first CRM issue

[Miked]

I'll keep this as brief as possible.
I have 350 hours total time, 75 on type (ie my only commercial experience).
Consider my self easy going, flexible but proffesional, a good pilot but with a lot to learn.

Flew with a young captain today, who rushed everything, skipped checklists ( resulting in me picking him up for several mistakes, 1013 to QNH etc) flew at Vmo and expected me to do so too, generally a stressy guy made me feel crap (therefore reducing my performance) took the P when I made a positive arrival (due to him lecturing all the way down the approach).

I know what a CRM instructor would say to do....but I wonder how people on the line deal with it.

We went home 15 mins early, not really worth it. This has been my worst day of flying yet. I know that I am slower than more experienced pilots but I have never had a problem with other captains. I really wanted to pull him aside after the flights and tell him he needed to slow down a bit with new FOs ( and that he was a pillock) but ended up just wanting to get home.

Any advice appreciated, I know I will end up flying with him or someone similar soon.

Cheers,
Mike

[wee one]

Are you under training or checked.
No excuses for skipping checklists but worse if the former. No need to go at v/mmo unless a valid reason is given. ie to ATTEMPT an earlier arrival if pushing duty limits during discretion. Indeed any departure from sops should be justified and agreed.. As a tool to get home early in normal ops he shows his inexperience rather than the opposite. Too many variables to slow you up that negate the high speed philosphy.
However I wouldnt advise giving anyone the General Advice you talk about, rather tell himm that hes moving too fast for YOU at your current experience level. If he doesnt recognise the nerve that would take in a new guy to say, and respect it then he is a tw@t.
Real time crm is callled airmanship and not the wooly plastic theory nonesense on renewals. Airmanship also encompasses the willingness to speak up when necessary without exceeding your experince or knowledge, both aviation and general. People with poor crm dont get fixed in a yearly renewal , and peple with good crm dont learn it in the classroom. Its all about the individual.
Basically in the real world your 375hr opinion ( no disrespect intended, just a fact of life) may not go down well if you generaly advise more experinceed guys on how they should lead, fly or act. However you are the most qualified guy to assess what your own limits are and put them on the table.

[Miked]

I have been on line for about a month. I really appreciate your good advice and understand how my thoughts would not have gone down so well. Thanks for your time. I have kicked myself all day for not speaking up but then again that is a lesson learnt (one of many more to come).

Thanks again,
Mike

[Flying_Scotsman]

I guess it's difficult for a young captain to know how to excercise his captaincy/leadership. It may well have been that he was also operating at a high level of stress knowing that he was now in charge:) . You need similar but not identical approaches for Captaincy and Leadership. Perhaps he thought he could show that he was a competent captain by being 'punchy' rather than being professional. A young captain needs assistance as does a young co. If you fly together again let him know your feelings.

[low n' slow]

I've had a similar experience.
The second time I flew with the same captain, I made a remark on my low experience level and that I didn't feel comfortable with the speed at which things were being done, allready in the briefingroom. It's foolproof to initiate the discussion by referring to your low hours and inexperience. No offense can be taken because the faulty person according to this way of reasoning is you and not the captain...

Another technique that has worked well for me is to work ahead of the captain. Being able to give an answer directly on fuelfigures or weather issues reduces his/her workload and they calm down. Try to be VERY well prepared and be on the ball so to speak. I know it's hard and after a couple of leggs worth of flying it's not the easiest thing to do. But only do this once you start feeling confident in that you can handle your copilot duties without strain.

Hope things get better!
/LnS

[A37575]

You must always remember that regardless of your relatively low flying hours you wear the mantle of second in command. You are not just the boy in the right hand seat. If there is an incident or, heaven forbid, a bad accident, you as second in command may well be deemed in a court to bear some responsibility.

It is folly to simply hunch your shoulders and meekly accept unwarranted criticism from the arrogant fool in the left seat. By cowering and accepting that criticism from the captain is part and parcel of being a second in command, then you make a rod for your own back. Give in to a bully and you wear the consequences.

While constructive criticism should be welcomed, the carping tirade of sarcastic words from a senior crew member must not be accepted by you - unless you lack the character or bottle to call a halt. Of course the risk is always present that a serious altercation of words will only result in your being invited by the chief pilot for a cosy chat. Chances are that even if your retort to the captain is justified, seniority rules and you will be labelled a trouble maker. Never plan on winning against seniority.

It is a matter of moral courage and it helps if you are articulate and know your stuff. With some tyrants of the left seat, a strong and robust reply to carping can have surprisingly good results and the fool pulls his head in knowing the second in command cannot be trifled with. The danger is in escalation, especially while airborne. Again your commonsense should dicate biding your time until the aircraft is on the deck and the passengers have departed. Then let the bastard have it with both barrels - ensuring your facts are right. That night write down what happened as you need to record these things for future defence.

There is great responsibility and dignity that comes with your appointment as second in command. Unfortunately some captains may treat you as a small boy to be admonished and hectored. Every airline is plagued to some extent by these little Hitlers and management may close its ears to their excesses.

There is never an excuse for bullying or sheer bad manners on a flight deck. Within the bounds of good airmanship you need to speak up and be a man and not be a wimp. Sometimes the clearing of the air produces a happy outcome.

