Captains flying with Captains - Cockpit Authority Gradient
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South Africa
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captains flying with Captains - Cockpit Authority Gradient
I would like to get some opinions on the situation when a Captain is rostered to fly with a colleague who also a company Captain. On the day, one pilot is rostered as Captain, while the colleague is rostered as First Officer. Both are qualified and current for both seats.
When the roster calls for the ‘more experienced’ Captain (say, judged by a balance of more years aviation and in the company, larger total time, more time on type etc etc) to be assigned the Left Hand Seat, I would say the authority gradient is correct. But when the situation is reversed, (i.e., the more experienced Captain sits Right Hand Seat and is acting First Officer), the authority gradient slopes the wrong way.
This ‘reversed’ authority gradient might work just fine for normal Ops, especially where the more experienced pilot sitting right has adequate respect for his colleague’s Command. But could the situation change if there was an emergency or abnormal? The pilot in the Right Hand Seat might instinctively try take over Command, since he/she has always viewed himself/herself as being “more senior” and thus subconsciously in Command?
This attempted Command reversal could play havoc with the mechanics of resolving the emergency or abnormal situation, as well as place the assigned Captain in a possible compromising situation.
I am interested to hear views particularly from the larger airline sector.
When the roster calls for the ‘more experienced’ Captain (say, judged by a balance of more years aviation and in the company, larger total time, more time on type etc etc) to be assigned the Left Hand Seat, I would say the authority gradient is correct. But when the situation is reversed, (i.e., the more experienced Captain sits Right Hand Seat and is acting First Officer), the authority gradient slopes the wrong way.
This ‘reversed’ authority gradient might work just fine for normal Ops, especially where the more experienced pilot sitting right has adequate respect for his colleague’s Command. But could the situation change if there was an emergency or abnormal? The pilot in the Right Hand Seat might instinctively try take over Command, since he/she has always viewed himself/herself as being “more senior” and thus subconsciously in Command?
This attempted Command reversal could play havoc with the mechanics of resolving the emergency or abnormal situation, as well as place the assigned Captain in a possible compromising situation.
I am interested to hear views particularly from the larger airline sector.
Moderator
Never an easy situation and one which needs to be addressed in detail in the relevant Company Operations Manuals as well as crew preflight briefings. Once these are addressed, then it comes down to a normal crew discipline matter ?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes John, all this sounds good, but rarely works in the actual fact.
Captains rostered with Captains...always a bad idea, to be avoided at all costs, if possible.
And, it usually is.
Captains rostered with Captains...always a bad idea, to be avoided at all costs, if possible.
And, it usually is.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not airlines, per se, but operating a regional airliner to some sort of reasonable airline standard (one hopes).
We try to avoid this 'two captains' situation, yes, but given two mature adults it does seem survivable.
Whoever is named first on the roster is in overall charge and gets to nominate PF and PNF. That seems to keep questions about who is in charge under control.
We have done quite a bit of 'two captain' flying in the sim, when one can often see oddities develop in emergencies as the other captain tries to assert his (nonexistent) authority. This is when good CRM comes to the fore, hopefully. We have often come away from a session having learned more about CRM than the aircraft systems.
I think that the stronger the personality and the better the systems knowledge then the less problems about authority enter into the mix. The weaker captains seem to have more trouble staying on the uphill side of the authority gradient.
Check the epaulettes: the guy with the shinier gold bars is usually the weaker one. Well, that's been my experience.
We try to avoid this 'two captains' situation, yes, but given two mature adults it does seem survivable.
Whoever is named first on the roster is in overall charge and gets to nominate PF and PNF. That seems to keep questions about who is in charge under control.
We have done quite a bit of 'two captain' flying in the sim, when one can often see oddities develop in emergencies as the other captain tries to assert his (nonexistent) authority. This is when good CRM comes to the fore, hopefully. We have often come away from a session having learned more about CRM than the aircraft systems.
I think that the stronger the personality and the better the systems knowledge then the less problems about authority enter into the mix. The weaker captains seem to have more trouble staying on the uphill side of the authority gradient.
Check the epaulettes: the guy with the shinier gold bars is usually the weaker one. Well, that's been my experience.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: A posh villa in Rome
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm. That hoary old chestnut.
Shortly after I got my command I had some flights rostered with another, vastly more experienced Captain. I had flown with the guy before which, in some ways, reduced the problem.
However, you can still run into problems. I did a nightstop with the Captain. The cabin crew were used to socialising with him (thoroughly nice geezer incidentally) and so clustered round him for the evening. The problems started the next day when the Captain 'allowed' the crew to make a shopping visit to Duty Free whilst waiting for the inbound aircraft. Needless to say they were then late and I ended up at the arriving aircraft without most of the crew, including my 'First Officer'.
Not a huge issue I suppose, but command and control are of the essence and emergency situations happen on turn rounds too.
