First Officer "assertiveness" versus Captain's "authority"???

[Dave]

As a First Officer you are expected to be assertive if the Captain is doing something unsafe......

But....

As a Captain you are legally in command and responsible for the aircraft.



This brings about a number of questions....

If you are a First Officer and a Captain is doing something you think is dangerous, how would YOU approach it? What if he/she carried on with the dangerous thing? Could you legally take control? Would you take control?

etc etc.....

Please can someone advise/discuss.....

Thanks.

[CaptKremin]

Lemme think about it.....

[Iva harden]

You would obviously say something to the guy, see what his thoughts are about what he is doing, if you can get an understanding then you can make an informed decision about what you are going to do at the time, if you deem it to be unsafe, tell him, see what his reaction is, I as a captain would have no problem if my FO questioned what I was doing especially if it was not standard. Taking control straight away before exploring the issues is quite an extreme action, however it depends on the phase of flight and how much time you have to act. If in doubt speak to a Captain you trust see what he thinks, take his advice, speak to a trainer if necessary. Hope this helps

[Albert Driver]

Actually it is perfectly clear cut.

The F/O is authorised, indeed required, to take whatever action is necessary to ensure the safety of the aircraft.

But, and it's a big BUT....

He has to be able to justify his action at the subsequent Inquiry.

He needs to be crystal clear on the grounds before taking the action.
Get it wrong and he loses his job and may be prosecuted BUT.... most pilots who have been there would say it is better to be alive and unemployed rather than the alternative.

As with everything in aviation, it helps to have some of this thought through before it happens.

[Iva harden]

Albertget it wrong and he loses his job and may be prosecuted

I am not sure that is correct, I Know that the company I work for would not do that and to be quite honest I do not know of any company that would. If, however there was an accident as a result of said action then it would be more complicated.

[Dave]

Its not from a situation that has happened, but just thinking it through for the future if the situation was to arise.

Thanks.

[flash2002]

Well it is a very dificult question if we don't know what phase of flight this is.

For landing, tell the captain to go-around. If he doesn't tell him again. If he then doesn't go around, take control of the aircraft and do it yourself. And get the tapes pulled on the ground.
A go-around might be expensive, but if there is enough fuel... its probably the safest course of action.

In other phases, ask him what he is doing!

[Albert Driver]

I take it we're talking "in extremis" here, not merely a situation which is covered by standard operating procedures such as initiating a go-around or calling "Stop".

Captains have been known to suddenly lose the plot and do something quite irrational. The Concorde which landed with nearly dry tanks is a good example where the co-pilot was presented with just such a dilemma.

Of course the co-pilot will question the decision....but then what?

[Dave]

Albert Driver, yes thats what I mean, if the Captain is doing something irrational.

[Iva harden]

Treat it like anything in life, if you saw someone in the street behaving irrationally you would ask yourself a few questions and come to a decision as to intervene or not, common sense should prevail and each situation weighed up. No two situations are the same and there is no golden answer.

[Wino]

A go-around might be expensive

This is part of the problem in people's thinking.

A go around is NOT expensive. A320/737 circuit is somewhere around 1800-2400 lbs of gas... (from the last possible second nearest the ground IOW most fuel used) It is not a cycle on the engines or anything else. so that makes it 3-400 gallons of gas.

To an airline that is CHUMP change, especially when weighed against the consequences of a mistake... Even in the A300-777 range of aircraft we were aren't talking about more than 700 gallons of gas or so.

NO one should even CONSIDER expense when contemplating a go around. I actually let an F/O go around twice and land the 3rd time. It was gusty windy in pouring rain, he called his own go arounds when he got uncomfortable before things got out of hand and he landed nice and safe the 3rd time.

On the debrief afterwards he asked "why I didn't take it?" I said he was doing fine and getting himself out of trouble...and next year he was going to be captain and then what would he do if it was windy or something else happened.

