Greedy captains who won't let you fly
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your description of your FO paints a picture of overwhelming incompetance in the right hand seat.......so I have two questions
1) If you had dropped dead midflight on a nasty weather day, would this person be able to safely land the aircraft, something the passengers should be able to depend on ? If not how are you properly exercising your authority as PIC by allowing the situation to continue ?
The airplane involved as certified as a single pilot airplane, and although we operated as a crew, could have been operated alone. He was not required to be there, but was on board as a function of company policy.
I am familiar with many operations in which the First Officer or Copilot may or may not be able to handle completion of the flight alone. In this particular case, as I stated before, he is one of two individuals throughout my career for whom I have written letters recommending termination. A third individual cropped up last year, for whom I was asked to do an evaluation flight. I recommended his release before his initial checkride. He was given the ride, and failed the first, passed the second, as was put on payroll. I was able to learn afterward that his experience and background was falsified, and he was subsequently terminated.
These individuals were found at different companies with very different kinds of operations.
2) Why did you not simply exercise your captains discretion and refuse to depart with this individual in the right hand seat ? After all in an earlier post you related how you refused to fly with a overbearing and abusive Captain ?
In the case of the overbearing captain...he was a little more than overbearing. He operated unsafely, and as the captain with full PIC authority, and ultimate control of the flight. I did not have the legal place to dictate how the flight would be conducted or to ensure it's safety, beyond refusing to get on the airplane at all.
In the case of the first officer on board an airplane certified for single pilot operations (but flown by policy with a crew of two), the first officer wasn't necessary to begin with, nor legally required. It was my hope initially that he could be trained, but experience showed that this was not the case, hence my letter recommending his termination. And the letters from other captains in the company, as well. That particular operation, a fractional company, hired a very diverse group of pilots, most of whom were very competent. How this particular pilot got hired is rather a mystery, and of no concern to me. His level of incompetence emerged in spurts; his character wasn't revealed overnight. He initially dressed and acted very professionally. I became wary of him, attempted to train him, and gradually abandoned any hope for him at all.
Contrary to the evaluations of some here, I tried harder to help him than most, and for a longer period of time, before giving up on him as a lost cause. I highlighted here a couple of incidents which illustrate the pilot he turned out to be. Some here have demanded that I train pilots to be a captain, that when acting as PIC, I have some sort of obligation or duty to make others a captain. While this is assuredly untrue, rest easy on the fact that I worked very hard to prepare this individual to improve himself on the job. He was more interested in partying and playing than study, and couldn't be helped.
Very simple. The captain works for the operator. So if the FOM (OM-A) requires that he should give the controls to the FO for at least 50 or 75% he must follow that rule.
If the situation is not safe it should be pointed out to the Chief or the training manager or the safety pilot and resolved. There are ways of fixing substandard performance for the FOs (or Captains of course)
The captain does not own the aircraft. He just operates it according to the FOM of the company and the JARs or FARs or whatever...
So, if the company requires the 50/50 or at least 25% rule, that is exactly what he must follow.
If the situation is not safe it should be pointed out to the Chief or the training manager or the safety pilot and resolved. There are ways of fixing substandard performance for the FOs (or Captains of course)
The captain does not own the aircraft. He just operates it according to the FOM of the company and the JARs or FARs or whatever...
So, if the company requires the 50/50 or at least 25% rule, that is exactly what he must follow.
The FAA issues my pilot certification. The FAA determines my responsibilities in the cockpit, and my authority.
The company can demand or dictate what they will, but it's my pilot certificate, not the employers. Now, I will do what I can within reason with the employer, to include adhering to guidelines and policies if safe and legal. That said, I have never seen an operations manual that stated that company policy takes precedence over the regulation. Ever. In fact, every operations manual I've ever seen says exactly the opposite; where a conflict with the regulation exists, the regulation is to be followed.
Moreover, I have yet to see an operations manual which states that the captain will give 25% or 50% of the legs to the First Officer. I don't believe such a policy exists, and I defy anyone here to present such a document.
You'll find guidelines that suggest crews alternate legs, nearly always with the caveat that it's "at the captain's discretion." You show me a manual where the company dictates that the captain will allow the F/O to fly a certain percentage of legs, or alternate every leg. I've asked someone to do that repeatedly in this thread; thus far nobody has been willing or able to do so.
