View Full Version : New jumpseat regulations?

3rd Jul 2002, 10:42
It would appear that the US is about to introduce new regs over who can travel on jumpseats, it looks like it will almost certainly put a block on wives/partners etc. and may even be more far reaching than that, seems yet another over reaction from the US.
Land of the Free? more like Land of the Paranoic.

3rd Jul 2002, 10:56
Also heard that the jump seats will only be available for operating/relief crews or anyone concerned with the operation of the flight unless cleared by the FAA. Believe the UK CAA is likely to follow as well. How is this going to affect pilots in the US using the jump seat when off duty going home etc?:(

3rd Jul 2002, 13:01

The jumpseat in the US has never been open to wives/partners.
Only cockpit crew members and FAA inspectors.

Still land of the free, but the ********* on September 11 screwed up some of the freedom.

Shame on you TD. Using racist overtones, not like you at all. Now deleted

3rd Jul 2002, 13:04
Obviously another "Giant leap for mankind" !

3rd Jul 2002, 13:34
NATS (UK) ATCOs, up until last year, had a 'Fam' (Familiarisation) Flight scheme whereby we could occupy the J/S and see what you guys did to earn all that money. (This included US based carriers for which FAA written authorisation was required and was, to my knowledge, always given).

It was highly beneficial to see what life was like at the other end of the headset and gave us an insight into CRM, aircraft performance, how to make life easier for busy crews, etc. The knowledge gained on such trips was invaluable as it enabled us to get a better understanding of what was reasonable to ask a crew to do to and what was/was not possible for them to achieve.

Our scheme has temporarily ceased due to budgetry constraints on the part of NATS. However, it would be a great pity if legislation on the part of the FAA/CAA were to prevent its recommencing at some point in the future.

(NATS currently includes at least two 'Fam-Flights' with a UK based carrier as part of its Student ATCO training programme)

3rd Jul 2002, 14:27
Tower Dawg

The flight deck jumpseat may not be open to wives/partners on US carriers, but is, at least for now, on some UK carriers. Don't know about other countries.

I agree with foxmoth - yet another knee jerk! :rolleyes:

BTW I have many Arabic/Muslim friends who would be dismayed by your racist use of ******* :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Removed for the same reason on TD's post.

3rd Jul 2002, 16:17
Tug 3 - Agree wholeheartedly - every jumpseat ride a learning experience - and almost only chance of interaction with flight deck crew. If we are banned from jumpseats I believe it will create a "them and us" situation.
Would be interested to hear comments from flight deck crew - and perhaps they might be able to influence those concerned to enable us to ride jumpseats in future.
Do any UK carriers have an 'approved' list of who can ride on the jumpseat ? If so do ATCO's appear on the list ?

Spearing Britney
3rd Jul 2002, 18:49
I understand that BA skippers may now only issue the jumpseat to BA staff or other persons personally know to the Captain.

As a OneWorld FO recently denied the jumpseat despite knowing the BA FO on the flightdeck due to the above I feel things have gone a bit silly.

Wonder what would happen to the BA crews living elsewhere, especially the scores in Ireland if other OneWorld carriers applied the same policy so rigidly.

What goods a flight crew ID anymore, I'm starting to just pay the full fare... Perks,what perks...

Notso Fantastic
3rd Jul 2002, 19:00
Foxmoth- were you on another planet last 11/9? <<It would appear that the US is about to introduce new regs over who can travel on jumpseats, it looks like it will almost certainly put a block on wives/partners etc. and may even be more far reaching than that, seems yet another over reaction from the US.
Land of the Free? more like Land of the Paranoic.>>......I was given to understand that Atta himself, the alleged ringleader, was probably ALREADY on the F/D jumpseat with a fake ID. Got any better ideas for security? It seems to me your posting was largely an excuse to display some anti-Americanism emotion for reasons best kept to yourself!

PPRuNe Pop
3rd Jul 2002, 19:05
No-more racist views or remarks please.

PPRuNe Pop
[email protected]

3rd Jul 2002, 21:25
I must say that my Company has a jumpseat authorisation policy (at present), and it has been enjoyed many times by many, many company employees and partners.... AND it has been a boon to those of us who operate long-haul in keeping marriages and relationships together.:D :D

Lets get something straight.... 11th Spetember and the atrocious acts perpetrated were NOTHING... I say again NOTHING to do with the airlines involved OR the Flight Deck/Cabin Crew members on those flights OR jumpseat occupancy !!!!!.......PERIOD.

It was the result of exceedingly lax security at the airports where these animals (being PC here)... boarded !!!!!....PERIOD..

This is a knee jerk reaction as the FAA has to be seen to be doing "something" to calm the great American public's fears.

Tell me what locking the flight deck doors does ???.... If I recall the actual cockpit voice tape of Capt. Al Haynes comments correctly. As he struggled to control his DC10 on final approach to Souix City he said "Unlock that f**k*ng door..!!!".
I presume in order that his crew could professionally carry out their duties and maintain the extraordinarily high standard of CRM that resulted in the (reasonably) succesful outcome of that particular incident.

