PDA

View Full Version : Captain Sir - I have control.


Centaurus
18th May 2008, 13:20
CRM books and allied papers make much of the responsibility of the second in command to advise the captain he is taking over control where it is warranted.
In particular if the captain deliberately presses on regardless at low altitude with a badly unstable approach. Or if he deliberately breaks the minima.

While there is no shortage of advice on the things the first officer must say before he attempts to take control from the captain, there is precious little guidance offered to what the first officer should do should his warnings be disregarded. Taking over control at a critically low altitude will certainly result in an arm-wrestling competition with the potential for a disaster. Few captains intent on pressing on regardless will take kindly to the No 2 attempting to take over and almost certainly the captain would be cross and firmly resist.

There is one action however that can almost guarantee a go-around by the captain - and that is the first officer reaching over and selecting the gear lever to up while simultaneously calling "Landing Gear Up - Go Around"

Desperate times sometimes call for desperate measures. Either way the second in command will be called to account for his actions and he must be prepared to wear the consequences. Therefore the gear up action is a last resort. Unless temporarily medically insane even the most culture driven captain will not deliberately land wheels-up just to make the point that real men don't go around.

Rather than inundate first officers with all the politically correct and warm and fuzzy words they must use in warning the captain that things are going dangerously pear-shaped on short final (see Garuda 737 accident report), it is about time the authors of such material cut to the chase and offer practical if indeed brutal advice on how to save the day. Keep in mind there are some out there that really do think real men should not go around.

Iceman49
18th May 2008, 14:06
"I have the aircraft, go-around"

Centaurus
18th May 2008, 14:14
"I have the aircraft, go-around"

And if the captain says get stuffed I retain control - what then?

ab33t
18th May 2008, 14:23
get your shute ready

lomapaseo
18th May 2008, 17:42
Well since this is human factors oriented and not just CRM.

It seems to me the more likely scenario is where the captain (PF) is no longer accepting input (frozen ignorance of the situation)). That's different from rejecting input (I don't agree and I am the commander).

With the former, the captain is unlikely to object until the situation is stabilized (after the go-around) and indeed may be a tad confused at first before he can effectively contribute again to CRM.

Of course if it's the latter, then some yelling (John Wayne movie "The High and Mighty") comes to mind.

Notso Fantastic
18th May 2008, 19:42
Can't agree with that Centaurus. By raising the gear, you will immediately set off the gear warning horn (gear not down with flap >15 in a Boeing). You will immediately create mayhem in the flight deck- horn, shouting, fighting control, probably the worst go-around in the western world, a new nickname and a new unemployed pilot! There are ways to try and solve the problem regarding discretion and tact, not taking a sledgehammer to the problem out of the blue at the worst possible time. The Captain will get reprimanded, the copilot will get canned.

The only way is to call: 'We are in an illegal situation, go-around please!.......I have control, go-around, flap15, positive climb, gear up' Do it in the right order, and correctly, or the consequences will be severe. But to just raise the gear? Ouch!

Right Way Up
18th May 2008, 19:50
Best way to deal with the situation....

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=gmxiZZZ-2_4

Iceman49
18th May 2008, 19:57
Been there, done it...if it causes a problem, thats what prostan is for...and if you get no backup...move on.

4PW's
18th May 2008, 20:09
True story: aircraft not stabilized, First Officer informs Captain, Captain ignores First Officer, First Officer tries again to begin the process of going around by alerting Captain, Captain ignores First Officer.

F/O: "Tower, XYZ is going around."

Tower: "Roger XYZ, maintain runway, heading climb 3000."

Captain snaps out of it, goes around.

Think about this: it worked; no sticky business of taking control; Captain executed the go around and, importantly, the First Officer protected the Captain.

Look after each other out there...we're colleagues, not combatants. This isn't some dumb-ass Hollywood movie with Denzyl bloody Washington.