Said the same thing to the chief pilot after the flight attendants reported it. Chief said "Well done!" F/O in question has been an excellent captain for the last 6 years.

Moral of the story, GO arounds are cheap, and Good captain's should have "A wide strike zone" as long as it isn't unsafe...

Cheers
Wino

[flash8]

If we have something to thank Van Zanten for, it was the catalyst that started the CRM ball rolling. Of course in some Asian carriers the FO would still let the ac run into the ground.. but that's another story.

In Western culture, it is expected that any decision that the FO is unhappy with would be challenged overtly.

None of this "isn't that the ground commander?" (as said by one 727 FO who failed to initiate action before a CFIT)

I don't think this thread serves any purpose (perhaps 20 years ago) as in a Multi Crew environment in the 21st century most if not all the younger FO would I like to think be assertive enough to challenge any potential issue.

Eventually all Multi Crew pilots will have gone through CRM, and the old pre CRM dinosaurs will have retired. I think that in itself will reap major safety benefits.

[Two's in]

A go-around might be expensive

If you think a go-around's expensive, try a smoking hole in the ground.

The other aspect of the cockpit gradient not often considered is when it is completely flat - ie. Mate A and Mate B off for a day out together where nobody ever really takes command of the aircraft. Works fine for Ops normal, but when the flashing lights come on and the "whoop-whoops" start, it rapidly goes downhill. I don't know if it's more of a Military crew issue, where the Aircraft Captain may not always be the "ranking officer", or whether there are any laid back 4 ringers out there happy to sit back and let the Right seater run the show.

[Albert Driver]

I don't think this thread serves any purpose (perhaps 20 years ago) as in a Multi Crew environment in the 21st century most if not all the younger FO would I like to think be assertive enough to challenge any potential issue.

Maybe if you actually read the thread....?

Dave, who's Profile states that he's a qualified airline pilot, posed the question : "What if he/she carried on with the dangerous thing?"

As I understand it, his question is not just about taking control, but taking Command. Challenge doesn't necessarily resolve a conflict, despite the impression often given by conventional CRM teaching.

[gatbusdriver]

Firstly, if an FO said "go around" I would G/A then ask questions later. The chap sitting next to me is fully qualified, therefore I would like to think he called G/A for a good reason.

As for captains being unsafe, and whether to intervene. There are ways to do this, and ways not to.

I flew for just over 8 years before getting my command this year. I never had any captain that didn't listen to me. I always treated them with respect, and posed questions if I wasn't happy. If they couldn't justify what they were doing, then I generally was right. If they could, I was generally wrong (more often the case).

If you still aren't happy, keep going at him. It took me 4 attempts to get a captain to de-ice one time. In that case I had decided that I wouldn't operate if we didn't (obviously it never went that far).

[Farty Flaps]

So you're going into samos, its august, the wind is northerlyat 25 kts. The Capt has been checked out in various types in samos and has seen it all.Specific conditions clearly briefed. The FO with all the bells and whistles courtesy of daddy and 600 hrs. He calls a go around as you turn final on 09 at one mile/300feet. positive/negative gusts of 20kt etc,/ flap relief surf type thing going on but all fairly normal cat c samos with the switching winds. he screams go around as per his crm/fctm/touchy feely inexperienced out of depth background attitude..What do you do?
Me I land if i think im in the box and disregard his lack of experince induced , touch feely backed lack of judgement. Only gained by time on line. . I'm the captain I have the cat c qualification ..hard earned... he didint listen to the brief, didnt absorb the part c brief. ( he did find time to flirt with the girls for 4 hrstho) and panicked as he is in a Jet in the uk because hes rich and reasonably educated when he should be in a turbo prop accumilating experince and exposure to the myraid undefinable variances he will meet on his way to being able to make a genuine crm contribution.
ps : for "his" read "his /her"

[beamer]