No company is going to be stupid enough to abdicate the authority and judgment of the pilot in command, who has legal ultimate authority and control over the operation of the flight, by demanding that the captain acquiesce X number of legs or XX percentage of legs. In most operations, the legs get split fairly evenly, 50/50, but this is at the captains discretion, not at company mandate. At best, an operator will suggest an even split, but that's as far as it goes.
Have you a documentation that shows otherwise?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do not think anybody here is questioning the legal authority of the PIC. A Copilot not proficiant or capable in being the PF should not even be there. That is the point. This does not preclude the PIC to be PF or take control whenever he deems necessary. The normal case being a balanced job sharing in the PF/PNF environment.
The problem discussed in this thread is the existance of captains that do not let somebody fly for reasons which have nothing to do with flying ability or airmanship - but are purley interpersonal.
Last but not least - a pilot can be suspended from flying as long as the company wants - they just have to pay the basic salary and in that time prove, that he/she is not fulfilling the requirments by other means. So even if it was a SPO it was a bad decision from the company to still grant flights.
The problem discussed in this thread is the existance of captains that do not let somebody fly for reasons which have nothing to do with flying ability or airmanship - but are purley interpersonal.
Last but not least - a pilot can be suspended from flying as long as the company wants - they just have to pay the basic salary and in that time prove, that he/she is not fulfilling the requirments by other means. So even if it was a SPO it was a bad decision from the company to still grant flights.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have said underwhelming incompetence, but yes; the individual was exceptionally incompetent. How he managed to get certificated, much less get hired, was a mystery.
Quote:
1) If you had dropped dead midflight on a nasty weather day, would this person be able to safely land the aircraft, something the passengers should be able to depend on ? If not how are you properly exercising your authority as PIC by allowing the situation to continue ?
As stated previously, I did not hire this individual, and made pointed requests not to fly with this individual, as did everyone else to whom he was assigned. This individual had a good attorney, and the company was looking for good, solid backing before letting him go. Until then, the fact of the matter was he was going to go fly.
The airplane involved as certified as a single pilot airplane, and although we operated as a crew, could have been operated alone. He was not required to be there, but was on board as a function of company policy.
I am familiar with many operations in which the First Officer or Copilot may or may not be able to handle completion of the flight alone. In this particular case, as I stated before, he is one of two individuals throughout my career for whom I have written letters recommending termination. A third individual cropped up last year, for whom I was asked to do an evaluation flight. I recommended his release before his initial checkride. He was given the ride, and failed the first, passed the second, as was put on payroll. I was able to learn afterward that his experience and background was falsified, and he was subsequently terminated.
These individuals were found at different companies with very different kinds of operations.
Quote:
1) If you had dropped dead midflight on a nasty weather day, would this person be able to safely land the aircraft, something the passengers should be able to depend on ? If not how are you properly exercising your authority as PIC by allowing the situation to continue ?
As stated previously, I did not hire this individual, and made pointed requests not to fly with this individual, as did everyone else to whom he was assigned. This individual had a good attorney, and the company was looking for good, solid backing before letting him go. Until then, the fact of the matter was he was going to go fly.
The airplane involved as certified as a single pilot airplane, and although we operated as a crew, could have been operated alone. He was not required to be there, but was on board as a function of company policy.
I am familiar with many operations in which the First Officer or Copilot may or may not be able to handle completion of the flight alone. In this particular case, as I stated before, he is one of two individuals throughout my career for whom I have written letters recommending termination. A third individual cropped up last year, for whom I was asked to do an evaluation flight. I recommended his release before his initial checkride. He was given the ride, and failed the first, passed the second, as was put on payroll. I was able to learn afterward that his experience and background was falsified, and he was subsequently terminated.
These individuals were found at different companies with very different kinds of operations.
Definitely an old time Flight Engineer who desires he was actually...a pilot.
We see 'em all the time.
To be ignored, generally.
IE: consigned without a window seat.
IE: what else is new?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ propeller and 411:
Amen and
A discussion/argument can go on and on forever without even not disagreeing significantly, bit like a marriage overdue by far. The arguees just skip the part of actually trying to understand what the opponent actually means, just what can be attacked to win
Now a bit of sleep before seeing if my captain will let me fly our old A/P-free british jetstream tomorrow, keep your fingers crossed for me please.