[AHRS]

CRM requires you to speak up or the wrong stuff caprain may kill all of you if ypu are meek.It happenned to the GF A320 crash,KLM Tenerife disaster and countless others.Read NTSB reports and you will be more motivated to stand up and say the right things.Take a good CRM book with you on board...and be prepared to flash the page that says".....this should or should not take place".Non proficient CRM pilots are able to swallow such leads better(when referenced) if coming from low timers(and he was one too some time ago).YOU ARE SECOND IN COMMAND..NOT JUST A TRAINEE(YOU HAVE TO BE COMPETENTLY QUALIFIED TO FLY THE LINE EVEN AS A TRAINEE OR CHIMPANZEE).EVEN IF YOU ARE IGNORED...MAKE SURE THE CVR(IF EQUIPPED) KNOWS WHAT YOUR PROTEST WAS ABOUT..TO GIVE YOU THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT SHOULD YOU INCUR AN INCIDENT AND A SUBSEQUENT COURT HEARING.I HAVE FLOWN WITH SUCH DICTATORIAL SKIPPERS...STRAIGHTEN UP YOUR SPIME AND STAND UP TO THEM..CONFIDENTLY, THE BULLIES MIGHT EVEN SHOW YOU RESPECT..AS ONE OF THEM USED TO TELL ME..."I MAY NOT LIKE YOU...BUT I CANT DISCOUNT YOU FOR YOUR GOOD IDEAS".Finally, write down al these episodes as experience to learn from...THAT'S WHY YOU ARE SITTING ON THE RIGHT SEAT ...YOU ARE NOT JUST A REDUNDANT AUTOPILOT BUT A FUTURE CAPTAIN!:ok:

[Centaurus]

Many many years ago I had the treasured opportunity to have afternoon tea with Captain David Beatty who wrote books on his flying experiences during and after the war when he joined BOAC as a first officer. During our chat he said he had problems getting some of the captains he interviewed as research for his book to admit to making errors of judgement. I forget the name of the book but it was one of the first on CRM.

I suggested to this venerable gentleman that if he considered writing a follow-up book on cockpit personalities, it would be revealing to interview first officers rather than captains as they see more of the mistakes made in the left seat. To my embarrassment, Captain Beatty immediately terminated the discussion and I was politely ushered to the door of his lovely cottage in Sussex.
From this episode I got the distinct feeling that I had crossed some hidden boundary by daring to suggest that first officers are often witness to the real stuff-ups by their captains but it was considered bad form to talk to the lower status ranks about senior status pilot errors.

[Vc10Tail]

Yes,I rather recal reading the same book or wasit the one that docused on Air Disasters?A venerable gent indeed.It must have been a priviledge to be unde his wings that adternoon.....I suspect it could just be a matter of being old and cranky that got his patience to run out.My elderly guardian was like that...the seniors of the old British Empire so to say!:rolleyes:

[Dream Land]

1. Keep the captain from killing himself :} . Some things that may initially intimidate a captain is pointing out the obvious, don't be one of those types, be very familiar with your company SOP's and callouts, sounds like he may have been a little frustrated at your pace, know in your mind what the next three things you need to do, for instance, if you know it's your leg, don't wait to adjust your seat or rudders after the plane is on the runway :ugh: .

[merlinxx]

The Naked Pilot is required reading. It's avail on most search sites, a good background to David Beaty can be found at

www.b737.org.uk/emergency_descent.html

It says a heck of a lot that is pertinent.

Good luck, keep the faith & don't let the b'stard get you down!

[merlinxx]

My apologies for gifting your web site notes, bloody good read though. As a sprog Ops guy back in the early 60s I had loads of this stuff.

Did it breed respect, only those that helped to explain what, where & why. The old protocols where still in place, but were being slowly torn down.

The old application of "that's always how we did it" when I was a sprog, had to valued and respected, but times were, and still are changing.

If only you could get Kevin (bloody) Wilson to write a song about these folks, it would be a best seller amongst all those with the same snags.

Thank you, the sim incapacitation I've seen happen when riding a sim jump seat.

Thank you for all the really pertinent input, I hope many learn from you.

PS. I did meet David Beaty at a RAeS meeting in LON, a gentleman of the first order, but again of the old protocol.

[calypso]

There is a world of difference between allowing your colleague in the left seat to fly you into a mountain and letting him have both barrels because you didn´t get on. It is a fact of life that we are all different and somebody you may love to fly with is not liked by somebody else and viceversa. I would encourage you to absolutely speak up if safety is compromised I would also say, however, bid your time and learn to deal with the small personality frictions that happen. It is not easy being an good FO but you will find and get quite good at different strategies to deal with difficult captains (and despachers, controlers, cabin crew, your pregnant wife... actually I never did master that last one).

I would bring it up by pointing out your low experience and saying that you feel unconfortable and rushed, would he give you a little more time while you adapt to the aeroplane. The problem of giving him both barrels is that when the **** flyies it tends to splatter everybody.

Look at it as a challenge, in due course you will also find yourself flying with the opposite: a captain for who anything YOU do is too racy. It will be a different customer to please but heyho that is life as an FO.

[Bob Lenahan]

I really find it difficult to believe that a 350 hr pilot is in a position to critisize a capt.
However, I was even more surprised to find that an airline would hire a guy with 350hrs.

[Dream Land]

Yes, many companies are flying with pilots from cadet training with less than 300 hours total time :eek: , I for one must say that they do a great job.

[Right Way Up]

I really find it difficult to believe that a 350 hr pilot is in a position to critisize a capt

If he is part of a crew it is imperative he speaks up if the Captain is operating in such a way. Cutting corners whilst flying with such an inexperienced chap is foolish. This scenario would be no different if it was a 3,000 hr pilot who was new on type.
As an aside you need Captains like this to make the rest of us look alright!;)

[A37575]

I really find it difficult to believe that a 350 hr pilot is in a position to critisize a capt.

If the 350 hour pilot is second in command of a jet with 100 plus passengers he is certainly well advised to level criticism at a captain who knowingly breaks the rules. Read the reports in Pprune on the tragic Garuda 737 crash that made headlines where the first officer with 2000 hours meekly submitted to the captain's crazy flying.