FF

Understand your frustration but did you ensure that the FO in question had fully comprehended the written brief for Samos and had you emphasised the probabliity of speed fluctuations/turbulenence etc in your verbal brieifng ? If so then your level of experience commensurate with the C qualification should be sufficient to overcome the FO's misgivings - trouble is from the position of a third party, what if you were making a cods of the approach - at what point would you have expected the FO to actually say something and if necessary call a go-round. It is the classic CRM dilemma which most of us have experienced - 'I know what I'm doing' but he/she does'nt because they have not got the experience to fully comprehend what is or what is not normal given a certain set of circumstances. I think that there is a problem in the industry with a certain number of low houred pilots who have found themselves in the rhs of large aircraft with little or no real experience of aircraft handling in their fledgling careers - its not their fault per se, daddy had paid for their licence and the ailrines have been eager to snap up cheap labour. They can have the greatest SOP's in the world but by definition they do not have the experience which perhaps would have be gained in smaller aircraft in a longer 'apprenticeship' before graduating to large jet aircraft. This is not a case of saying 'I had it tough, so should you...' more a case of pragmatism based upon a rather longer career.

[Farty Flaps]

Beamer...Thats what I meant

How dare you incinerate that i would make a cods of the approach. Im a skygod dont you know:}

[flash2002]

@ two's-in
sounds really cool if you quote like that. But you should have read the rest of my post as well.:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

I clearly stated that it is often the safest way to go-around. As long as you have enough fuel offcourse..........or your not on fire
As said before there is no single answer. But I guess that's why we get paid.

@ FF

Most FO's will know their manuals/ airfield briefs etc...:= You should brief it and make sure he understands it (maybe an interactive brief?) Maybe you just briefed too quickly in all your godly experience and he just said yes because he could not follow you.

And if this is a problem which constantly happens at cat c airfields you should confront the company. And make sure they also qualify the f/o's as cat c. And if the company doesn't listen maybe a couple of go-arounds will get their attention.

I hope you don't meet the f/o who gets the tapes pulled and files an asr against you for not going around when he called for it.:E

[Farty Flaps]

Loking at your other posts ou are quite clearly an f/o with a chip about your position. You'll make a lovely Captain someday and lets see then if your utopian ideals survive the upgrade. I'll wager they dont . If you have done Human peformance youll remember the bit about how different personalities dont transsition too well. might be worth a re-read.
Your simplistic retort about the goings on at cat c airfields and going around to make apoint betrays your lack of exposure to A the airfield in question and B the sizeable percentage of arrogant little twerps who confuse wealth for talent and knowledge. Im confident in my management, crm and flying skills and decision making that if it came to the scenario you paint I would welcome the asr to highlight the hypothetical failings of a colleague. That is to say after 12000 command hours I have had no complaints as to my interpersonal or professional interaction or decision making. So bring it on.
I hope you get an upgrade soon.:ok:
Be safe

PS Aplogies in advance to the many many low hr talented cadets i have also flown with. This arguement doesnt extend to you all. A generalisation that the good ones will recognise.

[flash2002]

First of all FF I have no doubts about your skills in anyway. But your wrong:p I enjoy the RHS very much:ok: LHS is still some years away.

Your right btw my company doesn't fly to cat c airfields unfortunately. I don't really see what is simplistic about stating you should put an experienced f/o in the rhs when going to cat c airfields. Is that a stupid idea????

I just disagree with you on the point you are trying to make.
IMHO most f/o's / captains do a good job. There is only few out there who start screaming speed each time there is a change in wind on final app, also captains btw.

Furthermore being a good or bad pilot has nothing to do with how much money daddy owns. Most f/o's paid for all their training themselves! And worked very hard to get where they are.
Do you really have the bad luck of constantly flying with f/o's who call for a go-around at samos?!??

And I am sorry but no matter what you think of transitioning into the LHS, if the other guy calls for a go-around, I think you should have a very very good reason not too. Like no fuel to try it another time or being on fire. That has nothing to do with an utopian picture of the world. No re read of that HPL section required btw I still remember it.