Another time two of us were rostered together my 'colleague' suggested we fly 'leg & leg about'. Having insight into the situation I volunteered for the right hand seat for the day. However, that didn't work too well either. Try as I might to be a First Officer my Captain / Colleague seemed a bit distracted by having equal expereince in the right seat and forgot to put the gear down in the correct sequence . . .
Overall conclusion? Well you can fly two Captains together. However, even if you all know and like each other AND try and make the best of it you can run into problems.
Best avoided.
Shortly after I got my command I had some flights rostered with another, vastly more experienced Captain. I had flown with the guy before which, in some ways, reduced the problem.
However, you can still run into problems. I did a nightstop with the Captain. The cabin crew were used to socialising with him (thoroughly nice geezer incidentally) and so clustered round him for the evening. The problems started the next day when the Captain 'allowed' the crew to make a shopping visit to Duty Free whilst waiting for the inbound aircraft. Needless to say they were then late and I ended up at the arriving aircraft without most of the crew, including my 'First Officer'.
Not a huge issue I suppose, but command and control are of the essence and emergency situations happen on turn rounds too.
Another time two of us were rostered together my 'colleague' suggested we fly 'leg & leg about'. Having insight into the situation I volunteered for the right hand seat for the day. However, that didn't work too well either. Try as I might to be a First Officer my Captain / Colleague seemed a bit distracted by having equal expereince in the right seat and forgot to put the gear down in the correct sequence . . .
Overall conclusion? Well you can fly two Captains together. However, even if you all know and like each other AND try and make the best of it you can run into problems.
Best avoided.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Who can say?
Posts: 1,700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It can get even worse than that. I know of a company which is desperately short of F/O's but the accountants won't let the DFO recruit. Consequently there are training captains rostered to fly as F/O's with qualified but not training captains because the former are qualified to fly right-hand seat.
This makes the reverse gradient steeper and is, in my personal opinion, a disaster waiting to happen.
This makes the reverse gradient steeper and is, in my personal opinion, a disaster waiting to happen.
My experience of two captains flying together comes from two different sectors of the industry, both with hazards. First, in a non-public transport operation, flight crews flew as Capt / Co-Capt with command rotating on each leg. Due to the nature of the operation, only a few captains were qualified to command particularly demanding flights. With a very small group the procedures were standard (if not always written down) and personal interaction was both strong and balanced. However many slips and mistakes were made, most were quickly caught and corrected, but complacency and failure to behave as a NFP led to a few interesting events.
My second experience is from investigating incidents and accidents. I saw evidence that flights with two Captains significantly increases the risk of an event. Even worst three captains on the flight deck, whether or not the jump seat pilot was in official or unofficial capacity (a caution here for check flights and LOSA, but of course everyone is flying ‘by the book’ on these sectors).
The evidence indicated that a captain NFP is not a good monitor, this also applied to a lesser extent to training captains during check flights. A monitoring captain intervened much later than would have occurred with a recently qualified first officer. Some pilots did not intervene at all. The reason for this appeared to be the assumption by the NFP that the handing pilot knew what he was doing, or at least as long as the monitoring pilot knew what was happening he assumed that he did not have to alert the Commander. This may be similar to an Instructor letting the student go too far with an incorrect course of action.
With two captains, their joint ability to detect threats and hazards appeared lower than with a balanced authority gradient; thus during an event with two captains they were at higher risk before recovery action was commenced. I wonder if this is similar to group risk theory; where a decision taken by a group of people tends to be more risky than when taken by an individual. Although CRM encourages group participation, the responsibility for any decision rests with the commander. With a level authority gradient, two captains may operate more as a group, whereas with a balance authority gradient this maintains the respect for the commander. These aspects are seen in other industries, particularly at board level.
Another aspect of incidents and accidents was that a monitoring captain was not familiar with the duties of that role, particularly standard calls and physical actions from the right seat. The lack of intervention by a captain was also apparent when there was a first officer handing; errors by the captain in these circumstances were more biased to the lack of awareness and complacency; CRM aspects.
My second experience is from investigating incidents and accidents. I saw evidence that flights with two Captains significantly increases the risk of an event. Even worst three captains on the flight deck, whether or not the jump seat pilot was in official or unofficial capacity (a caution here for check flights and LOSA, but of course everyone is flying ‘by the book’ on these sectors).
The evidence indicated that a captain NFP is not a good monitor, this also applied to a lesser extent to training captains during check flights. A monitoring captain intervened much later than would have occurred with a recently qualified first officer. Some pilots did not intervene at all. The reason for this appeared to be the assumption by the NFP that the handing pilot knew what he was doing, or at least as long as the monitoring pilot knew what was happening he assumed that he did not have to alert the Commander. This may be similar to an Instructor letting the student go too far with an incorrect course of action.