:cool:

Notso Fantastic
18th May 2008, 22:17
This sort of thread imprints in people 'that the copilot is always right!'. I never had to make that call as a copilot- a short discussion always did the job with mutual agreement. However, I have known a couple of occasions when a new copilot has called for a go-around, and my response having judged it OK (from the POV of vastly greater experience) has been 'don't be so bloody silly- look and learn!'. There followed in the post mortem a short discussion on how carefully one must assess the situation and not just call go around when it may not be actually necessary. When a proper discussion takes place and the co-pilot can voice his concerns, he has done enough to protect himself. But the danger is very inexperienced copilots will get the idea from this sort of thread that they are infallible and must be obeyed. Try that and get it wrong and they will be nursing a wounded ego!

chintanmanis
19th May 2008, 01:44
[QThere is one action however that can almost guarantee a go-around by the captain - and that is the first officer reaching over and selecting the gear lever to up while simultaneously calling "Landing Gear Up - Go Around"
UOTE][/quote]

My, oh my!! A disaster in the making.....you will soon be scraping the runway at low altitudes! With sufficient altitude a scary go around might be salvaged.

May I suggest, at least in modern aircrafts, hit the TOGA or Go levers first , Call " YOU MUST GO AROUND " and then select go around flaps and with positive rate of climb, then reach up to retract the gears.......if no response by then firmly state " I have control ". It will all be recorded on the CVR to save your tail.also don't forget to insist that the CVR recording be preserved by maintenance.trip the CVR cbs.

Navigator33
19th May 2008, 13:38
"not stabilized go around"

"negative we continue"

"I say again not stabilized go around"

"negative"

"xxx twr abc123 going around"

Still no response?.....

I see no reason why not to reach for the gear handle at that point?

A situation very similar to this has happened very recently in Europe so don't think it can not happen. :ugh:

Centaurus
19th May 2008, 15:06
If the Garuda 737 first officer had taken decisive action by selecting gear up after the captain had disregarded 12 GPWS warnings and his own first officer imploring him to go - around, it is highly probable that this dreadful accident would never have taken place. The point of this thread is that when the captain is fanatically intent on landing no matter what danger, the gear up option by the first officer is a last ditch action. By all means make the normal warning calls of "Please captain etc" but there has been no shortage regretfully of culture dispossessing common sense and a blazing wreck is the result.

EMIT
19th May 2008, 16:25
If all the GPWS warnings, including WHOOP WHOOP PULL UP don't wake up the captain, I seriously doubt whether the gear not down warning will catch his attention. Come to think of it, that warning might even be blanked by the priority scheme of warnings, which probably gives highest priority to the GPWS warnings.

Notso Fantastic
19th May 2008, 16:27
The problem is I have heard a few calls called wrong. So to take action like that really is a last resort, because when you do it, by God will there be some answering for it, and if the flight recorder shows you were wrong, you are out of a job! But agreed, sometimes it may be an absolute last resort. The great reluctance to do it is probably the copilots know if they do, and an accident is averted......no incident, Far Eastern face saving time.....'you are fired!'

tom775257
19th May 2008, 17:39
Well I had it happen to me. It is a very unpleasant situation certainly. The one thing that was said about my actions was that I should have taken control earlier. Unfortunately as a fairly new FO (less than 1 year jet at the time) I was reluctant.

Without going into too many details (I was PNF) the aircraft was getting higher and higher and ignoring my hinting the very senior pilot listened to me finally when I called Go around (high/fast A/C intercepted 6 degree glide which I called) a few times with increasing urgency. Subsequent botched G/A I had to take control from. Unpleasant. I ended up with 'fast hands' from me in the flight deck to sort it out, rather than having taken control earlier which would have been better all round.

jonathon68
19th May 2008, 18:29
Under stress the first thing which we loose is our sense of hearing, so as the co-pilot/pnf/pm/pnh in these situations we need to recognize this and be ready to communicate appropriately.