Now we have a bunch of FAA beauracrats and suits telling us to ignore 20 years of facts relating to CRM and the lessons learned therein...... AND dictating poicy across National Borders..... (I wonder what the outcry from ther US would be like if the EU unilaterally acted in such a manner :confused: :confused: .

There need to be unequivocal recognition that the only way to stop acts of terrorism and air piracy is to PREVENT the potential perpetrators from getting ON the aircraft in the first place.
AND I personally don't care what it takes... compulsorary I.D.'s banning of nationals from country's assessed as "high risk"...etc..etc...

Let's get real people....!!!!I
Instead of arguing amongst ourselves.... Start putting pressure on ALPA, BALPA Company management, Regulatory Authorities etc..etc.... TO improve airport security and intelligence data so that these people NEVER get near an aircraft......PERIOD.

3rd Jul 2002, 21:43
Spearing Britney

Just to clarify, in BA bona fide BA staff passengers, CAA flight ops. inspectors and the like and anybody else specifically authorised in writing by flight management are the only people allowed to occupy the flight deck jumpseat.

Whether an individual is known to the Captain or not is not a factor.

3rd Jul 2002, 21:48
Well said PocaHostie,

3rd Jul 2002, 21:56
do you remember the Russian Airbus who's captains son was allowed to take his fathers seat ...... don't remember the exact circumstances but the aircraft was sent into a non-recoverable dive as a result of the boys actions ...... total write-off with all on board lost ....... I must say that I would prefer cockpit access to be restricted to flying staff (on and off duty) and of course ATCO's for Familiarization trips, with prior formal permission ......

3rd Jul 2002, 22:29
Poca - "politically correct"??

Whilst there are no words in the English language to describe the actions of, or suitable adjectives to decsribe the lower than low life forms that carried out those acts - I do think "animals" is the correct term. There is no "animal" on Earth that would do such a hideous, hideous, thing to its own species.

I'm with you 110% - up to there.

I'm also with "bring back the fam flights".

3rd Jul 2002, 22:37
Yes I DO get frustrated with Americans banging on about being the "land of the free", but when you go there there are actually far MORE restrictions than many other countries I fly ( I COULD give you a list of these restriction, but really can't get up enthusiasm), I think Pothecahostie has made most points that I would otherwise make, there is a HIGH incidence of marriage breakdown in our job and I like to do everything I can to avoid that, taking my wife on trips keeps her sweet.
I have every sympathy for US pilots NOT being able to do this and have helped out before, when asked if I would go on the jumpseat as the Captains wife was travelling (she could not use the JS but as qualified crew I could).
The Russian allowing his son to fly was WRONG and I certainly do NOT condone this, but I think this is a seperate issue again - this guy would probably have ignored any rules about not having his son in the FD anyway.

3rd Jul 2002, 22:39
Have always wondered why some pilots are too cheap to actually purchase a ticket when they live outside their respective domicile.
Relying on jumpseat authority is foolhardy at best.

Seems a good idea to me would be....live where you work...or else...bid accordingly. Should be good business for moving companies;) ;)

3rd Jul 2002, 23:11
Not talking here about living away from work, I drive from home but then regularly (once or twice a month)operate to destinations where I may be away from base for 5-10 days. Leaving my wife at home in the rain sorting out School runs/ house/ finance while I sit in the sun does NOT go down well, taking her on the odd trip helps with this, and even with a standby ticket this does not work out cheap by the time we have paid for someone to look after the kids, plus paid the extra costs in her being there. Paying a full fare ticket to make sure she gets on will be prohibitive most of the time.

3rd Jul 2002, 23:24
GoneWest... Thank you for pointing out the obvious... and it is a sentiment I wholeheartedly agree with...... But... I can't think of an appropriate description for these individuals that would meet with Capt. PPrune's approval..!:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

411A....Foxmoth and myself work for an outfit that has full occupancy on 95% of it's long-haul flights....Jumpseat authority is in somecases the only way you can guarantee that your spouse/partner can travel with you at the same time when your operating.......And it is particularly used by our cabin crew and ground staff as well...!!

The FAA at present cannot gurantee that the security systems in place will prevent potential terrorists from gaining access to commercial flights Stateside.......... OTHERWISE... they would be banging on about it "ad-infinitum" on CNN 24 hours a day.........!!!!

I repeat that we who are at the "sharp end" in the industry need to be more forcefull in lobbying the relevant authorities to take the neccessary draconian measures to ensure that these people are identified, marginalised, isolated and prevented for ever more, from boarding commercial flights....... ONLY that way can we be sure of preventing similar horrors to that experienced on the 11th Sept...!!!

Electric Sky
3rd Jul 2002, 23:42
I don't think further restricting access to the flightdeck jumpseat will make the slightest bit of difference. Post 9/11 at my company you need to be employed by the airline and have a valid IATA ID card. Even then Captain's discretion still applies. If ID cards and aviation security in general are no longer a protection against terrorism then these extremists we unfortunately have in our society can get access to the aircraft before we even take our seats and jumpseat access is the least of our worries.