/T
Amen and
A discussion/argument can go on and on forever without even not disagreeing significantly, bit like a marriage overdue by far. The arguees just skip the part of actually trying to understand what the opponent actually means, just what can be attacked to win
Now a bit of sleep before seeing if my captain will let me fly our old A/P-free british jetstream tomorrow, keep your fingers crossed for me please.
/T
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: More or less all over the place
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During a departure one day, I was given a left turn and then asked to intercept an airway…
You could have said: "Would you please take control for a while, HDG xxx and climb to FL yyy…" and take the chart and tune the radio's and pointers yourself. And when on the radial: "Thanks, nice job… We managed…"
And take it from there…
One morning I had a dead leg to fly in two parts, with a fuel stop.
I told him I'd take the first leg, he could have the second, assuming good weather. He was a very weak pilot, and I didn't trust him in busy areas, complex airspace, or in weather.
Very strange, but why do I have this feeling that, despite the numerous negative things mentioned about him and your endless efforts to help him get up to standard, this copilot was fighting some sort of lost battle…
I wonder how the copilot would have had developed, if you guys had been 'coaching' him in a more 'active' positive manner with some patience and let him fly a bit more in stead of less, without overloading him or yourselves at crucial moments… Some people need help desperately, rather than being 'put aside'...
Of course it is a bit odd if you don't get the speeds.
(But, I wonder how this had been done on earlier take offs…? Set any 'bugs' or speeds in fmgcs…)
Of course it is embarrassing if you don't get a 'departure' and a 'go/no go drill' briefing somewhere before departure.
(But, I wonder also how this had been handled on earlier take offs…?)
He had not only no idea about how to do a takeoff briefing, but no idea about how to reject the takeoff. I prompted him on how he might reject the takeoff, if needed. He got the procedure wrong. Not even close.
After three times he should 'get the hang of it'… Unless he was/is not the PF too often, of course…!
Just let him fly in that busy area, complex airspace and weather. Easier for you to manage the flight and… manage him…!
Maybe he would have had the opportunity to improve a bit in certain area's.
In a way, I feel sorry for both of you that, despite your and your colleagues' admirable efforts to help him get up to standard, he could not control himself in public, went to the bar in stead of studying and eventually got fired…
Very sad indeed . . .
Kind regards, learner . . .
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where we fly, it usually goes like this: "Which legs would you like to fly…?" (Unless CAT 'low' or auto-land…)
The general rule of thumb at that operation was that copilots flew dead legs, captains flew passenger legs. It was a fractional operation, generally with every other leg being an empty one, repositioning. Such as been the case at several charter operations at which I have flown.
Interesting that some here have harped on the idea that if the company says fly every other leg, then the Captain is supposed to have no choice...but when the company doesn't want the copilot flying the live legs, people whine. You really can't have it both ways.
You could have said:
Very strange, but why do I have this feeling that, despite the numerous negative things mentioned about him and your endless efforts to help him get up to standard, this copilot was fighting some sort of lost battle…
(But, I wonder how this had been done on earlier take offs…? Set any 'bugs' or speeds in fmgcs…)
What had he done on earlier takeoffs? Very little. Hence the purpose of making a point on that particular day, as part of the teaching process.
Did you discuss with him later what departure and emergency briefings stand for and when and how to perform them?
In a way, I feel sorry for both of you that, despite your and your colleagues' admirable efforts to help him get up to standard, he could not control himself in public, went to the bar in stead of studying and eventually got fired…
Definitely an old time Flight Engineer who desires he was actually...a pilot.
We see 'em all the time.
To be ignored, generally.
IE: consigned without a window seat.
We see 'em all the time.
To be ignored, generally.