Many years ago I had an RTO at medium speed (in a 747) as an FO with an elderly, very senior Captain, who basically had an attack of riggor mortis when the big event happened. While he was able to keep steering the aeroplane on the runway he was otherwise non responsive. It was only on my third verbalisation of "we need to stop" and putting my hand on his to close the thrust levers, that he came back to life and did his stuff. Notably the call which worked used his first name, which may have helped get my message through.

Now that I am older, and wiser (and a trainer), I am much better at recognising when people are overcome with pressure/workload. The first sign (and key signal) is that they will stop responding to verbal challanges or sounds (such as rad-alt calls of 1000 or 500 etc). As soon as they start to miss aural challanges then you need to recognise the risk and help them. Apart from offering solutions (eg, shall I seat the cabin crew down, would you like more track miles) the next best thing that can be done is to reinforce minimums. eg

"JOHN, if we are not stabilised by xxx then we will have to go around"

If you get to the point when a "recall procedure" is required then call for the drill and be ready to step in if required, eg "Go-around, set thrust" etc . (Just as you will do when you are a Captain).

PK-KAR
20th May 2008, 14:41
"not stabilized go around"
"negative we continue"
"I say again not stabilized go around"
"negative"
"xxx twr abc123 going around"
Still no response?.....
I see no reason why not to reach for the gear handle at that point?
A situation very similar to this has happened very recently in Europe so don't think it can not happen.

If the Garuda 737 first officer had taken decisive action by selecting gear up after the captain had disregarded 12 GPWS warnings and his own first officer imploring him to go - around, it is highly probable that this dreadful accident would never have taken place. The point of this thread is that when the captain is fanatically intent on landing no matter what danger, the gear up option by the first officer is a last ditch action. By all means make the normal warning calls of "Please captain etc" but there has been no shortage regretfully of culture dispossessing common sense and a blazing wreck is the result.

Given the fixation by the PF, the PNF raising the gear in that accident may have just resulted in the landing belly first... but we'll never know. The problem I have with that accident is, the PNF appears not assertive enough, even by Garuda's standards. Another few occasion where the PNF took over involved something between what the PNF did in that accident, and what's suggested in this topic.

But yes, pull up the landing gear, you gotta make sure it'll snap the PF out of it. Previous events indicate that the first officer screaming his head off "NOT STABILIZED, MY CONTROLS, GOING AROUND" has been enough to snap the captain out of it and he reactively took his hands and feet off the controls and throttle. That happened 2x to the same F/O if I remember correctly.

PK-KAR

Geragau
21st May 2008, 07:14
Thought I have seen this great post somewhere.....found it and here it is :

OKhalsa (http://www.pprune.org/forums/member.php?u=191795)

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Asia
Age: 57
Posts: 6


Captain's landing in marginal weather? Well, my present and past airlines practise that. However, there were cases where the humble eff oh did a better job.
Years ago in another life flying the old A300 B4 into old Kai Tak at the onset of a typhoon. X-Winds were within limits but very gusty. After the checker board, we were turning beautifully for a textbook gusty X-W landing when a mighty gust turned everything pear shaped! The wings went wiggy waggy, the concentration and focus throughout the whole IGS 13 approach was so intense that the skipper ended up with tunnel vision and keep struggling to salvage the landing. The F/E was pretty quiet; the young F/O just grunted " GO A... " and pressed the Go levers! In a daze the skipper and F/O struggled together for a split second before, unbelievably, the skipper shouted " you have control " and the young f/o took it around. The skipper , ashen faced, with shaking knees and squeaky voiced asked the f/o to fly to TPE. Since we had plenty of fuel ( no problem with 8 extra tons ), the young f/o proposed another try. Skipper agreed with f/o flying..well f/o brought it down beautifully on the IGS to an equally beautiful landing. Later we celebrated at the bicycle bar!
The skipper was : YOURS truly. The F/O... well he has moved on to become a great skipper. The F/E; he probably learnt a lot that day and too took up flying as f/o and is now a junior skipper!
http://www.pprune.org/forums/images/statusicon/user_offline.gif http://www.pprune.org/forums/images/buttons/report.gif (http://www.pprune.org/forums/report.php?p=3956480)

Kudos to this humble gentleman! IT SURELY takes quite a bit for a skipper to own up to this.

discountinvestigator
22nd May 2008, 12:28
For the go-around call to be made at 500 Radio Altitude, it would imply that you have had a precision approach terrain chart drawn up for that approach and examined it. There are several approaches where 500 RA is relatively meaningless in terms of being 500 feet above threshold (or touchdown zone) elevation. Please remember that very very few runways are ever surveyed for the PATC which is a great shame as radioaltimeters can be used to very beneficial effect with some ALAR procedures.