There is absolutely no defense for saying "I am trained to do this and the F/O got it wrong. And that's why I continued" He is trained as well! And by going around he gains experience. And he will see that the situation at samos is exactly the same as the previous attempt.

I agree totally with gatbusdriver, if there is time go-around. And if you have
doubt's about anything a captain does, ask him why!

[Bob Lenahan]

Seems to me some people confuse training with experience.
Can you fly an ILS, read the altimeter correctly? I'm sure you can.
Experience? That's another matter.

[Rananim]

You are a crew, and you operate as such - if he is uncomfortable, your briefing is deficient - if he isn't listening, it is your responsibility to make sure he is.

He might be uncomfortable because he doesnt know what hes doing and shouldnt be there in the first place.You cant brief for a lack of experience.

You ALWAYS go around on the call, and he learns from the fact that you LATER tell him it was unnecessary to call a go-around in those conditions stated.

Absolutely,IF the crew make-up is TWO EXPERIENCED pilots.If its not,then the Captain must make his own decision.

In what world do you think that your experience enables you to continue in strong windshear??!

Some airports are problematic which make them cat C.Terrain,windshear etc.If you discontinue the approach every time your inexperienced co-pilot says hes not happy,you may never land.Inexperience has no business in a right seat of a jetliner at any time,and especially into airports like Samos or Katmandu for example.

[low n' slow]

What's this about not having the FO cat c airport qualified when going to one?
Both crewmembers need the sign in the loggbook to say they are qualified. And by qualified it means reading up on the special requirements for that airport, having seen the approach as an observer OR having flown the approaches in the sim. Both pilots need this. Being the FO and acting as an observer at the same time is not acceptable.

The FO might have been a bit touchy feely about it, but had he been properly qualified he would have been more in the loop and would've had a higher threshold for what's acceptable or not. It is most likely an experience thing, but in experience, proper training is the fundamental building blocks. I would call the training manager and discuss it...

As regards to "stop" and "go-around" there is no such thing as not following up on those calls. If I would have called a GA and this was not commenced withing 5 seconds I would have said it again. If no reaction, treat it as an incapacitation and take control if you deem it absolutely necesary. If the result of all of this is no GA and a safe landing, I'd file a report. That's how serious I think this issue is. There is no way of knowing what the reason for going around is (if it's in VMC) and there's no time to discuss it in that situation. It may screw up the days schedule if tight turnarounds are planned, but other than that, there's nothing except a few gallons of fuel to loose.

/LnS

[peatair]

This is an old chestnut! In modern times it would be a very poor captain who could not be "challenged" by the 1st Officer. They are "supposed" to be a team! Surely, the 2 pilots ought to be communicating all the time.

I've lost track of how to find it now but there were some accidents on 3 pilot operations which might have been prevented. The two pilots "handling" ignored the 3rd pilot (who was often rather junior in rank).

As I'm now retired it would be good to have some reassurance that this old "rank" etc. nonsense was history! Give the question itself, it probably isn't.

[Rananim]

I am sure that you are not trying to wind people up

I never wind people up.I just speak straight which some people dont like in this pc world.

other half of the crew is certified by competent authority.

Being certified is one thing.Knowing what you're doing is quite another.Cadet/junior pilots might well be recognized in the UK as having the right to recommend a go-around on a 737/757 into Samos or elsewhere.We dont have cadet pilots in a 737/757.Period.We carefully distinguish between beeing qualified and being able.

This is exactly the attitude leading to CFIT or collision with other traffic for example.

Actually,no.As all co-pilots in the majors in the States have good experience,the cockpit gradient is normally shallow.Two experienced crews can screw it up(cali) but if you look at a lot of accidents,you will see the common denominator was a steep cockpit gradient.NOT THE CAPTAIN LISTENING TO HIS CO-PILOT.But the co-pilot not fulfilling his true role as the experienced right arm becase he was simply not able to do so.Two of your(ie UK) last accidents are classic cases;Gerona and Kegworth.There was no experience in the right seat to act as senior advisor/caretaker.The skipper is the manager but he's not by any means omniscient so he needs good sound advice/assistance.