IE: consigned without a window seat.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: London Zoo
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
how to have an argument while disagreeing over almost nothing.
co-pilots need to fly, obviously, otherwise they'll be gear and flap operators and nothing else. hand flying is a particularly perishable skill. come the day when the overbearing tub of lard next to them has a heart attack, they'll be useless because they've had no practice. they'll also fail their command course when its time for them fill his shoes
but, el capitan does indeed have ultimate responsibility for that aircraft (but dont for a minute think that its only HIS licence or future employability on the line) and quite rightly will allow co-pilot flying as he thinks appropriate on the day and as required by the ops manual.
on any given sector, it is the captain's privilege to decide who flys, if he doesnt care which sector he gets, then he'll ask the FO to decide, which in practice is generally what happens in my experience unless theres a sensible reason to do otherwise. If the co-pilot is getting almost no flying (as was suggested in the original post), then clearly something is not right at all... thats not the way we operate in the modern world.
also, almost all captains see it as part of their role to pass on a bit of know how to the next generation of guys, particularly the older most experienced ones who have the most to offer. the idea that you should only do that if you're being paid as a trainer is ridiculous. you learn most about flying while you're doing it for real, not doing courses or taking tests. in that sense, the captain is training the FO to be a captain.
reading some of the rubbish on here makes me realise how lucky i am to fly with the guys at my base. there are some very good young captains and also some real old timers, who have vast amounts of experience to pass on, who i respect all the more because aviation and CRM etc has changed vastly during their careers, but they have adapted.
co-pilots need to fly, obviously, otherwise they'll be gear and flap operators and nothing else. hand flying is a particularly perishable skill. come the day when the overbearing tub of lard next to them has a heart attack, they'll be useless because they've had no practice. they'll also fail their command course when its time for them fill his shoes
but, el capitan does indeed have ultimate responsibility for that aircraft (but dont for a minute think that its only HIS licence or future employability on the line) and quite rightly will allow co-pilot flying as he thinks appropriate on the day and as required by the ops manual.
on any given sector, it is the captain's privilege to decide who flys, if he doesnt care which sector he gets, then he'll ask the FO to decide, which in practice is generally what happens in my experience unless theres a sensible reason to do otherwise. If the co-pilot is getting almost no flying (as was suggested in the original post), then clearly something is not right at all... thats not the way we operate in the modern world.
also, almost all captains see it as part of their role to pass on a bit of know how to the next generation of guys, particularly the older most experienced ones who have the most to offer. the idea that you should only do that if you're being paid as a trainer is ridiculous. you learn most about flying while you're doing it for real, not doing courses or taking tests. in that sense, the captain is training the FO to be a captain.
reading some of the rubbish on here makes me realise how lucky i am to fly with the guys at my base. there are some very good young captains and also some real old timers, who have vast amounts of experience to pass on, who i respect all the more because aviation and CRM etc has changed vastly during their careers, but they have adapted.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not yet.
A lot of concurrent and temporary assignments, though. Contract work, seasonal flying, leaves of absence to accept temp assignments, etc.
I decided a long time ago that I wanted to experience as wide a variety of fly as I could; not because it would be career enhancing, but because we only get one lifetime to do this, and I wanted to see as much as I could in that time.
It's definitely not the way to reach the top. It's definitely not the way to achieve a high seniority number. It's definitely not the way to do a lot of things, and it makes for a really long employment history (and a complex one, because a number of jobs have been taken concurrent with other jobs). The only real uptick is that of persona satisfaction.
One of my biggest fears is reaching a point, somewhere in my life and looking back to say "I wish I'd done that," and realizing it's too late. I say that knowing there's a lot more to do, yet. At this stage, my career to date has been what I'd prefer to call "a good start."
When flying as copilot, that's something I always appreciated...being asked which leg I preferred. Sometimes there was the captain who didn't care if he flew a leg at all, and though he knew the answer, he'd say "do you want them all?" Is there ever a way to answer that than "Yes, thanks!"?
A lot of concurrent and temporary assignments, though. Contract work, seasonal flying, leaves of absence to accept temp assignments, etc.
I decided a long time ago that I wanted to experience as wide a variety of fly as I could; not because it would be career enhancing, but because we only get one lifetime to do this, and I wanted to see as much as I could in that time.
It's definitely not the way to reach the top. It's definitely not the way to achieve a high seniority number. It's definitely not the way to do a lot of things, and it makes for a really long employment history (and a complex one, because a number of jobs have been taken concurrent with other jobs). The only real uptick is that of persona satisfaction.
One of my biggest fears is reaching a point, somewhere in my life and looking back to say "I wish I'd done that," and realizing it's too late. I say that knowing there's a lot more to do, yet. At this stage, my career to date has been what I'd prefer to call "a good start."
on any given sector, it is the captain's privilege to decide who flys, if he doesnt care which sector he gets, then he'll ask the FO to decide, which in practice is generally what happens in my experience unless theres a sensible reason to do otherwise.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Poland
Age: 69
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guppy,
With such a varied job history, and the urge to fly in as many roles as possible, I guess we can assume that your career expectation is to become a Jack of all trades....and a Master of none!