ES ;)

3rd Jul 2002, 23:48
Did not consider r..h.... to be racist, rather a describtin of old fashioned head gear on certain folks, besides are we supposed to be PC and polite towards terrorist now...?:confused:
(Check my previous postings again, was talking about the 9/11 scum.)

Foxmoth: if ya are disappointed over the US and the lack of freedom, why don't you just stay away, or go and visit your Arab/Muslim friends in the Middle East. That should open your eyes to what lack of freedom is.:rolleyes:

4th Jul 2002, 02:03
The FAA has opened this up to comments. Below are the links to the docket.

As a commuter who uses the jumpseat to get to work, the US carriers consider the Jumpseater an additional crewmember.

Have always wondered why some pilots are too cheap to actually purchase a ticket when they live outside their respective domicile.


You really are an ass. Do you fly for AWA?



14 CFR Part 129
[Docket No. FAA–2002–12504; Amendment
No. 129–33]
RIN 2120–AH70
Security Considerations for the
Flightdeck on Foreign Operated
Transport Category Airplanes

(3) No person may admit any person
to the flight deck of an aircraft unless
the person being admitted is—
(i) A crewmember,
(ii) An inspector of the civil aviation
authority responsible for oversight of
the part 129 operator, or
(iii) Any other person authorized by
the civil aviation authority responsible
for oversight of the part 129 operator.

4th Jul 2002, 02:38
Right now, I don't think this applies to domestic jumpseats in the United States.

As I read it, Part 129 applies only to Foreign airlines operating in the United States:


1. GENERAL.FAR Part 129 prescribes rules governingthe operation within the United States of foreign air carriers appropriately authorized by the Civil Aeronautics Board orthe Department of Transportation (DOT)."

However, one hand washes the other; shutting of Jumpseats of foreign carriers operating in the United States surely will have a ripple effect in the US. There are a few United pilots I know of who are fed up with the US and have opted to live in Europe.

Actually, I think they are more fed up with American women than the country itself....but that's a topic for another thread entirely.

West Coast
4th Jul 2002, 05:06
You have issues.

My carrier only allows our own pilots along with our connection carriers in the actual JS, reason being all of the above pilots are in a database and that real time employment can be verified.

4th Jul 2002, 08:17
Tower Dog
Thanks for the suggestion but I come to the States as part of my work, unfortunately I am not well funded enough to feed my family without it!
Nothing against most Americans and have in the past helped some (properly accredited airline Staff relative) by having THEM on the jumpseat.
For your info I also visit many Muslim countries in my flying, yes they ARE more restrictive, but generally they don't deny it and with very strict laws you can feel safer in many muslim countries than in many US cities. If you travel to different countries you find they ALL have different rules and restrictions that you have to accept.
Americans comming to the UK probably find restrictions that they are not used to, but at least we don't claim to be "land of the free", which winds me up,If you are going to make a claim like this, have the balls to back it up without bringing in unneccessary legislation and this new restriction is impinging DIRECTLY on quality of life.
Another factor you might like to think about, with someone else on the FD the pilots do not have to get out of their seats to operate the door which is something I have always considered a major worry in an emergency, so this extra person does actually come in useful.
Restricting the Fd is one thing & Jumpseat pax SHOULD be vetted by the company, but this latest regulation though is WAY over the top.

4th Jul 2002, 09:23
I worked for the same company as Foxmouth & PokaHostie until very recently.

Pre 11/9 many of the company aircraft flight decks were regularly occupied by wives, girlfriends or other invited (sometimes not invited) guests! All except mine that is, because I found it such a pain in the butt that I stopped taking them. I recall one F/O who took his girlfriend on a trip - she spent the entire time distracting him to the point that he missed nearly every RT call and his P1 ops on the return sector was pretty poor too. Normally he would be a very switched on operator.

Another time I refused flight deck travel to the CEO's secretary after she had written a note to the cabin services department to inform them she would occupying the flight deck seat because it was a none training flight - she hadn't thought to ask me if it was ok. The next day I received a telephone call from the CEO to inform me he was aware of what I had done.

4th Jul 2002, 10:19
Not had that problem. Any flight deck pax I carry I thoroughly brief beforehand as to what to do, when they can talk etc.
Most FD pax are actually useful, at night they are a safeguard if you are nodding off, and with the locked FD door a definate boon.
As far as preventing terrorism goes I would think any serious terrorist is going to have worked out how & when he MIGHT be able to get through the door and a FD passenger is more likely to be a second line of defence rather than a terrorist!
nb. Sapco2 - Even if the Americans don't know British Aircraft I would have thought you would know the Fox Moth as that and be able to get my name right! :mad:

Rwy in Sight
4th Jul 2002, 10:25
Thank you very much for you intervention moderator. YOu definetly made my day.

4th Jul 2002, 12:10
Sorry Foxmoth,

Sacasm wasn't my intention - merely to offer another point of view. I happen to believe that visitors to the flight deck can be detrimental to flight safety. Not always - but sometimes!