[Bob Lenahan]

I would say that as "standards" are lowered the "acceptance" of lower standards becomes common place.
In the early to mid 60's a major U.S. airline tried a temp policy that if you had a commercial certificate with an instrument rating and two years of college they would guarantee you a flight pòsition as soon as you graduated from the university. I don't remember how many they hired under that policy, although I do know it was a good number, but within 5 years their were less than a handfull remaining because they could not maintain company standards.
I did a fair amount of flying with new-hire 1,000 F/O's, and it was a text-book example of "flying alone".

[calypso]

Hey where is 411A?

[dream747]

I'm not a pilot but I just thought of some questions when browsing through the topics here.

How would veteran captains with big egos (I'm sure there would be a few at least) react to junior FOs pointing out that they've made mistakes? If they refuse to correct or admit those mistakes and a certain incident happens as a result of that, I suppose the FO has to shoulder part of the blame too?

[Dream Land]

Happens all the time, I make an effort to thank them for their effort!

[ant1]

The practice of putting low (200h) Pilots in the right seat is common place in Europe.

As a matter of fact some airline training departments prefer them over more experienced types. These airlines reckon that low timers have got no bad habbits to correct.

I have no strong opinion on this one.

Reading your posts one question comes immediately to my mind: do you like to fly alone ? ;)

I would say that as "standards" are lowered the "acceptance" of lower standards becomes common place.
In the early to mid 60's a major U.S. airline tried a temp policy that if you had a commercial certificate with an instrument rating and two years of college they would guarantee you a flight pòsition as soon as you graduated from the university. I don't remember how many they hired under that policy, although I do know it was a good number, but within 5 years their were less than a handfull remaining because they could not maintain company standards.
I did a fair amount of flying with new-hire 1,000 F/O's, and it was a text-book example of "flying alone".

[Bob Lenahan]

The argument, no, let's say discussion, will never be settled. This is like discussing religion, politics, etc. Many of today's low time pilots do not have the skills of those of the 70's. Many examlpes of that in these and other forums, and in the cockpit. I won't waste time on that point. If you are not aware of this, then this discussion is out of your league.
However, maybe a lot of these skills are not now necessary because of the technology-FMS. Maybe the 500 hr, f/o doesn't need to figure how to get into a hold because he can just enter the fix into the fmc. Maybe it isn't necessary for him to make pitch, roll, power adjustments on a tight approach in gusting winds because all he has to do is sit back and monitor the airplane as it flies the approach by itself.
First flight with f/o, 4000 hrs heavy time: I can assume this guy knows how to fly. I don't know him personally, so I will keep an eye on him. Only came across 1 high time ex-military pilot who was, essentially, incompetent.
First flight with f/o, 500 hrs. Hope the wx's good. Bad wx, heavy traffic, I'd prefer to say, "sit back, relax, and watch." Seen too many probs with inexperienced pilots.
Doesn't mean they aren't motivated, or don't care. Means have no experience and shouldn't be here. When I had 200 hours, I would not have turned down an airline job. I would also have understood I had no idea what I was doing.

[contacttower118.2]

When I had 200 hours, I would not have turned down an airline job. I would also have understood I had no idea what I was doing.


I find it slightly odd that you should say that, I was always under the impression that in the days of most FOs being sponsored you tended to get a lot more low houred pilots in the RHS of jets. Major carriers like British Airways always used to take a large intake of pilots straight out of flight school.

[NorthernSkySailing]

Hmmm, without getting bogged down in the original argument, I'll suggest to Mike that he looks (by scrolling down the page) at some of the resources at:

http://www.crm-devel.org/resources/crmtopic.htm

in particular reading about PACE (it's a heavy and blunt instrument and not one that works in every case) at:

http://www.crm-devel.org/resources/paper/PACE.PDF

:ugh:

[low n' slow]

Bob:
I've flown with guys that have shown the same attitude like you. Those flights are the ones in which I've gained the least experience.

"sit back, relax, and watch" is what bothers me. This approach is bound to lead the co-pilot into a "I give up" mode and he or she will go from being part of the crew to just a pax in the RHS, learning nothing but the fact that they are incapable of doing what they have been trained for. Perhaps it makes you feel better knowing that you are in full controll of things, but in the case that you feel they are not capable of doing their job properly, the more appropriate approach to the problem would be to give the CP a call and make him or her aware that so and so is in need of more training and if the situation is so bad that you'd rather fly alone, cancel the flight. This is of course an extreme situation, but you should not accept to fly a multi crew plane in a single pilot operation.

I have about a 1000 hours of which 650 is in commercial TP's and I consider myself still in training. Even though I was checked out a little more than a year ago. And I will still be in training a year from now. The training never stops and therefore asking your crewmember to step aside in other than extreme cases will achieve nothing positive in the big picture.

The best captains I've flown with have when I've shown phases or sides that have been below standards, given me a little more responsibility, let me do another leg as PF and so on to give me a chance to rise to the challange. These are the flights that have made me a better pilot and subsequently on the next flight, I've been able to produce a higher standard. This is perhaps the better way to go about the problem than to just cut them out of the loop :ugh:.
/LnS

[TACHO]

Bob.... are you for real?:}. How, pray tell, do you suggest that a low hours first officer attains the magic '4000 or so hours' on the 'heavy jet? As if by magic they are just going to appear in his logbook overnight?:rolleyes: It strikes me as a trifle odd that you are not willing to give an inexperienced pilot the benefit of the doubt so that he may learn, but instead suggest that he permanently has to stagnate in a pool of inexperience with no means of removing himself..