With such a varied job history, and the urge to fly in as many roles as possible, I guess we can assume that your career expectation is to become a Jack of all trades....and a Master of none!
Last edited by clivewatson; 6th Sep 2010 at 07:58. Reason: grammar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: I can see it from here.
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With 2,365 posts (and counting) and the content I'm supprised he's got any time to fly, you have to have an F/O so as you can prepare your next publication in flight. 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With such a varied job history, and the urge to fly in as many roles as possible, I guess we can assume that your career expectation is to become are a Jack of all trades....and a Master of none!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If my by engineer, you mean certified mechanic, then yes: I hold US certification as a mechanic, with airframe and powerplant ratings. If by engineer you mean flight engineer, I also hold a flight engineer certificate.
I hold ATP pilot certification.
I hold ATP pilot certification.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Scotland
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some time ago I got tired of playing the nice guy and asking FOs "which leg would they like to fly?" Without exception, they would always choose the outbound leg of a 2 sector day. That meant I always had to fly home to the same airfield every time I went to work.
Consequently, I adapted my question to "which leg would you like to fly, and why?" Invariably, the answer would come back "The outbound leg, because it gives me more variety."
Funny how they would never want the crosswind and short runway practice that the inbound leg afforded as part of their passion for "variety." It was all about avoiding boredom, which was downright selfish. They would shy away from their weak areas that required practice.
Mind you, sometimes I would allow the FO to fly both legs because his flying was so much better than his exruciatingly poor RT which I would have otherwise had to sit through.
PS I'm not tarring them all with the same brush!!
Consequently, I adapted my question to "which leg would you like to fly, and why?" Invariably, the answer would come back "The outbound leg, because it gives me more variety."
Funny how they would never want the crosswind and short runway practice that the inbound leg afforded as part of their passion for "variety." It was all about avoiding boredom, which was downright selfish. They would shy away from their weak areas that required practice.
Mind you, sometimes I would allow the FO to fly both legs because his flying was so much better than his exruciatingly poor RT which I would have otherwise had to sit through.
PS I'm not tarring them all with the same brush!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2010
Location: europe
Age: 67
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On...and on.
Definitely an old time Flight Engineer who desires he was actually...a pilot.
We see 'em all the time.
To be ignored, generally.
IE: consigned without a window seat.
Definitely an old time Flight Engineer who desires he was actually...a pilot.
We see 'em all the time.
To be ignored, generally.
IE: consigned without a window seat.
don't feed the fish
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: uk
Age: 75
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kiltie
Quote: Mind you, sometimes I would allow the FO to fly both legs because his flying was so much better than his exruciatingly poor RT which I would have otherwise had to sit through.
Agreed, why cannot young F/O's get the RT correct? Especially procedural reporting, does the RT licence not teach them how to do it anymore? I have given away more sectors for the very same reason than I can remember. I have just thought........these young guys are pretty smart aren't they I think they purposely cultivate crap RT to get more sectors!
Quote: Mind you, sometimes I would allow the FO to fly both legs because his flying was so much better than his exruciatingly poor RT which I would have otherwise had to sit through.
Agreed, why cannot young F/O's get the RT correct? Especially procedural reporting, does the RT licence not teach them how to do it anymore? I have given away more sectors for the very same reason than I can remember. I have just thought........these young guys are pretty smart aren't they I think they purposely cultivate crap RT to get more sectors!
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: England
Posts: 1,050
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SNS3
I think this puts a different slant on things. I must admit I usually scan down the list of recent topics and on this occasion the thread title piqued my interest and I didn't pay any attention to the forum it was in. My earlier response was based on airline ops, whereas the example you refer to is basically single pilot with a pilots assistant. In that context your observations make a lot more sense to me (and my post is obviously less relevant).
Guess I ought to read the forum title !
pb
The airplane involved as certified as a single pilot airplane, and although we operated as a crew, could have been operated alone. He was not required to be there, but was on board as a function of company policy.
Guess I ought to read the forum title !
pb