officer swapped seats and the man with the turban strapped in to the right seat. He requested that I demonstrate an NDB approach.

Our airline used standard Boeing 737 SOP which required the aircraft to be configured at flap 5 and 170 knots by the time we arrived over the NDB for the first time.

At 210 knots clean and one minute to overhead I called for flap 1 on the way to the flap 5 config. To my dismay the turbanned one said "No, No, you are taking the flaps too early".

At the instant of my call I had airspeed bleeding just below 210 knots at idle thrust clean, in anticipation of my request for flap1 being executed without delay. I again called for flap 1 only to be countermanded by the PNF check pilot who repeated in an irritable manner that it was too early to configure.

I hastily reached across and selected the flap lever myself while throttling up to stop further airspeed bleed. While there was no danger of any more bleeding airspeed, nevertheless I was taken aback at my request for flap extension being countermanded by the PNF check pilot while it was I who held full command responsibility for the flight.

The incident was disturbing and harsh words were exchanged between us. The rest of the approach proceeded with a marked hostility between our two cultures.

After landing I wrote a report on the matter of check pilot and command responsibilities.

The next day, I was told to present myself to the chief pilot's office and lo and behold the turbanned one was in the chair. I was informed that I had failed my route check.

When I asked on what specific point did I "fail" the check, the turbanned one said "How can I pass you on the route check when you write a letter like that criticising me?"...

I was staggered to say the least and asked what I would have to do to "pass" the route check again. The chief pilot replied "Just tear up your report and you pass"..

Two captains together in the same cockpit is not always a good thing - and definately a bad thing if there are two cultures involved.

[411A]

Hudson,

Oddly enough, SQ had one of 'those' (altho without the required headress) in the very late seventies, and he was passed over for fleet advancement for just such nonsense.
Actually, SQ did the deed interestingly enough, they just quickly lowered the maximum age for fleet upgrade, then reinstated same after he was permanently ah...gone.
He complained bitterly of course, but it was he own undoing.
Easy come...easier 'go'.:E :ok:

[international hog driver]

Captains with Captains is always a sticky issue within an airline environment.

Where we operate we have a large number of captains from many varied parts of the world and the experiences of flying with several have been amusing to say the least.

Bad Examples:

After day 2 of a 7 day trip one captain was at the point of killing the other due to his poor procedural adherence. (the poor one later jumped before he was pushed).

Non attentive attitude by two “mates” who had not flown together in 15+ years, missed calls and the such, however they did enjoy the time.

One captain caught up on about 4 months sleep during a co-captain stint according to the others report.

Cultural differences played a big part where one European “work orientated” captain was dismayed by the Latin “Social orientated” captain putting pleasure before work.

Good Examples:

Positive outlook by both crew members, highly experienced and when the faeces and fan met the handled the situation impeccably where the capabilities of some of our FO’s would have been lacking.

Opportunity to escape from the norm. Days where you fly leg for leg switching seats and enjoying the experience of learning something as opposed to “teaching” something.

Many other instances however these are more a social nature, as an expat in a foreign land it is sometimes hard to catch up with “the boys” when people are rostered all over the place.

My thoughts are that there is the good with the bad and crewing needs to roster people of the same ilk to get a good result and avoid cultural or attitudinal problems.

[JoeCo]

International Hog Driver,

Check your PM's.