Timely Go-Arounds
Yes. As I am required to do.
Worse than what? Me taking control? Are you saying if I'm not happy and take over, this is a worse outcome for safety than just letting the Captain continue on whatever course of action has led us to this moment? Surely you don't mean this, I must be reading it incorrectly.
The sentence is a bit of a plane crash so forgive me if I didn't make correct sense of it.
Hows that contradiction coming?
The sentence is a bit of a plane crash so forgive me if I didn't make correct sense of it.
Hows that contradiction coming?
Gender Faculty Specialist
Well you know, sometimes it's a requirement that the captain keeps control. In the interests of safety and all that. So who's right?
I've explained your contradiction. If you don't agree then fine, I'm not going to keep repeating myself.
I've explained your contradiction. If you don't agree then fine, I'm not going to keep repeating myself.
Gender Faculty Specialist
No more remarkable than someone taking control really.
You know sometimes it could actually be safer to continue with something than possibly end up fighting for control and during a go around which is one of the most poorly flown maneuvers in the industry anyway. Straight into that Cb that you haven't seen (See? I can throw random nonsense into the argument too just to make a point too).
You know sometimes it could actually be safer to continue with something than possibly end up fighting for control and during a go around which is one of the most poorly flown maneuvers in the industry anyway. Straight into that Cb that you haven't seen (See? I can throw random nonsense into the argument too just to make a point too).
Chesty Morgan shall from this point forward be known in this thread as Van Zanten.
His invincibility complex and complete contradiction to every CRM course and any multi-crew research produced in the last 20 years still is not enough to convince him at 500’ to go around, but rather to have an argument with his FO while continuing.
The mind boggles.
His invincibility complex and complete contradiction to every CRM course and any multi-crew research produced in the last 20 years still is not enough to convince him at 500’ to go around, but rather to have an argument with his FO while continuing.
The mind boggles.
Only half a speed-brake
Would you agree then, at least, that this habitual, life-saving best practice needs to be in place specifically because of that part of human nature that makes people act
- forcefully, up to a point of insulting to others,
- insist that the only acceptable way is their way
- in spite of numerous though subtle voices carefully sounding from all around the woodwork
?
- forcefully, up to a point of insulting to others,
- insist that the only acceptable way is their way
- in spite of numerous though subtle voices carefully sounding from all around the woodwork
?
Gender Faculty Specialist
Chesty Morgan shall from this point forward be known in this thread as Van Zanten.
His invincibility complex and complete contradiction to every CRM course and any multi-crew research produced in the last 20 years still is not enough to convince him at 500’ to go around, but rather to have an argument with his FO while continuing.
The mind boggles.
His invincibility complex and complete contradiction to every CRM course and any multi-crew research produced in the last 20 years still is not enough to convince him at 500’ to go around, but rather to have an argument with his FO while continuing.
The mind boggles.
Those of you sticking it to Judd and N_N over the auto brake go-around need to reread the FO's response.......
"The F/O disagreed saying all the captains he flew with use autobrake for ALL landings regardless if operationally necessary or otherwise."
This wasn't someone whom felt that they should go-around for any other reason than the FO didn't like the CA's choice of A/B. He was the childish one, the CA pointed out the Co policy and he didn't like it!
And I'm going to get screamed down on this one, but boy have standards dropped when an FO calls for a go-around based on the A/B setting on a non critical runway.
"The F/O disagreed saying all the captains he flew with use autobrake for ALL landings regardless if operationally necessary or otherwise."
This wasn't someone whom felt that they should go-around for any other reason than the FO didn't like the CA's choice of A/B. He was the childish one, the CA pointed out the Co policy and he didn't like it!
And I'm going to get screamed down on this one, but boy have standards dropped when an FO calls for a go-around based on the A/B setting on a non critical runway.
Why would you get screamed down for it? If its not policy that autobrake is mandatory and the runway isn't limiting, I agree a go around call wasn't warranted. One can only assume the FO was retrained.
Easy way around that, arm it and then the moment you touch down touch the brakes and disarm it. Then it keeps everyone happy. But an FO insisting on other people’s techniques, rather than sticking to policy, is pretty stupid.
This thread is eye watering.
I wonder if sheppey ever imagined the simple link he posted in the original post would turn out to be such a hand grenade?
Has certainly evoked some interesting discussion.
I guess better to discuss it here than in the air...
Has certainly evoked some interesting discussion.
I guess better to discuss it here than in the air...
Last edited by josephfeatherweight; 17th Jul 2019 at 11:58.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: earth
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well according to das Uber Soldat there is no discussion allowed in the air.
If the safety warrior FO calls for something (even if they are 300hr cadets in their first job after school) the PIC must comply immediately !
If the safety warrior FO calls for something (even if they are 300hr cadets in their first job after school) the PIC must comply immediately !
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tropics
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do assume soldat will go-around for the A/B if the FO calls for a go-around there and then... and then send the FO to be retrained later?
Last edited by dream747; 16th Jul 2019 at 23:52.