In what world do you think that your experience enables you to continue in strong windshear??! Are you some god who out-flies windshear

If you fly into Samos mid-afternoon in the summer,you will get windhsear,that why its briefed as cat c(just as some approaches trigger EGPWS warnings but its part of the brief...).There are occasions when you will discontinue.Its a judgement call.I would never advocate a pilot trying to out-fly persistent severe windshear just as I would never advocate a pilot with 300 hours sitting in the rs of a 737.

I think we understand each other now.

[gatbusdriver]

Listening to your f/o call go-around (and doing so) is not unsafe.

Presumeably, with the weather forecast, fuel has been carried for such an eventuality. Once the missed approach has been flown, and above msa, you can find out why you went around. If you think you were 'in the box' and should have landed, explain this and suggest another approach. This time he is even more prepared for the conditions.

If he calls go-around on the next approach, IMHO, you still go-around.
What if he has seen something that you haven't.

The most chilling (last) words I've heard on a CVR is 'I told you so'.

If you have issues, take it up with the training department. If you end up in KGS because the f/o called g/a on you every approach (when you think he shouldn't), something will soon be done about it.

[hoggsnortrupert]

"QUOTE" the point is that unless you are monitoring the ASI constantly, you may not have seen airspeeds that are so low as to be unsafe. Your experience in flying in conditions with variable winds is irrelevant - if won't stop you dying if the windshear is greater than forecast and so great that you are close to stalling.
What the hell are you doing getting into this situation in the first place.
Any Competent Pilot, speeds up his SCAN, and PRIORITISES IE the ASI, if you have any chance of encountering these conditions, also if local knowledge plays apart, why was it not briefed prior:
If you use any strip or runway that has a cliff or mountain at the end of it, you will get WIND SHEER::ugh::ugh::ugh:
As for S.O.P's they are there for the foolhardy to follow implicitly, and for the Sensible to use with Captains discretion:
Now when to use discretion??? amongst some today it does not exist, and some will and indeed have followed a S.O.P to their demise:
Poor wife & Kids, but they adhered to company S.O.P's.:E:E:E
H/Snort.

[Caudillo]

Interesting discussion, but FF why the constant mentions of daddy and wealth? No, obviously nobody'd suggest that because you did it the hard way, blood, sweat and tears and all that, that you weren't more deserving of those who have the good fortune to be in your presence whilst you complete another near miracle in Samos. However, whilst we're berating those with, is it 600hrs, for doing what I imagine you never did - ie scrabble around at the bottom, spare a thought that your experience, from here, looks dangerously close to arrogance.

[Ignition Override]

Wino- yep, even if you did twenty go-arounds a month, that is not even a drop in the bucket compared to the money/stock that is siphoned out of some airlines' operations by our 'leaders by example' :E, after each pilot took paycuts which exceed 35%. The CEO told the media that it was not their decision, but "was the Board's decision" to award them all about US $350,000,000.
There is little motivation here to reduce fuel costs except for having plenty at our destination and whatever suitable alternates are nearby with no weather in between.

One problem is when you take off on a two-hour flight after thunderstorms/very long ground delays at both runways 9 and 15R, running both the APU and an engine, in order to keep the plane from getting too hot ( :*in IAH ) you are 5-10 minutes from minimum fuel at the destination as soon as you take off.
And this was after I told Dispatch during the preflight that we would increase contingency by 1,000 lbs.:hmm:

[Re-Heat]

Any Competent Pilot, speeds up his SCAN, and PRIORITISES IE the ASI, if you have any chance of encountering these conditions
I think you missed Lucifer's point - if you are looking out, even if scanning quickly, you are in a 2-crew aircraft, relying on P2 to monitor the instruments when you are heads-up. To then ignore him is an invitation to create a smoking hole in the ground.