Discount

BOAC
22nd May 2008, 15:56
All I can add to some excellent posts in here is that if I have stuffed it up that badly and appear to be seriously out of the loop, please drop the 'Sir'. As 737Jock said don't be afraid to call, lads and lassies, and make it positive. I may have to beat you round the head downwind:) (oh, what fun!) but more importantly, we might just not have that 'big event'.

Notso Fantastic
22nd May 2008, 17:47
Chaps, we haven't got enough fuel for a spurious call of go-around because a highly inexperienced co-pilot feels it's over the edge! As far as I am concerned, it takes 2 'Nays' to go-around, not just one without a darn good reason being shown! The answer may well be 'Don't be so bloody silly lad!'. I trust my judgement more at 20,000 hours than some green laddie at 600 hours!

Angels 60
22nd May 2008, 17:52
+1 Notso Sorry you have to fly with 600 hr pilots.

BOAC
22nd May 2008, 18:06
than some green laddie at 600 - so they're giving you the experienced ones now, eh?:)

mnttech
23rd May 2008, 01:55
I have seen both go on (Capt or the F/O making mistakes) and what always seemed to make the most sense was the Capt stating that they have seen the deviation (airspeed, descent rate, etc) and are correcting for it. No response, something needs to be done, and the discusion at the hotel later.

But I agree with the topic of the thread, there is not always a SOP on what to do when SOP breaks down.

Lemper
23rd May 2008, 02:52
.....Which is why in the outfit I work, we (try to) recruit for attitude and train for skill. The other way around has been proven not to work.

Centaurus
25th May 2008, 14:31
ust accept that your inexperienced FO, needs to get comfortable

Hang on a second here. Passengers read these pages and if they see the words "inexperienced first officers" they are entitled to think what the hell are inexperienced second in command persons are doing on a plane. All the advertisements I see in aviation mags show pilots with lots of gold stripes. Are you saying these guys are inexperienced? I'm outta here until you get two very experienced pilots up front or else I'm going by ships where the First Mate is experienced and not just a kid.;)

Right Way Up
27th May 2008, 08:41
Onepercenter,
Theres nothing against high time pilots, just the realisation that just because you have loads of hours doesn't mean you cannot be wrong. If a f/o questions a call, he should be able to explain his course of action both at the time and to the chief pilot afterwards. If this scenario is true he would not have been able to do that.

Edited: as not quite fast enough before 1%er banned...must be some kind of record.

helimutt
27th May 2008, 11:20
Centaurus, your quote:-
Hang on a second here. Passengers read these pages and if they see the words "inexperienced first officers" they are entitled to think what the hell are inexperienced second in command persons are doing on a plane. All the advertisements I see in aviation mags show pilots with lots of gold stripes. Are you saying these guys are inexperienced? I'm outta here until you get two very experienced pilots up front or else I'm going by ships where the First Mate is experienced and not just a kid