Spearing Britney
7th Jul 2002, 13:15
M.Mouse - are you sure? Your company council head seems sure that its only BA staff or persons personnally known to the Captain(CAA inspector etc also I presume). The same view was also relayed to me by the skipper concerned?

Yours Confused.

7th Jul 2002, 14:21
There is no security risk carrying friends and relatives of the operating crew. There is minimal risk in accepting friends and relatives of staff you personally know in your own handling agency, own company etc.
There is a small, but unacceptable risk in carrying someone who insists on being in the flight deck - eg an unannounced CAA/FAA 'inspector', even if he does have an ID card.
Surely BALPA/ALPA could negotiate with government to get some deal where those on the jumpseat who only have an ID card, will be subject to extra checks on their ID and a body search just prior to boarding. No extra bags permitted in cockpit, and so on.
The Commander retains, the final say(as now), after taking everything into account.
If there are specific rules, it just helps the terroroists to plan to get round them.
The problems of getting past the vagaries of different aircraft Commanders on the day, is a good deterrent in itself.

Carnage Matey!
7th Jul 2002, 14:22
M.Mouse is quite correct. The rules are quite clear about who is allowed to use the jumpseat and those rules are set by the CAA. If you're not on that list then you can't use it, regardless of how well you know the Captain. In fact there have been instances when Captains have refused the jumpseat to people travelling on BA staff tickets (usually family members of BA staff) because they have been unable to prove that they are who they say they are.

Now I may be being thick here but section 3 of that rules states:

(3) No person may admit any person
to the flight deck of an aircraft unless
the person being admitted is— .....

......(iii) Any other person authorized by
the civil aviation authority responsible
for oversight of the part 129 operator.

So I read this as if the CAA say its OK for you to be on the jumpseat of a UK aircraft then thats OK with the FAA. So effectively no change for anyone operating for a UK carrier.

7th Jul 2002, 18:35
As a matter of interest folks, what are your company policies on use of any spare 'crew seats' in the cabin?

In my gaff the hosties are under the delusion that they 'own them' and can take who they like...without telling the skipper OR EVEN GETTING HIS PERMISSION. In one recent event a CCM even refused to accept that the FOM had a final say in the matter!

Security risk or what? I ask you.

7th Jul 2002, 21:52
Our professional ATC association had, among others, a top class Fam Flight program with a non-US cargo company flying between Europe and Asia. Sadly, because their flights staged through PANC, the new FAA regulations screwed that up nicely for us. This is very sad time for pilot/controller relations, and no more so than now when, each year, ATC worldwide is training hundreds of new generation controllers most of whom don't know and now may never know what goes on at the pointy end. Somebody mentioned the "them & us" syndrome, well I already see it at work now when I hear (off r/t) derogatory comments from young obviously quite ignorant ATCOs. SAD TIMES :(

8th Jul 2002, 01:03

Although our operations will be confined to SE Asia for awhile, Eurpoean flights are a possibility.

You are invited without reservation to any of our sectors for FAM training. We will have extra business class seats in the cabin as well. Wll advise you by email when this is possible.

If pilots cannot accomodate ATC guys on a regular basis, it is a real shame. It takes two to tango, unfortunately some regulatory authorities have lost sight of this fact.

8th Jul 2002, 04:07
Although I fully appreciate there is a requirement to heavily restrict access to the FD, I believe that some thought needs to be given to the medium and long term effects such unilateral banning of access will have.

For example, if ATCO’s are banned from observation flights, the understanding/appreciation of the controller/pilot relationship will obviously deteriorate. Surely an "approval" system could be established that would validate accredited ATCO "applicants" for FD visits. One way to keep control of such a program would be to limit the number of carriers ATCO's could travel with (maybe this does/will continue to occur?). At the end of the day, these people have similar/same security status as flight crew and are fellow aviation professionals.

You then get into the "family" aspects of such a ban. I'm sure all crews with family travelling with them, particularly kids, love having them visit and see what it is they do (I appreciate the US restrictions about not entering the FD…). Having grown up myself with numerous trips in the jump seat, I know what a privilege it is...to not have ANY flexibility in the system is in my opinion very sad.

Anyway, there will always be the argument that to keep things simple, we just say NO to everything. This keeps the regulators happy and makes it simple to control.

There are other points that could be mentioned however I've ranted enough. It seems the days of "fun" and "aviation" in the same sentence are (have?) coming to an end...

8th Jul 2002, 11:45
My company are getting clarification from the FAA, but in the meantime are still allowing bookings for accompanied travel to prevent any last minute rush.

Please let us have less personal attacks it serves no purpose and clouds the issues. I am often amazed at the vitriol released from a group of supposedly intelligent people. We are better than that.

Finally if anyone can come up with a system that allows more personal freedoms than the USA answers please on a postcard to your local MEP.

8th Jul 2002, 12:08
The passengers dont appreciate seeing non uniformed persons entering the flight deck during flight or any other time. People are still cautious about airline security. Which pretty much rules family etc out....