Means have no experience and shouldn't be here
ditto the above... "shouldnt be here", Flying a jet IS normally a two man job. The problems do arise when one believes it is a single pilot operation. Read "Fate is the Hunter", even that Author (who IS one of the old school) makes special mention of those captains who sought to prove that his presence was unjustified.:rolleyes:

I really find it difficult to believe that a 350 hr pilot is in a position to critisize a capt.
However, I was even more surprised to find that an airline would hire a guy with 350hrs

Whats so difficult about that, I would tend to agree with right way up's sentiments. If he is part of the crew then his opinions count! simple fact. As do the opinions of every crew member on board,:hmm: . Does one need 1000 hours to know that it is folly to fly at Vmo ? I think you have missed the point, I would suggest that part of being a good captain is understanding your crew, that means tailoring your style to suit. Plenty of airlines hire guys with 350 hours. that total doesnt stay at 350 for long I can tell you.
In fact when speaking to a captain just the other day his brief included a caveat asking the newish first officer to 'pick him up on anything non-standard' As he appreciated that his first officer, due to a LACK of experience, would tend to be doing everything as per Sop's.

Many of today's low time pilots do not have the skills of those of the 70's

however it would appear at least one "very experienced" pilot on here has adopted the attitudes of THAT era.:}



Tacho

[Tigs2]

Bob
When was the last time you did a CRM course?? Or would your answer be 'I don't need one'. So were you one of these lucky chaps who popped out of his mother's womb with 4000 hours in the cockpit!:} (can't be that far off 9 months). I had a friend recently who somehow set his altimeter at the wrong setting. Thankfully the young lad with 300 hours said 'sorry Captain but i think there is something wrong!' - problem rectified! Your type would have allowed the Captain to take you to the scene of the crash thinking ' Well what do i know'!

[beamer]

First thing I say to a new low-houred pilot when we fly together for the first time ' don't EVER under-estimate my ability to foul up' or words to that effect. Perhaps a bit melodramatic but it seems to make them realise that four stripes, god knows how many hours and thirty years in the business does not give a cast-iron guarantee that things cannot go wrong in the lhs.
Works for me - may not work for others !

[Rananim]

I really find it difficult to believe that a 350 hr pilot is in a position to critisize a capt

I concur. It wouldnt happen in the States in any case. Guys with 350 hours should be trying to kill themselves in a beaver in Nova Scotia.

We dont subscribe to this modular 13 month course and hey presto you're an airline pilot.

We believe that a pilot learns his trade through life's experiences, from single piston to twin piston, to right seat on a turboprop, then left seat on the same and then finally when he's assimilated all that aviation can throw at you, he might just be ready to apply to the majors. We also subscribe to the view that such a rough-and-tumble 5 year route teaches humility and makes you a survivor. The only guys who get a pass to the majors without any civilian experience are the military and the reasons are self-evident.

When I hear of 2500 hour Captains flying alongside 300 hour co-pilots in a 737 in Europe, it makes my blood run cold. The plane is so reliable,the FMS and automation does all the work, and so yes theoretically you should be just fine. But you're hedging your bets.

In short, experience counts. And the wider the experience the better. For example,take a Brit flying 757's to Spain and the Canaries for one year. He joined out of flight school and probably has 1200 total with 800 on type. Is he experienced? NO. His exposure to different operating environments is very limited. Flightschool (very little practical use to be frank) and one year of line flying the same routes in a highly sophisticated machine that will practically fly itself if he so chooses. Little has been learnt in such a short time span (2 years) and such a limited operating environment. Yet there he is pushing the buttons and following the FD commands all the way down the slope and dutifully filing the paperwork. And no disrespect to him. But scratch at the veneer and what have you got?

[Dream Land]

It wouldnt happen in the States in any case Please, let's not turn this into one of those threads.
The cadets from most of these programs are highly motivated and are very professional, very thorough training curriculum, at the airline I worked for in the UK an emphasis was placed on check rides without the use of automation, one of the casualties I witnessed involved an Saab CA (US) that couldn't pass an FO check. What I have learned from my experience in the UK is motivation, training and company culture that make the pilot.

[TACHO]

Rananim, the fact that you believe it is so Inconceivable that a 350 hour guy could pick up a captain on an error, speaks volumes. I am sure CRM gurus the world over are banging thier heads in frustration. :ugh:

Take the time to read over the posts again on this thread. No one is saying that the FO should 'usurp' the captain, the captain has more experience, thats why he is in the LHS and not the right, however regardless of whether someone has 300 hours or 30,000 hours, mistakes are inherant in human beings nature. To think that one is infallible is a recipe for disaster, furthermore one who doesnt value (not neccesarily accept) the opinions of his crew because he doesn't consider them "a survivor", sounds like an absolute pleasure to fly with.

When I hear of 2500 hour Captains flying alongside 300 hour co-pilots in a 737 in Europe,it makes my blood run cold.The plane is so reliable,the FMS and automation does all the work,and so yes theoretically you should be just fine.But you're hedging your bets

Orrr.... another way of looking at it is that the newly "QUALIFIED" F/O will probably have recently completed an IRT. no autopilot used there my friend. He will have recently completed a line check, would a training captain sign the piece of paper to say a candidate was ready to fly the line unless he genuinely believed him able. Not neccessarily brilliant, but 'able' nonetheless.

Theres a term for people who try and keep people in thier place... its called greasing the pole:hmm:, and imho has no place on the flightdeck of a modern airliner, in a modern society. Some may disagree with me, but then again they are probably too busy sat daydreaming of the days when they used to fly the dehavilland comet for BOAC:ouch:

Happy landings.

T

[Rananim]

mistakes are inherant in human beings nature

Concur 100%.I never said they werent.Read my post again.

To think that one is infallible is a recipe for disaster

Where did I say that?Nobody is infallible which is why we believe in two experienced pilots at the sharp end.Whichever way you cut it and however many times you say that cadets are eager and a pleasure to fly with,a 350 hour guy knows diddly squat.Let me try an analogy;can a med student offer concrete advice to a brain surgeon,should he even try?Doesnt mean the brain surgeon wont seek a second opinion because he thinks hes infallible;he'll just seek it from another experienced brain surgeon.