Made me laugh. You really think the first mate on some ships nowadays is experienced? I know you probably meant it tongue in cheek but I have sailed with 24yr old First Mates and I can tell you they might know the answers to the questions but have very little real world experience.
And it's not just the deck side you need to worry about. Have a look at the engine room guys too. A huge shortage of experienc nowadays. why? because the industry didnt recruit for a long time and is now suddenly short. Haven't we heard this before somewhere?
;)

cattleflyer
27th May 2008, 16:34
I've seen this in other fields: Hire inexperienced guys, so we don't have to pay them much, we can teach them what to do, and get away without needing experience. They will do what we want, little marshmellows that just want to fly and can be controlled.In many proffessions, this is true. You don't need a janitor with 20 years of experience to mop a floor...also, obsolete knowledge is giving way to computers and technology. FEs and guys that really knew how to navigate and handfly, going the way of the FMS, EFIS, and GPS. So flash forward to the Sims and flight instructors have coined a term...'Childrem of the Magenta'.....pilots that have never handflown, no situational awareness, no concept of compass turns, partial panel, or dead reckonking. Situational awareness: Look for the little plane on the moving map, that's where you are.Now that is who is flying a jumbo jet these days? I would have expected more.The equipment is so reliable these days, that expecting anything extra ordinary out of these pilots, like dealing with a real tire failure, engine failure ect is so remote that even the insurance companies buy off on it, as long as the insurance premiums are high enough, and they make a profit. So now we have kids hiring kids, or chief pilots who really just don't care anymore hiring for a happy work environment, CRM being more important then actual safety...and people not making waves, doing what they are told what to do...At the end of the day, we know that a 600 FO flying a jumbo jet is unacceptable, the captains know it, the airlines know it, the insurance company cringes at the thought of it...but everyone is making a buck..

AirRabbit
28th May 2008, 23:41
I am in complete agreement with Centaurus. When youve tried everything else and the circumstances continue to worsen, your options become less and less. Making the right decision is not difficult. What is difficult is making the wrong decision. I, for one, consider the outcome after having made the wrong decision given both options.

Wrong Decision Number 1: It really is a bad approach at first, and, while the F/O thinks things are going from bad to worse, the steely-eyed Captain is closing in on the localizer and glide slope as the airspeed is increasing back to the appropriate reference speed. The F/O reaches over and raises the landing gear lever and announces Go Around. The steely-eyed Captain really has little choice but to go around. After landing and debriefing the appropriate company personnel, the F/O finds himself cleaning out his locker.

Wrong Decision Number 2: It really is a bad approach at first, and, while the F/O thinks the steely-eyed Captain is going to close in on the localizer and glide slope as the airspeed is decreasing further below the appropriate reference speed, things really are going from bad to worse. The F/O thinks about reaching over to raise the landing gear lever and announcing Go Around, but decides to keep his thoughts to himself. The steely-eyed Captain continues his deteriorating approach. After the crash, the appropriate company personnel find themselves cleaning out the F/Os locker to send the contents to his widow.

I dont know bout you guys, but I know which wrong decision Id rather make.

PK-KAR
29th May 2008, 00:46
You don't need a janitor with 20 years of experience to mop a floor
Obviously cattleflyer aka ssg v7.0 doesnt appreciate the different characters and experience requirements of different jobs (which does sound like a clueless teenager)... Gimme a janitor with 20 years experience to mop a WHOLE floor and one who's a newbie... Which one cleans the whole floor faster and cleaner and use less of the stuff?

Obsolete knowledge is giving way to computers and technology.
Such as? They get those as they go. These "obsolete knowledge" gets passed down to the new ones in time... such as "how to "leaf down" or brick your jet". Hand flying when their confidence on the type and themselves build, etc.

pilots that have never handflown, no situational awareness, no concept of compass turns, partial panel, or dead reckonking.
Or (fake-)pilots who can't spell dead reckoning...

Now that is who is flying a jumbo jet these days?
Another teenage boxed/insular/bunker mind/mentality type of statement based out of ignorance and "smart-ass-ness" that is based out of... well... no need to be explicit...

At the end of the day, we know that a 600 FO flying a jumbo jet is unacceptable, the captains know it, the airlines know it, the insurance company cringes at the thought of it...but everyone is making a buck.
Do we see Singapore Airlines or Cathay Pacific (no narrowbodies + cadetships) having problems with these 600hrs TT First/Second officers?

Oh hang on... Ssg v7.0 is now banned... let's see if v8.0 will provide more "answers"...