[Farty Flaps]

Claudillo,
The only arrogance Icome up against these days is from the (some) chaps who confuse wealth and subsequent access to an approved school, a quick job on a jet, and the opinion that they know more than god himself, coupled with the actual flying skills of a penguin.:eek:
Now we all know that is my job:ok:

[A37575]

Some time ago around Longitude 110 East, and during type rating in simulator on large jet a start problem is introduced by instructor. Local captain calls for wrong checklist and is corrected by the F/O. The captain then demands again the checklist he asked for. F/O (non-local) has no choice given local culture mores to read out the demanded checklist. Captain soon realises he has indeed called for inccorrect checklist and directs the F/O to read the correct checklist, which he does. No further drama until de-brief by local instructor who fails the F/O for not displaying assertiveness. The captain gets off scott free.... As the Americans say "Go figure....."

[Cypher]

"Hey Bob.. how do you feel about this approach? Do you reckon we're a bit low and might need a bit of power"

Bob, We're below glideslope and speed is decaying... I request a return to the S.O.Ps"

"Bob, YOU MUST LISTEN TO ME, GO AROUND, IF YOU DO NOT RETURN TO S.O.Ps I WILL ASSUME CONTROL"

"Bob I got control....."

[Centaurus]

You ALWAYS go around on the call, and he learns from the fact that you LATER tell him it was unnecessary to call a go-around in those conditions stated.
(a) You have NO way of knowing at the time whether he has called a go-around for the weather conditions or something else - he called go-around (you say), and did not/would not typically have time to explain why



So you have a inexperienced thoroughly twitchy first officer who directs the captain to go-around. It is the captain who decides whether or not he is going to conduct a go-around - not the first officer. Same thing with a rejected take off. The first officer can scream "abort" for all he is worth - but the decision to abort is the captain's.

But to say that the captain must ALWAYS (the original writer's "shouting" - not mine) go around simply because of the personal opinion of the RH seat, is poor airmanship indeed.

[low n' slow]

Centaurus, again I'd like to ask a question: How do you know the reason for the F/O's decision to call G/A or Stop? There's no way of nowing is the correct answer. In this case it might be the PIC's personal judgement of the carachter in the RHS that will jeopardise the whole thing. Just because we're young doesn't necesarily say that we blurt out "stops" and G/A orders just because we feel a bit nervous!? Have you seen it happen? Have you gone against a F/O on a call like this? If so, what was the situation? Stabilized approach concept?

I would say that it's bad airmanship no to listen to the F/O when he says something as serious as stop or G/A. My personal opinion.

/LnS

[Smudger]

If the guy in the rhs calls go around then you must do so - there is no time for discussion. If you do not have enough fuel left to do so then the Captain would have briefed that fact and there would be no decision to make (God forbid).
To you FOs - low hours or otherwise - if you decide a GA is the only option then please CALL IT - talk about it on the ground later. At worst you will look a prat, at best you will save your life and everybody else's on board.
That's my 5 penn'orth, goodnight.

[Bullethead]

Not relating to go-arounds specifically, but in any situation where my old mate in the RHS is feeling a little uncomfortable then I believe an experienced pilot will announce the fact fairly early in the proceedings whereas a pilot with less experience will probably be a bit more reticent and if he does feel the need to speak up it’s probably for a very good reason. Maybe even a little late in the scheme of things and therefore to be acted on promptly.
On the other hand, before I started my command training I’d been a Captain in a previous life and I was sometimes happy to let a situation develop to see what was about to ensue, even if things weren’t quite SOP, though when I felt the need I had no hesitation in speaking up. I never had to call a go around on a Captain but I did have to fairly forcefully upwardly manage, as it’s called, at times.
I would never debate a go around call from any first officer, there’s always fuel for one and we can discuss it later when the dust has settled.
Only very rarely have I objected to monitoring calls by a first officer, one called me one knot slow on Vref, but I wouldn’t debate it there and then I just fixed the perceived problem and had a chat about it later.
Regards,
BH.