[low n' slow]

I like the way you (for sake of argument of course) use a brain surgeon as the other example... I would have chosen a carpenter or something a little less prestigious :hmm:

There's a lot of generalisation going on here though. It seems that the general consensus here is that hours equal experience. I beg to differ.
Number of landings and thereby number of approaches is where the experience comes in to play.

Also, Rananim, You say that for a bloke to be accepted into the big machinery, they have to have seen all this buissness has got to throw at them. What does flying an old piece of metal tubing and fabric, in god knows where with god knows type of SOP have in common with flying for a big commercial airline? The operational aspects are quite different and the ways of going about solving problems are light years away. Certainly, weather and natural laws of physics apply in both cases but the outcome is very different between the two types of operation.

By experience, I would like to referr to RELEVANT experience. That's why a decent operator will specify a requirement of so and so many hours of ME/IR. When Brittania was recruiting years ago, they factored SEP time by 0.1. That says something I think. It might not be fair to people trying to break into their first job, but they're just trying to sort out relevant experience from irrelevant. Do you get my point? Ofcourse, it's a humbling experience to fly SEP and live on dogsmess in the outback. But seriously, if this is what's required for someone to be able to have the right attitude towards flying, perhaps they shouldn't have started with it from the beginning.

This is not to say that I'm against building time towing gliders, flying parachutists and so on. It's made me a better pilot in regards to visual approaches and visualizing a the flightpath (actual and desired) and hand/eye coordination. But other than that it was mostly for the fun of it and knowing that it was taking me somewhere. It didn't teach me how to plan my descents with respect to wind, ATC requirements or aircraft weights and all the other stuff that goes into flying the bigger stuff. Perhaps I'm cutting corners here in my reasoning but I hope you understand what I'm trying to get at.

Regards/ LnS

[Tigs2]

Rananim

The chance of a student brain surgeon (who must be a consultant surgeon anyway) spotting a mistake in the slice of a blade, and notifying the mistake before it is made is slim (That is why in 2004-2005 2000 people died as a result of human error world wide in aviation, and 750 000 people died in the same year in the USA alone from medical human error - YES 750 000!!).

We are actually good now in mitigating human error in aviation. It is easier for your FO to spot your mis-set altimeter or the fact you are cutting the corner to the ILS than in the medical setting above. I wonder how many times you have made a mistake, then spotted it and rectified it without telling the FO, just to save face?? - Only you know!!

Your anology is very worrying for the future of aviation

Let me try an analogy;can a med student offer concrete advice to a brain surgeon,should he even try?Doesnt mean the brain surgeon wont seek a second opinion because he thinks hes infallible;he'll just seek it from another experienced brain surgeon.

I think here you are implying, do not seek advice from the 300 hour guy but just another Captain. Well you don't have another Captain on board on the flight deck do you? Just a guy with 300 hours.

I leave you with a final thought

'Experience is the thing that you get 10 seconds after you needed it!

After 17 hours military flying, i had an experience which i successfully handled, which lead to a prestigeous award. Neither my Squadron Commander, my Wing Commander or my Group Captain had had a similar experience in a total of over 90 years of flying 'experience' between them.

Moral of the story is - 'Experience normally comes with time in the job, but you just never know what that rookie has done'. It's not to late to learn before you retire with your family. Don't let the young rookie be that guy that knowingly allows you to take him to the scene of the crash! You are the mentor, you are the father figure, you set the conditions. I can name a large number of pilots with 15 000 hours plus who killed all their passengers, and had, as a major factor, ignored the (correct) input from their percieved inexperienced FO's.

[TACHO]

I dont think if I flew for 1000 years I would have assimilated all that aviation could throw at me!:bored: Think you have the wrong impression of low hours F/Os, most are a humble bunch who are only too aware of thier lack of experience. Yet by disqualifying them to the sin bin because they haven't been around in an otter for most of thier youth you have effectively made it a single crew operation, which IS dangerous. Suggest you read 'the naked pilot'.

he'll just seek it from another experienced brain surgeon.

Comparisons between brain surgeons is null and void I am afraid. Can a med student offer advice to a qualified brain surgeon? Well erm yes actually he can? it just depends on whether the surgeon is receptive to fresh input, or feels that he is so superior that he doesn't have to even consider opening his ears.

Overall I noticed both you and Bob have failed to answer my question on how an inexperienced FO might gain the oh so important 3000 or so hours before you will listen to him and .... God forbid.... actually let him fly the aeroplane he is qualified to fly on. Dont tell me sitting watching you and raising the flap lever for 3000 hours counts. I think all that would teach him is how undervalued he is.

Oh before I go found this, thought you might like to watch it, you know.... remind you of the good ol' days:E

http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photogallery/Videos/2006-2-25_TheHighTheMighty.wmv

Happy landings one and all.

Tacho

[Rananim]

Look,we're up against a brick wall here arent we?The brain surgeon was just an analogy,maybe a poor one.The point is that all experience is invaluable in this business and many others.But experienced crews can still make mistakes I grant you,so its not a watertight guarantee but rather it offers the best chance.Let me try another example.
Gimli glider..well-known case of a 767 that ran out of fuel over Winnipeg somewhere.The pilot and co-pilot were both VERY EXPERIENCED.Been there,seen it all,done it all.The Captain was a recreational glider pilot and the FO an ex-military guy.What saved them that day was airmanship and experience,not familiarity with '67 line operation.What they drew upon had nothing to do with the ability to fly a '67 under normal line conditions.The FO knew of a disused military field from his former days as a mil pilot and the Captain knew how to sideslip and fly a deadstick landing.These things arent taught,they're not in some airline manual that you can acquire instantaneously.They're part and parcel of the most important attribute a pilot can have;namely experience.
Now,lets for the sake of argument put 2 different pilots up front in that '67 on that day.The Captain has hours sure,but his experience is largely confined to day-in day-out highly-automated airline ops.He joined out of flight school and worked his way up on 73's to left seat '67.He's reasonably conscientious,practices raw data manual flying every now and then and performs well in his sim checks.He's seen one dead-stick landing in the sim in his entire career.He doesnt fly recreationally and thinks you cant side-slip a '67,only a Cessna.And the co-pilot is straight out of flight school,he's got 600 hours under his belt,300 on type.He's conscientious too,knows all the SOP's and is a pleasure to fly with.I'll ask you a question.If you were a passenger on that flight,which crew would you want?We'll assume that both crews fall into the same trap of not loading enough fuel.Be honest now,thats all I ask.