8th Jul 2002, 12:23
You,ve raised another good point. That was another bone of contention when I worked for your company. It's an attitude stemming from your CEO telling everyone that the people up front of the aircraft are merely 'drivers'. Most of the pilots of course are just too polite to argue.

8th Jul 2002, 14:25
Jump seats should be strictly limited for the use of personnel on duty. If I want to take my wife and kids then I buy them a ticket.

There is nothing worse than being stuck in a flight deck for 10 hours with someone else's loved one and their brat. It simply is not fair on the crew.

I would not entertain inflicting my tribe upon others so why should I have to put up with others?

Pat Pong
8th Jul 2002, 20:34
JW - weren't those the initials of that tobacco-chewing inbred Sheriff in the James Bond movies? I seem to recall that he shot from the hip without thinking things through.

8th Jul 2002, 20:48
About locking the doors, I vaguely remember something about the "animals" ENTICING the pilots out of the flight deck on at least one flight by killing the cabin crew in a terrible way. Did the doors on any of the aircraft have locks, if so, in some situations the locks may not even be enough.

8th Jul 2002, 20:55
The pressures of loved ones being a long way from home down route is hard at the best of times. If the powers that be put an end to fully briefed loved ones riding the jumpseat where a pax seat is not an option then the future may be rather dark.

Especially if the crew are generally operating a hectic summer schedule on short/medium haul routes.

Good luck and long may it continue.


9th Jul 2002, 08:39
Pat Pong:

Just what have I failed to think through?

My attitude to the social use of jumpseats became jaundiced in a previous company. One captain in particular seemed to need to take his wife with him just about everywhere he went (perhaps she didn't trust him). As often as not she would decide that the jumpseat wasn't comfortable enough and would lay on the flight deck floor just inside the door swathed in blankets and pillows!

In any event, minding your "Ps and Qs" for 10 hours is bad enough, but having to step over a human body every time you go for a pee is beyond the pale.

Then there was the emotional blackmail bit. The scenario would be that the agent would come up to the flightdeck and tell you that Capt Bloggs, his wife and family have been on holiday and are trying to get home. There are only two seats in the back so can we put the other two on the flightdeck?

What they really mean is that Capt Bloggs has been too tight-fisted to buy full-fare tickets and has taken his brood on holiday on ID75s!

I'm sorry but I shall continue to pay full fare for my family. That way I don't spend my holiday worrying about whether we are going to get back home or not.

If you really need to take your wife on the jumpseat then you are in the wrong job!

Cat O' Nine Tails
9th Jul 2002, 08:39
Nice as it would be to buy you family and friends a ticket, this is not always possible as the flights can be full, furthermore if you have the luxury of flying both Cargo and passenger aircraft the luxury of seats in the back are not always available either!

What has happened to the courtesy of asking the other crew members " Would you mind if i brought along ....... for a jolly?"

Good CRM dictates the use of manners regardless of the rank of the individual. I for one enjoyed entertaining visitors to the flight deck before the ramifications of the 11th September incidents, it was not only good PR if they were passengers, but it helped allieviate some of the more boring moments of the flight especially on the long flights without a lot to do.

I Hope that eventually circumstances allow the return of the flight deck visitors be they there for the duration of the flight or just a brief visit. What is this world coming to!!

9th Jul 2002, 11:58
Have to agree with JW411...let the el-cheapos buy tickets, and don't hound the operating crew. Nothing worse than a 200 pound aunt Martha who hasn't seen a bar of soap for two weeks brooding on the flight deck.

Capt Pit Bull
9th Jul 2002, 12:23
Look everyone,

For the nay sayers amongst you, you don't have to say yes.

Thats completely different from having somebody else tell you that you are not permitted to say yes.

Anything else that further erodes Pilots authority should be resisted, IMHO.

Its our call.


Corporal Jones
9th Jul 2002, 14:13
As a (used to be regular) jump-seat passenger (204 in the last 4 years until 11th Sept, only 2 since), and having got to know a large number of pilots (Captains and F/Os), I have always found them most of them welcoming (those that weren't, didn't have jump-seat pax).

In my job, as a W&B software provider, it has proved useful to see what the crews require from their flight docs (aswell as the Flight Ops dept!).

As Foxmoth says, the JS passenger can prove useful, opening the door, providing a first line of defence against miscreants etc.

From a personal point of view, one or two Captains that I know have said that I am welcome to travel 'up front with them' whenever they are operating and I am on their flight.

I just hope that in the medium term (in the light of the current situation, certainly not short term), the opportunity to travel on the flight deck will be available again. :(

9th Jul 2002, 15:41
I am (UK )ATC staff at Swanwick and until 11th Sept I organised a Fam Flight scheme with a major UK carrier for UK ATC staff. I can only confirm what other people have commented on, that on post flight reports from both crews and the ATC staff themselves that they found the whole experience informative and enjoyable.
We reciproacted by showing crews around our ATC facility, a task which I personally undertook, and a comment by one visitor said that visits to ATC by airline crews should be a mandatory requirement. There was also a serious airmiss a few years ago where one of the recommendations was that ATC staff should have more Fam Flights as that lack of appreciation of "aeroplane type" things was a factor in the incident.
It would be a shame if for reasons of economy or "safety" that Fam Flights were discontinued as they were a genuine contribution to Flight Safety. ( Tony Fallows )

9th Jul 2002, 19:45
Cat O'Nine Tails:

"What happened to the courtesy of asking the other crew members "would you mind if I brought .......... along for a jolly?".