-----
AirRabbit,
One accident March last year almost turned out to be your "Wrong Decision Number 2".

-KAR

AirRabbit
29th May 2008, 14:12
AirRabbit,
One accident March last year almost turned out to be your "Wrong Decision Number 2".
Which is why I recommend that if you insist on making a "wrong" decision, you really need to make the one that has the least impact. Pun intended!

SIDSTAR
31st May 2008, 04:45
In our outfit we use the Flight Safety Foundation's ALAR checklist as an aid to the approach briefing. At the end, printed in block capitals, is
"IT'S OK TO GO-AROUND".

Believe it or not, the company actually encourages us to do just that. Our stabilised altitude is 1000ft with 800ft as the visual one. I don't know what our ratio of continued approaches to go-arounds is but I'd be prepared to bet that we have a higher than usual number of G/As. Most of the Captains do actually encourage the F/O to call G/A if they're not happy with the approach. Of course there are those who'll never do that and they're the ones who'll have the incident/accident some day. And just for the record, we have 200 hr F/Os straight from flight school on the 'bus and they're outstanding! Short of experience yes but good guys who just want to learn. It's our job to ensure that they learn the right things.

Of course it's a tough call for a young F/O and all the CRM courses in the world cant buy experience. However, if those thrust levers are pushed to TOGA (or the TOGA button is pushed on the Boeings) there's not a lot the Capt can do about it except to discuss it afterwards. As a Capt I'd prefer he did that even when he might be a bit premature, than do nothing when he should have! He might just save my job and my neck. It's up to every Capt to create the atmosphere on the flight deck that encourages the F/O to speak (and act) up when things are not according to plan.

To the 20,000 hr guy who takes the opposite view I say I know where you're coming from but as someone else said which "wrong decision" would you prefer the F/O to make? I know I can screw up just a fast as the next guy but I hope I'm not so proud that I'd ignore a genuine call - no matter how "wrong" I might think it is. I'd much prefer to discuss it afterwards in the bar than in the enquiry!!!

Jaxon
31st May 2008, 05:18
"not stabilized go around"
"negative we continue"
"I say again not stabilized go around"
"negative"
"xxx twr abc123 going around"
Still no response?.....
I see no reason why not to reach for the gear handle at that point?
A situation very similar to this has happened very recently in Europe so don't think it can not happen.

I am reading a lot here that suggests inflicting a greater degradation of safety by initiating a fight for control without consideration to differentiating between an imminent disaster and a violation of accepted standards. For example, I suggest it would likely be much safer to NOT initiate a fight for control of the aircraft in a situation where the aircraft is under good control and some cowboy decides to bust minimums to get in. Obviously, you have some conversation and thinking to do after completing the parking check.

Be sure to differentiate between actual imminent danger and violated standards. There IS always a margin between the two, often times a big one.

Oxidant
31st May 2008, 05:47
To the 20,000 hr guy who takes the opposite view I say I know where you're coming from but as someone else said which "wrong decision" would you prefer the F/O to make? I know I can screw up just a fast as the next guy but I hope I'm not so proud that I'd ignore a genuine call - no matter how "wrong" I might think it is. I'd much prefer to discuss it afterwards in the bar than in the enquiry!!!

Or in heaven.........................
Having flown (& doing so now) with 200hr FOs, some are very good, some are not...As a FO, I flew with some 20,000 hr CPTs, some were very good, some were not.
So, you cannot generalise. The minute you profess to be perfect is the time you should go & get another job!
Remember, to err is to be human & NONE of us is infallible.That is one of the reasons they put two pilots (or more) on the flight deck. Yes, there has to be a cross cockpit gradient, BUT the other guy should not be frightened to speak up. (Teneriffe North springs to mind.)
As few previous posters have mentioned, I would much prefer the odd spurious go-around (part of the learning curve, we all had to make)as "we" may have missed something, rather than something much worse!

Someone famous once said.. "Better to late in this world than early in the next"

Food for thought?