I cant reiterate just how important experience is.Without it,airmanship is impossible.It provides self-confidence and the ability to intuit a situation and think laterally.Dont think for one moment,Tigs,that your ability to overcome untested waters was down to anything but experience and the self-confidence that prevented the slow creep of panic that would have subsumed a lesser pilot.

You know,people always cite the tenerife collision as the reason why we have CRM today.Always listen to your co-pilot,they say.Actually,all that crash demonstrates is that steep cockpit-gradients are not only flawed but lethal.If ever there was a crash to demonstrate that inexperienced pilots dont belong in the right seat of a commercial airliner,this is it.An experienced high-timer in the right seat of that KLM 747 would have prevented the Captain from taking off at all costs.If he had had the experience,he would have had the self-esteem and confidence and he would have acted.Or the KAL cargo out of Stansted where the co-pilot let the Captain fly the aircraft into the ground following an ADI freeze.Or the 320 in Bahrain where BOTH pilots didnt know how to fly.Never mind the 320,they didnt know how to fly period.Or the 737 in Sharm-el-Sheikh,another case where fundamental basic skills were lacking.I could go on and on.You dont solve these by putting cadet pilots in the cockpit and telling the Captain "Listen to the guy next to you".You're telling the Captain to listen to someone who cant possibly know anything yet.Its not his fault,its just a fact of life.You solve it by ensuring that both the Captain and co-pilot are experienced and that both are listening to each other.

Of course,the new breed of airlines dont want this,they want the cadets who pay for their training,and they'll lower the leftseat upgrade threshold because they cant find anyone else to fill the seat.Dont tell me its about CRM.Its economics.

[TACHO]

Rananim, in response to you question I would obviously say you want the more experienced guy:rolleyes:. BUT...and its a big But, if you had offered a third option ... i'd prefer to have them both. And in reality, in a modern jet airliner that is exactly what I have got. IE TWO PILOTS. this is the point you are missing, it is a multi crew environment:ugh:. I appreciate what you are saying with regards to experience. However by ignoring the guy in the RHS you are only steepening the cockpit gradient. It is all good and well saying that we should be shallowing it by only putting experienced guys in the RHS, but again you have failed to address how one may go about gaining experience.


And the co-pilot is straight out of flight school,he's got 600 hours under his belt,300 on type.He's conscientious too,knows all the SOP's and is a pleasure to fly with

So 50% of his experience is on the aeroplane he will fly for the rest of his life. just out of flight school, therefore books and limitations will be fresh in his memory. No bad habits. wont get confused and revert to previous behaviour under times of high stress (as often happens, of course being a champion of excellent crm you will know that:}) You imply that when one becomes a commercial pilot you simply get out of your cessna and up the steps into the big stuff. What about Type rating courses, CRM courses, 40+ simulator sessions that involve very little normal flight at all, base checks, line checks, line training ...etc...? "Knows all his SOPS and is a pleasure to fly with"... for me thats half the battle won. Who would YOU rather... a cockpit where the FO is scared of doing anything lest the captains ever so experienced had smite him from above, or alternatively a cockpit in which the atmosphere is relaxed, ideas flow freely regardless of whether it is an normal or an abnormal situation?

Its not about economics at all, its about the fact that commercial aviation is growing at an astounding rate and people will apply to these cadet schemes (myself included) because they know to sit in a cessna, twin otter, tiger moth...whatever and then attempt to get a job will be nigh on impossible (or hard at least) , due to the fact that there are pole greasers at every stage of thier training and career, who wont give them a job because they lack experience yet they have no way of gaining experience...because they can't get a job. Sound familiar? probably:O

Happy landings.

Tacho

[low n' slow]

"Always listen to your co-pilot,they say.Actually,all that crash demonstrates is that steep cockpit-gradients are not only flawed but lethal".

"You're telling the Captain to listen to someone who cant possibly know anything yet".

I think you're exagerating a bit here to get you're point accross and I'll take that into consideration. But the inexperienced RHS guy, I would argue, is in everyday operation fully capable of knowing when something is wrong.
I've picked up captains on altimetersettings, powersettings, gear, and so on. In safe day to day operation this is whats needed. I fully agree that your example on the gimli glider perhaps would not have had the same outome with a less experienced crew. This is however an extreme situation and we can just hope that these types of events only happen to a crewmember when he/she has passed the 50000 mark in the logbook.

In the meantime, a commander still has to listen to his copilot. What would you say if your 350 hour guy picked you up on an incorrect altimeter setting with a particularily low pressure in high terrain? Would you listen? Even though he couldn't possibly know anything yet? Would you take his advice to select gear down BEFORE the GPWS would have sounded? Not as extreme situations as the gimli glider but still potentially VERY dangerous. These small details are what makes everyday operation safe and it's dependant of that both pilots are listening to each other.

/LnS

[Rananim]

However by ignoring the guy in the RHS you are only steepening the cockpit gradient.

If you think I said that,then my whole post was pointless.The perfect CRM model(as in UA232)is when both pilots are experienced and when the Captain automatically accepts and trusts the input from the right seat.

books and limitations will be fresh in his memory

Admirable but what will that achieve?