Well then, that all depends on who is asking the question and when! If you are a junior F/O and the person asking the question happens to be a senior training captain and you are about to get airborne in 45 minutes time and his wife is waiting outside - what do you think your response is likely to be?

That is one of the reasons why I would never put anyone in that situation.

Now, I also deeply regret that flight deck visits have gone down the pan. I have met some fascinating and wonderful people over the years and it was always nice to meet enthusiastic aviation-minded people.

That is not what I am talking about. All of them had a seat in the back of the aircraft that they could always return to or be invited to re-occupy.

Nor do I mind in the slightest people on the jumpseat who have been authorised by the company such as deadheading crew, air trafficers, engineers, ground staff etc. etc. What I am talking about are the ones who are not on company-related business and are just there on "squatter's rights".

Capt Pit Bull:

"Anything else that further erodes Pilots (sic) authority should be resisted, IMHO". Its (sic) our call.

Are you suggesting that us pilots should have complete control of our jumpseats? Believe me, this is not a great idea.

I once worked for such a company and I thought it was a lovely concept to start with.

Sadly it didn't last very long!

Eventually you will find yourself with the old chesnut; there is only one jumpseat available. The three contenders are:

1. Your own wife (who doesn't work for the company but who has you for rather longer than the company concerned is likely to last).

2. The Chief Accountant's wife (and you didn't get paid promptly last month).

3. A really hard-working flight attendant who is payed in local currency and has saved for years and years just to manage a holiday for a few days in an expensive country. He/she actually DOES work for the company but knows that No.2's husband could have her wiped out when he/she gets back to base.

On the other hand, you as the captain, realise that if he/she was left behind they would be wiped out financially whereas the other two could afford another night in hotac.

Tell me Capt Pit Bull, which one are you going to choose or would it not be better to concentrate on your flight-planning and let the agents sort it out?

Thank God for a buffer!

10th Jul 2002, 00:45
Inflammatory posting from BigMouth(did I get your name right?).Yes,the US is the land of the free and the greatest country on the face of this planet.But we're not going to be so free from now on and if this means pilots lose a few perquisites,so be it.Not only do I find your anti-American remark truly disgusting(and racist) and so typical of the whingeing Brit,but your airlines have had a terrible reputation for extending the courtesy of a j/s ride to legit aircrew pre 911.Usually found that it was left up to the check-in agent or one of the flight attendants,not the Captain!What kind of a system is that? Access to the j/s for commuting pilots has always been an American tradition;used to work like a treat until things started to tighten up after the Fedex incident and now 911.The only Euro airline that was always courteous and helpful in j/s rides pre 911 was Iberia,and the girls were prettier too.

10th Jul 2002, 08:00

Just on a point of accuracy; I had it in my mind that when I flew for three years in the USA some 20 years ago, you could not get into the flighdeck legally unless you were the holder of an FAA licence. Have the rules changed?

If the rules have not changed then that means that any pilot who does not hold an FAA licence cannot receive jumpseat privileges.

Why then as an FAA licence holder would you expect to get on the jumpseat of a non-N registered aircraft unless you also hold the requisite national licence?

10th Jul 2002, 15:46
Rananim, you better double check your names before you hit the ¨submit¨ button.
I agree wholeheartedly with your post.

10th Jul 2002, 21:04
I don't agree with my mouth! :D
JW411 has a very good point.
Rananim has chosen to tar all with their typecasting of Brits as being anti-American and whingeing. Not a smart move, and quite untrue- although we do despair of the insular attitude Americans have at times, we do tend to agree on most points and are their best ally- and proud of it.

11th Jul 2002, 14:57
I am could also think of many ways to change your screenname into a personal insult, but I do not believe this is the way to discuss the issue. I am sorry if you find my comments offend you, but I know that many Americans also firmly believe in guarding personal freedom and that any reductions in this by legislation should be guarded against, then you CAN claim to be the land of the free, at the moment though, a lot of knee jerk reactions seem to be going on, it is easy to make a claim like this, but to guard these freedoms needs MORE than just saying something is so,and just pointing out that things are worse in other countries is not a valid response IMHO. I also feel that if there were still the j.s. priveleges in the US there may have been a different reaction back. You may see this as whinging - I think defending my freedom is far more important than that!
Whilst there may be many reasons for having/not having known family members/ company staff on the jumpseat, I still do NOT see this as a real security threat, in fact I would prefer to have someone I could trust sitting on the seat who could then, if neccessary, act as a barrier while I fly the aircraft, that person is sitting in the best position to do so, rather than either of the pilots, who have to get out of their seats before they can be effective.