I don't think that is what he is saying at all. Obviously if the FO raises something or calls something during a phase of flight when you have time to discuss it then you can discuss it and 're-educate' if needed. From my point of view though if the FO were to call go around on me during the last 1000' of the approach then I am going to go-around and have the discussing somewhere more appropriate. A go-around is a standard procedure and perhaps the more worrying trend here is the number of pilots on this thread who see a normal go around as a 'risky' task that should be avoided if at all possible. From a command point of view of course we hold ultimate power in the decision making area, however your job as the Captain is to also run a cohesive team both in the Cabin and Flight Deck which gives rise to an atmosphere where anyone can voice concerns, we have seen may accidents in the past when FO's have kept quiet about deviations as they have previously been ignored or berated for speaking up. The Autobrake example above is a prime example, if their is a disagreement about the need to arm it, as the Captain why not just put the FO's mind at ease on that approach and arm the bloody thing whilst briefing that you will take it out on landing. Then at an appropriate point on the ground get the manual out and have a discussion? Having flown all over the world I was quite surprised when returning to OZ at just how the FO's are treated, never being able to fly to the x-wind limits of the aircraft, unable to fly an instrument approach to minima, not being able to call stop at all during take off...... all things I was allowed to do as an FO at a major legacy carrier overseas. My first sim ride here as a Captain I was marked down as I handed control to the FO during a LOFT so that I could 'manage' the overall situation, the check captain told me that to ensure the aircraft was flown safely that I should have retained control throughout and directed the FO to talk to the Cabin, do perf numbers, talk to ATC etc. I told him I was confident that the FO could probably handle flying the aircraft on A/P into the hold at the top of the ILS while I freed up a bit of capacity to talk to everyone else whilst monitoring, he even told me off for requesting delaying vectors as I was passing my responsibility of navigation to ATC. Now some Captains out there may be superhuman in their abilities but I am not and need to be able to utilize all resources at times including a competent FO, I respect their ability to 'keep' me honest should I miss something and as such will go-around if they call it during the latter stages of the approach. I saved prevented a serious incident once when the Captain was taxying onto the gate, out of his view on my side a catering truck drove right across us, I called STOP, he stopped and the catering truck ended up 2 meters from our number two engine, with the above attitude he might have just ignored me as it looked fine to him, yes I could have slammed on the brakes but to be honest by the time I realised he wasn't going to stop to when I stopped we would have hit the truck. Ignore the other pilot at your peril.
Good god,
What a hornet’s nest!
The scariest thing about this thread is the absolute fixation on a particular course of action or theory, at the absolute rejection of any other position.
Bit like climate change or other topics de jour in the paper at the moment.
I have no idea how many times a FO has called “go around” and a captain has ignored said call, but I would wager that it isn’t all that frequent an event, and here we are getting all wrapped around the axle discussing an event that might happen infrequently at best.
There are different personalities in the flight deck, that is the nature of human interaction, and some times we will get it right and sometimes we will get it wrong, no shame in that in my opinion, we are, after all, merely human.
In most cases, as someone else has already posited, the problems can be nipped in the bud by a proper brief. But we tend to make brief “longs” and talk about all manner of crap. Make the briefings relevant, succinct and understandable and offer the opportunity for discussion at the end and most dramas will go away in my opinion. Whether that is true is in the eye of the beholder I guess, but that is my view.
I do not believe that there can be a fixed, predetermined view, on many things as they are very contextual, so stating with absolute certainty that you will do x or y actually, again in my view, goes against the crm or nts principles of using all the resources available to you to make an informed decision.
Captains are not infallible, and neither is any other crew member, and in many cases the FO is in a better place cognitively to make an observation about something going pear shaped before the Capt gets there, but that does not mean that the captain is not ultimately responsible and the ultimate decision maker. As someone else also said, it isn’t a democracy - the regulations are written as “the PIC shall...” don’t get me wrong I am not advocating a Capt Bligh like approach to life, but the buck has to stop somewhere and the person with the four bars is it.
Use your noggins and most things will work themselves out.
But I might be wrong (and I am a captain!)
What a hornet’s nest!
The scariest thing about this thread is the absolute fixation on a particular course of action or theory, at the absolute rejection of any other position.
Bit like climate change or other topics de jour in the paper at the moment.
I have no idea how many times a FO has called “go around” and a captain has ignored said call, but I would wager that it isn’t all that frequent an event, and here we are getting all wrapped around the axle discussing an event that might happen infrequently at best.
There are different personalities in the flight deck, that is the nature of human interaction, and some times we will get it right and sometimes we will get it wrong, no shame in that in my opinion, we are, after all, merely human.
In most cases, as someone else has already posited, the problems can be nipped in the bud by a proper brief. But we tend to make brief “longs” and talk about all manner of crap. Make the briefings relevant, succinct and understandable and offer the opportunity for discussion at the end and most dramas will go away in my opinion. Whether that is true is in the eye of the beholder I guess, but that is my view.
I do not believe that there can be a fixed, predetermined view, on many things as they are very contextual, so stating with absolute certainty that you will do x or y actually, again in my view, goes against the crm or nts principles of using all the resources available to you to make an informed decision.
Captains are not infallible, and neither is any other crew member, and in many cases the FO is in a better place cognitively to make an observation about something going pear shaped before the Capt gets there, but that does not mean that the captain is not ultimately responsible and the ultimate decision maker. As someone else also said, it isn’t a democracy - the regulations are written as “the PIC shall...” don’t get me wrong I am not advocating a Capt Bligh like approach to life, but the buck has to stop somewhere and the person with the four bars is it.
Use your noggins and most things will work themselves out.
But I might be wrong (and I am a captain!)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: earth
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Onion I am honestly learning from input like yours, keep it coming.
Ignore the other pilot at your peril indeed, but just don't blindly follow an inexperienced 'command' is what I was getting at.
Interesting that you had that experience after returning from flying all over the world. I guess we are known for doing things bloody differently. Did the years / months back here when you came home not reacclimatise you before you got the command ?
Ignore the other pilot at your peril indeed, but just don't blindly follow an inexperienced 'command' is what I was getting at.
Interesting that you had that experience after returning from flying all over the world. I guess we are known for doing things bloody differently. Did the years / months back here when you came home not reacclimatise you before you got the command ?