Knows all his SOPS and is a pleasure to fly with

Again admirable but it wont help one iota in an abnormal situation.

You imply that when one becomes a commercial pilot you simply get out of your cessna and up the steps into the big stuff.

I certainly dont imply that.You seem to though.

but again you have failed to address how one may go about gaining experience.


Actually,I detailed it quite thoroughly in my first post.Airlines like to see a fair bit of single crew time(NO,not flt school..) on the resume as it establishes self-reliance.They also like to see some multi-crew and high performance(turboprop) so they know the candidate already knows about teamwork and that his scan is up to speed for high perf jets.Some will look for high perf(BE1900 or metroliner for example) command time too.In the States,theres a whole range of outfits that can offer this experience before applying to the majors.Instructing is seen less favorably as the experience is repetitive although disciplined.Military guys get an open invitation;the training is the best and the experience all-encompassing.If it doesnt work like that in the UK,then may I recommend you look abroad.To go from flight school to an airliner might be tempting but you will miss out big time and regret it.

Its not about economics at all, its about the fact that commercial aviation is growing at an astounding rate and people will apply to these cadet schemes (myself included) because they know to sit in a cessna, twin otter, tiger moth...whatever and then attempt to get a job will be nigh on impossible

So it is about economics then isnt it?But at any rate,I never suggested you sit in a Cessna or a Tiger Moth for too long anyways...;);)

[TACHO]

Rananim,

I am growing bored of this tit for tat:zzz:, who said what. etc. The fact of the matter and the gist of my point (which I will write here so you dont have to fish too deep for meaning through my other posts on this thread, as it would appear you keep mistaking my meaning:confused:.) is that to suggest that a low hours FO cannot pick up a captain on an error, is very wrong in a modern cockpit environment. I could see such a comment being very valid in the 60's, in todays environment no chance.
I take your point about power gradients. However which is easier, and more beneficial. A) to add one of greater experience to the RHS (which, some might argue would create a clash) B) accept that flying a jetliner is a two man job:ok:, everybody has to start somewhere, and at least CONSIDER that an FO (who is actually qualified on type regardless of experience.) may now and again have a point, if he is wrong, then so what...he is learning and you have at least given him something from the exercise.
Again I suggest you read David Beaty's book, the naked pilot. You would be suprised at the amount of times he cites accidents that have happened because the FO sat perfectly silent. Not because he had a lack of knowledge or experience, but because the cockpit environment convinced him his opinion didnt matter:8.
Military guys get an open invitation;the training is the best and the experience all-encompassing.If it doesnt work like that in the UK,then may I recommend you look abroad.To go from flight school to an airliner might be tempting but you will miss out big time and regret it.

Thanks, but happy where I am, and how I got here. with regards to military pilots being the best, And having an all so encompassing experience etc... May I suggest you steer well clear of that can of worms.:=

Happy landings

T

[Bob Lenahan]

ummmm, WOW.
Not going to touch all of this. Some of the responses to my last post consist of: misquotes, putting words in my mouth, and also the ridiculous ones. None of these need responding to.
BTW, I never said experienced pilots don't make mistakes. I stand behind the post I made. If you wish to disagree, it's okay.

[Rananim]

Normally I would just bow out with a deep sigh but this is an important issue so I'll persevere.Let me make it simple so you wont misread.
-CADET AIRLINE PILOTS CAN PICK UP AN ALTIMETER ERROR,fLY AN ILS,DO THE PAPERWORK,HANDLE THE RADIO AND DO ALL OF THE MUNDANE LINE FLYING TASKS.My issue is nothing to do with that.
-However,when a situation develops ,they have neither the confidence,knowledge or airmanship to make any useful contribution,leaving the skipper alone.They can provide perfunctory assistance and that is all.
-Naked Pilot?Already read it but thanks for your suggestion.
-Military pilots?May or may not be suited to civilian flying.Depends on the individual.But their training is good,at least in the US.

Over and out.:cool:

[TACHO]

they have neither the confidence,knowledge or airmanship to make any useful contribution,leaving the skipper alone.They can provide perfunctory assistance and that is all

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I am going to stop repsonding after this post, because, to be perfectly honest between the pair of you, you and Bob are proving my point far better than I could ever hope to. :ok:. Suggest you read the thread below entitled...'what makes a good captain'

Happy landings. changing frequency.......NOW!

Tacho.

[Tigs2]

Rananim and Bob

Thia has to be a wind up! Surely neither of you are real pilots.

they have neither the confidence,knowledge or airmanship to make any useful contribution,leaving the skipper alone.They can provide perfunctory assistance and that is all.

With Skippers like you, a young pilot would never have any confidence or self esteem. You are both the classic example of what is bad in our proffession. I would love to know your real names, because if i was ever on an aircraft as a passenger and heard them on the intercom, i would stand up and ask to leave the flight. Do you not see that whilst your attitude was the norm in the 70's it is now completely outdated with current world-wide accepted doctrine towards flight safety:=

[john_tullamarine]

(a) chaps, can we relax a bit, please ? .. the discussions are valid but there are no sheep stations at stake in the PPRuNe environment. Belligerent argument only serves to turn other folk away from the thread and that defeats the aim of the game ..

(b) actually, the medical analogies are quite reasonable. The medical world has been looking to adopt a similar sort of CRM approach to life as we see in the flying game ...

[low n' slow]

Rananim:
-CADET AIRLINE PILOTS CAN PICK UP AN ALTIMETER ERROR,fLY AN ILS,DO THE PAPERWORK,HANDLE THE RADIO AND DO ALL OF THE MUNDANE LINE FLYING TASKS.My issue is nothing to do with that.
-However,when a situation develops ,they have neither the confidence,knowledge or airmanship to make any useful contribution,leaving the skipper alone.They can provide perfunctory assistance and that is all.