Capt Pit Bull
11th Jul 2002, 16:13

No, I'm not suggesting that we should have "complete" control of the jumpseat. That is your inference, I simply do not see the need to lose the control that we do have.

Let me get this straight. Your arguement seems to be that just in case more than 1 person wants it, we shouldn't make it available at all.

Let us not forget that J/S pax actually generate revenue for the company, so in these testing times it seems silly to lose any potential source of income.

To those that say crew who carry family members on standby are "too cheap to buy a full fare ticket", what planet are you on?

All trades get discounts in their own business. Or is the car salesman who gets a car at cost for his wife "too cheap" to pay the forecourt price.

In my own case, I have a wife and young sprog, so j/s use is not an option. Pre child, I did take Mrs Pit Bull down route a few times, and it was very straight forward.

The company just kept a large diary, and if you wanted the J/S you checked the diary to see if the flight number had already been taken by someone else (or prebooked for crew).

If not, you just got one of various managers to authorise the jumpseat (which would universally be given for adult family members) and then wrote in the flight number and your name. F/Os, as a courtesy, would generally drop a note in the skippers pigeonhole as well.

Problem solved.

No need for arguements at the gate.

Just a simple, straightforward, pen and paper solution.


11th Jul 2002, 19:23
I know it's difficult but, if you can, it's much better to ignore silly anti-American comments and treat them with the contempt they deserve. If you respond with generalisations, the problem escalates. All governments are prone to to knee-jerk reactions - and the UK is no exception!

Your attempt (in your most recent post) to gain the moral high ground is unconvincing but, I hope, a good sign. You made provocative remarks about America in your post which originated this discussion, and have repeated anti-American comments subsequently despite a warning earlier in the thread. If you make provocative remarks, people tend to be provoked - that phenomenon is often called 'human nature'. ;)

Which do you want?
A discussion about whether there is any necessity to add further restrictions when the existing FAA j/s rule was already so restrictive? (Absurdly restrictive many would say, including me.)
Or perhaps a discussion about which aviation authority, the CAA or the FAA, generally gives pilots more freedom to use discretion? I suspect you might not like the answer to that question. Your first post suggests you are not very familiar with FAA Regs - TowerDog corrected your mistake.
Or even whether America truly is the 'Land of the Free'? (But start that topic on JetBlast, not here.)

Sweeping generalisations about countries, race or nationality are not conducive to good discussion and, as has already been pointed out by another Administrator, will not be permitted.

Let's all keep to the topic - it's a good one!


11th Jul 2002, 20:09
Capt Pit Bull:

"Your arguement (sic) seems to be that just in case more than 1 person wants it, we shouldn't make it available at all".

No dear boy, I am merely suggesting that my 40-odd years of flying experience has taught me that I really do not want to have anything to do with the allocation of jumpseats for my job is to operate the aeroplane and not to get involved in company politics.

My illustration of the three "hopefulls" trying to occupy the "last" jumpseat is, in this particular case, slightly (but only slightly) fictitious. It was rather like one of the first questions asked in my RAF aircrew initial interview:

"You have an MG TF: it is pouring with rain and you find yourself by a bus stop. Three people are getting soaked to the skin awaiting a bus":

1. A lovely dollybird that you have been hoping to date for years.

2. A lady that has been looking after your disabled mother for years.

3. An asthmatic 80 year-old man who is probably going to die if you don't take him straight to hospital.

Which one do you pick up? Of course, there is no answer and that is the point I was trying to make; so why do you want to get involved in the first place?

I am fascinated by your statement that jump seat passengers generate revenue. Visitors to the flightdeck (who have bought a seat in the back) might well do so but is your company now selling jump seats per se? (Bin Laden please note).

Anyway, it is good to see that you are always up for a discount, my boy. However, I detect that now that you have a sprog, you might just be beginning to realise that your family deserves 100% and not an ID90. Your family is the most valuable part of your life.

P.S. With the exception of one, all the big aircraft that I have ever flown have had two jumpseats.

11th Jul 2002, 20:12
Now we have reach the level of 'personal abuse' perhaps we have lost sight of the original topic.

The regulations being discussed here are those that the FAA are going to apply. These regulations only allow jump seat occupants on Part 129 operators (non-US carriers) that have the approval of the local administrative authority (CAA in our case). The CAA will decide who can and cannot occupy the jump seat with a Commander's veto.

The US carriers already have restrictions in place.

It will probably apply globally (to domestic UK flights as well as trans-Atlantic) and it will probably be more restrictive than any present regimes:(

Not happy times ahead.

(typo edit)

11th Jul 2002, 20:23
I agree I probably should not have the "land of the free" remark in my origional post as it has diverted the discusion onto silly sidetracks, just exasperation i'm afraid, as a job that I once enjoyed is becomming more & more restricted, and personal insults do not help me avoid trying to justify my remarks. Subject dropped by me, could others please follow suit and just address the main part of the thread - preferably with relavence to the SECURITY aspect.

Capt Pit Bull
11th Jul 2002, 20:25

For convenience, let us assume that my aircraft is configured for 100 seats, all of which are full.