[Right Way Up]

Now this is real F/O assertiveness!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dh5oS-NZeQg

[Cypher]

That was actually out of our S.O.Ps..

Three strikes and the "Captain you must listen to me" is the catch phrase that when said, must be acknowledged by the captain.

Using the other guys name helps as people tend to react more favorably to their name rather than a tittle.

The first call was to tell the captain of a percieved problem and a bit of a hint to help get out of the situation.

The second is to let the other person know that the problem still exists and is getting worse. The phrase "I request a return to the SOPS" is meant to be a catchphrase warning to the captain that things are trending to getting worse.

The 3rd is meant to be emphasized. You don't have to shout.

Thats how our SOPs are.. not saying that they are the end all and be all.. but they seem to work well in anger.

I can see some captains probably resenting a call from a younger more inexperienced F/O, esp the bit about how to fix a potential problem. It's a suggestion.. not an order... and maybe if you think you are above and beyond all and you know it all.. maybe you shouldnt be flying in the first place and retire while your still ahead.

[Fredairstair]

Right Way Up, that's a classic. Cheers.

[permFO]

Its a fine line for an F/O but the bottom line for me is that if what the bloke in the LHS is doing is not going to kill me then use tact in the way you bring it to his attention. Also have in the back of your mind what your model for a successful outcome for a particular situation is and if what the Captain is doing is close too it then no problem. As with most things in aviation it is a dynamic situation and in the end commonsense and experience will determine your best course of action.

[calypso]

The gerona accident due to an inexperienced FO? you must have read a different accident report to everybody else. Without iducing thread creep here the basics where: A stormy night in the med, arrived with insuficient fuel (about 15minutes extra) change of wind direction forced a non precision app, captain takes over from FO, speed brake left deployed burns the excess fuel they had, G/a and rnwy changes again, very short of fuel now they do an ILS, airport lights fail at about 100' and spatial disorientation ensues. Add a good mix of poor ATC and bad luck and there for the grace of God go all of us.

I can't remember how many hours the FO had but it was 2000 plus. I seem to remember that he makes consistent good calls all they way except he does not call GO AROUND at the crucial point (ie when they lost the lights).

When I think of it you could not have chosen a worst example

Calling go around is in no way comparable to calling stop, most SOP's reflect this. A go around is an inherently safe maneuvre, an RTO performed at the wrong time can be prety devastating.

I wonder if your confidence extends to also ignoring a GA call from ATC. After all once you have all the facts and your situational awareness reaches such enlighted levels you can also allow for the inexperience, the nationality and the poor training of the controler?

I wonder what was going through the KLM captain's head in Tenerife when the FO was objecting. Probably something like the musings you have given us

[Bartosz]

Don't you think that cultural matters may also interfere with the first officer's decision to call another g/a? For example people from Asia are known to be paying more attention and have greater respect for the authority of their superiors. I think this was one of the reasons of the Korean Airlines 801 crash on Guam in 1997, wasn't it?

[hoggsnortrupert]

Whatever happened to Whoever is scared first wins!:ok:
H/Snort.

[Piltdown Man]

"I wonder what was going through the KLM captain's head in Tenerife when the FO was objecting." Unfortunately, a PanAm 747.

PM

[Centaurus]

If perchance the chappie in the left chair is seemingly intent with pressing on regardless with an unstable and potentially highly dangerous final approach - and he disregards the second-in-command's exhortations to go around. In this situation the danger is made worse if the 2ic attempts to wrestle with the controls in an attempt to save the day by taking over.

A painless and very effective action is for the second-in-command to simply reach over and select the landing gear selector to UP. Few captains faced with this outrageous action by his minion in the RH seat, will then deliberately land wheels up. And voila! - a go around is performed with no one hurt apart from the captain's pride. Sort it later...