I see we've gone a bit past eachother. I think that in many cases we've discussed just this mundane day to day operation and how to make it safe. How to pick up on the small things that need to be corrected in a cockpit environment that is plagued by a steep power distance relation. We can never know how one will react to an engine failure, smoke in cabin, engine fire and so on. These are stressful situations and much as you draw all newbies over one comb, I think we can draw some of the more experienced guys over the same.

Certainly, someone who has been subjected to a similar event will be the better pilot, but this is one thing we can't provide in training. We can't expect that all pilots have experienced a dual enginefailure or a fire that can't be extiguished. Therefore, we can only do the next best thing. To make sure that all details deviating from the required track, be corrected. The aim of the game is to keep the operation on the safe side at all times and this is where the ability of the FO to speak up on even small things comes into play.

/LnS

[TACHO]

:DHere here Low n Slow, Finally someone is talking a bit of sense.!

Tacho

[Capt Pit Bull]

Training resources are a hell of a lot better than they used to be.

Real emergencies are a hell of a lot rarer than they used to be.

There is no longer the same relation between flight time and experience that there might have been 30 years ago.

The vast majority of accidents occur because of an error chain, and anyone can break it. Even the pax in the back at Kegworth identified which engine was malfunctioning.

I've flown with a lot of (originally 200 hour) cadets, and I'll tell you, if you select the correct people before you train them they get real sharp real quick. It was an honour.

Frankly the 'one man bands' here are simply identifying their own shortfalls as leaders: namely the inability to make use of the skills of their subordinates.

pb

[Rananim]

Low n'Slow,

We can never know how one will react to an engine failure, smoke in cabin, engine fire and so on.

Yes,thats why we need two experienced pilots.

What Bob and myself were saying,if any of you had bothered to read our posts carefully,was that the First Officer is a crucial member of the team.He is the right arm of the skipper or should be.But he's gotta earn this right.You earn respect,its never automatic.

to add one of greater experience to the RHS (which, some might argue would create a clash) B) accept that flying a jetliner is a two man job, everybody has to start somewhere, and at least CONSIDER that an FO (who is actually qualified on type regardless of experience.) may now and again have a point, if he is wrong, then so what...he is learning and you have at least given him something from the exercise.


Yes,everyone must start somewhere,but this is what we're debating surely?You dont start in the right seat of a 757 with 300 hours under your belt.
The only people who benefit from that are the beancounters who get cheap malleable labor who wont complain about T&C and who will pay for their training.The Captain wont benefit and neither will the passengers.Two experienced pilots together rarely clash.In fact,the opposite is true.The calm on the flight deck is directly proportional to the amount of trust the left seat has in the right seat.Perfect CRM exists almost on a telepathic wavelength.You know what the other guy is thinking/feeling,nothing has to be really spelt out.And how do you know?Experience.

Finally,the post from Capt Pit Bull is the most distressing of all.The young guys know no better,they cant be blamed.But,here presumably is an experienced pilot who not only thinks training can replace experience and that accidents dont happen that much anymore(reallly?)but that its all our fault for not recognizing the skills of a 300 hour pilot and managing his skills???Just what skills are you referring to?A 300 hour pilot has no skills.None.A 300 hour pilot who recognizes that fact has one thing going for him;honesty.

If you select the right people,they get real sharp real quick?Sharp at what?Sharp at flow scans and reading checklists and flying an ILS?Yes,I agree.Important skills but they're just the bare backbone.The real skills that we need on the flight deck of a large passenger jet come only through experience.You probably counter that the Captain has these in abundance and so it doesnt matter.Well okay,but that brings us back to the steep gradient and the plethora of accidents that have happened as a result of just such a flightdeck.Kegworth.gerona.tenerife.Bahrain.Staines.On and on and on.You probably next counter that two experienced pilots can also screw up.Thats right.Nothing is watertight.We must however,play the percentages.What crew combination gives us the best chance of combatting a bad situation when a whole load of passengers lives are at stake???Let the new guys learn their skills flying cargo on a 9 seater with an autopilot that doesnt work.Let them shoot a dme-arc non precision with no FMS in IMC and no fancy avionics.Let them experience mod to severe icing at 14000' with only boots and the speed slowly coming back and see what they make of it.They'll soon learn self-reliance and adrenalin-control and when their time comes to move on and up,they'll thank the Good Lord that they didnt have to learn from their mistakes with two or three hundred passengers sitting behind them.And yes those experiences are relevant to commercial jet flying.Every one of them.Airmanship is not type-specific.Never has been,never will be.

[Sliding Doors]

Whilst we're at it how about getting the FO's to dress bare foot in animal skins, live in caves, use outside toilets and write on slates with chalk :ugh::ugh:
As an ex FO my worst Capt was the Training Capt. Ex mil, been there, seen it, done it better than anybody else! He'd not even trust my guidance on taxyway routings and I had the most incidents of poor airmanship with him. He was no better with other Capts unless their resume was as experienced as his ( as if that woudl ever be possible!).CRM and common sense don't only come from aviation.
Different training Capt now. What did I learn most from the departed one???? How not to do it.
He made my life awkward for some time, but I always spoke out if I thought he was wrong in a professional and respectful manner. Hang in there new guys, many (me included) appreciate where the next generation have to come from.

[Right Way Up]

Worst f/o I flew with, wa ex US military fast jet jock, ex widebody jet Captain, who I wrongly assumed would be up to the job and more. I learned something that day.
Best f/o was a cadet with a years experience on type. We had an extremely difficult day but his training and "common sense" provided me with as much support as I could have expected from any colleague on the flight deck. (be that Captain or F/O).
I think we have to accept that different regions of the world operate differently. It does not make one country more right than the other.