By making a single jumpseat available for family members (flying on an ID 90) for use when the aircraft is overbooked (which they often are these days) you boost revenue from the flight by 0.1%, which obviously doesn't ammount to very much for an individual flight, but on a companies with revenues of Billions, a potential 0.1% is not to be sniffed at.



Your arguements might be a little more convincing if you weren't so condescending......


You also confuse 'cost' with 'worth'.

11th Jul 2002, 20:50
Thanks foxmoth

BTW, on the topic .....

I agree with you about the new restrictions, have always considered the FAA rule regarding jumpseats to be silly (and a curious exception to the FAA's admirable approach to aviation in general) and don't think it makes the slightest difference to security.
Whilst we obviouly can't ignore security threats, if we over-react, and abandon the freedoms we've enjoyed, in many ways the terrorists have won because they've forced us to change our way of life.

12th Jul 2002, 08:32
Capt Pit Bull:

The same result could be achieved by offloading one ID90 passenger and filling the seat with a full-fare passenger. In fact this would be a more efficient solution for the take-off weight would be slightly reduced.

By the way, it is "argument" not "arguement".

Flight Detent
12th Jul 2002, 09:01
Hi all,
Can I take this opportunity to ask a question regarding the current jumpseating availabilities within the US.

I fly for an airline that is based outside the USA, and hold a current licence for a country outside the USA, though I do hold a current C1D1, US crew entry visa in my passport, as is the requirement.

I regularly layover in the US, mainly JFK, and am wondering if I can get access to the jump seat on domestic flights, if not pax, then maybe freight, maybe Fedex.

Can anyone give me any idea on the current situation?


12th Jul 2002, 09:41
I'm very sorry to hear about this new FAA regulation. As a BA ground staff member I've had the pleasure of many jump seat rides over the years and I can honestly say that those jump seat rides have been real highlights. Undoubtedly these have been a huge inspiration in my goal of becoming an airline pilot and it's a shame that others will not be given the same opportunity.

Of late I have been refused jump seat rides sometimes when I have asked and I have been told it is at Captain's discretion. I feel that leaving it to Captain's discretion is the best policy - he can make a sensible judgement on the day - not a suit in Washington.

Yet another move towards the 'Nanny state' I fear.


12th Jul 2002, 16:19
I regularly layover in the US, mainly JFK, and am wondering if I can get access to the jump seat on domestic flights, if not pax, then maybe freight, maybe Fedex.

Freight carriers can not carry jumpseaters from other airlines at this time. At my airline we can only take pilots and dispatchers that are on our FAA approved list. They must sit in the cabin. Jumpseaters are the lowest standby priority.

12th Jul 2002, 19:43
I said things would get worse and they just have. Phase 2 doors are to be fitted to all UK registered a/c over 45 tonnes by April 2003 and there will be strict limits on who may have flight deck access irrespective of route and destination. Those who thought that we would slowly slip back into the old ways were sadly mistaken.



12th Jul 2002, 21:53
Old Osama in his wildest dreams couldn't have foreseen such success. Thought such reasoning belonged to Caligula and his horse.

12th Jul 2002, 22:17

Right now FedEx are only allowing the companies own crew-members, technicians & dispatchers/loadmasters to ride the jumpseats as they are all FAA certificate holders of sorts, and these are normally in the galley jumpseats only. Jumpseating on the 727,s is currently no-go as there are no galley jumpseats installed. Jumpseat authorisation for the above is basically down to captains discretion and he can turn away a FedEx employee if he so wishes. However, i know the FPA are working hard on getting it back for non-FedEx crews so they can get reciprocal rights!!:(

Capt Pit Bull
12th Jul 2002, 22:24

Which will have happened automatically, since ID90 is subload. Then instead of throwing the ID90 pax off, you put them on the J/S (if acceptable to crew), thereby boosting revenue by .1% in the example given. Which, given the narrow margins, is very significant.

Whichever way you cut it, the combination of staff travel and known jumpseat availability generates revenue.

BTW, I can't spell to save my live. Don't bother wasting bandwidth correcting me. ;)


12th Jul 2002, 23:15
11 September would not have been avoided by having these regs in place. As SLF who is a PPL and works with the aviation industry I have have enjoyed several jumpseat flights on UK airlines. I fly a huge amount and have only ever requested JS on full flights or if I have been on a new type.

A number of years ago on a BA flight from LHR-PHL I was sitting in Club and got talking to the pax next to me. It turned out she was the skippers daugher and she said if I wanted to visit the flightdeck I should ask. I did as she suggested and after talking to the skipper he invited to stay in the cockit for as long as I wanted and was welcome to stay for landing. I took up his offer and enjoyed every minute of it. The FD crew were very friendly and seemed happy for me to be there.

My last jumpseat flight was on a bmi 321 from LHR to EDI just prior to 11/9. I arrived for an earlier flight but it was full. I told the ground staff I would take the JS and they said they would ask the Capt. He agreed. It was a great flight and I enjoyed my time with the crew. I am not an "anorak" and we ened up talking more about my job than theirs!

I'm sad that I will probabl never experience this again.