With two captains, their joint ability to detect threats and hazards appeared lower than with a balanced authority gradient; thus during an event with two captains they were at higher risk before recovery action was commenced. I wonder if this is similar to group risk theory; where a decision taken by a group of people tends to be more risky than when taken by an individual. Although CRM encourages group participation, the responsibility for any decision rests with the commander. With a level authority gradient, two captains may operate more as a group, whereas with a balance authority gradient this maintains the respect for the commander. These aspects are seen in other industries, particularly at board level.
Another aspect of incidents and accidents was that a monitoring captain was not familiar with the duties of that role, particularly standard calls and physical actions from the right seat. The lack of intervention by a captain was also apparent when there was a first officer handing; errors by the captain in these circumstances were more biased to the lack of awareness and complacency; CRM aspects.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My experience of flying with a 'Heavy Crew', i.e. two Capt's. and one F/O was that the F/O ALWAYS sat in the RHS for take off and landing and the other Capt. only helped by augmenting the cruise sector.
At any time that you fly two captains together it is the operators, (your employers), responsibility to nominate a 'commander' and the other captain will fulfil F/O duties only.
At any time that you fly two captains together it is the operators, (your employers), responsibility to nominate a 'commander' and the other captain will fulfil F/O duties only.
Happens a lot in corporate aviation. The boss thinks he/she is safer with 2 four ringers up front.
If only they knew the truth.
If only they knew the truth.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's a point I had overlooked about the level authority gradient, that the captain in the right seat can be slow to detect or react to deviations. It's so, and I agree that makes for a higher level of risk.
One factor there is perhaps that a RHS captain's comments are more 'loaded' than an FO's, more of a challenge, so that one is slower to make a comment from the RHS. Mainly though, a captain is lacking in specific FO skills.
In our company relatively few people are qualified in both seats but every so often some trip comes up when we have run out of FOs for some reason or other.
I find that flying in both seats in the sim is a good way to learn things about CRM that are otherwise just theory. Of course one could question whether an hour with a normal crew composition is of more value than an hour with a captain/captain crew. I suppose that is the case.
One factor there is perhaps that a RHS captain's comments are more 'loaded' than an FO's, more of a challenge, so that one is slower to make a comment from the RHS. Mainly though, a captain is lacking in specific FO skills.
In our company relatively few people are qualified in both seats but every so often some trip comes up when we have run out of FOs for some reason or other.
I find that flying in both seats in the sim is a good way to learn things about CRM that are otherwise just theory. Of course one could question whether an hour with a normal crew composition is of more value than an hour with a captain/captain crew. I suppose that is the case.
Moderator
There is ample evidence in the literature to support the contention that F/Os generally make better monitors in a normal crew situation. For co-captains to fly together satisfactorily, there has to be acceptance of seat position for the flight and a fairly well defined set of procedural protocols ... otherwise it inevitably ends up in anarchy to a greater or lesser extent.
And, of course, the high ego associated with the pilot fraternity introduces its own problems ...
And, of course, the high ego associated with the pilot fraternity introduces its own problems ...
2 captains...
Very simple: he who signs the dispatch release is "The Captain". This is supported in legalities, company policy, and tradition. If YOU didn't sign the release, get out your copilot hat and be a professional.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Who can say?
Posts: 1,700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not quite that simple bafanguy, as many people above have testified. Yes, we'd all like things to be that simple, but it doesn't happen in the real world.
Incidentally, and to add to the evidence presented above, in my former company over a six month period we had a small spate of four runway incursions. Three of these happened with Training Captains in the right-hand seat and qualified Captains in the left.
Incidentally, and to add to the evidence presented above, in my former company over a six month period we had a small spate of four runway incursions. Three of these happened with Training Captains in the right-hand seat and qualified Captains in the left.
Good points Captain Stable, multi-crew flying is not simple legalities or policies. Even the traditionalists would have to agree from the history of accidents that the individual human element and human interaction (or lack of it) dominate causal factors.
Those people still in the industry must continue to strive for professionalism; it is of little value in being a professional Captain / Commander if you are not going to be a professional co-pilot (as a Captain) when in the right seat. It is both the recognition of the change of role and the additional joint professionalism that a two-captain crew requires in order to defend against the hazards identified in this thread.
Those people still in the industry must continue to strive for professionalism; it is of little value in being a professional Captain / Commander if you are not going to be a professional co-pilot (as a Captain) when in the right seat. It is both the recognition of the change of role and the additional joint professionalism that a two-captain crew requires in order to defend against the hazards identified in this thread.
2 captains
alf5071h,
I guess that's what I was trying to say in 25 words or less...but YOU said it much better. If one calls oneself "professional" he must demonstrate that no matter the seat or his unfortunate turn of career events. It's all in the attitude.
I guess that's what I was trying to say in 25 words or less...but YOU said it much better. If one calls oneself "professional" he must demonstrate that no matter the seat or his unfortunate turn of career events. It's all in the attitude.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Emoh
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying with another Captain is definetely a learning experience.
If in the right seat, as difficult as it may appear, I try to make myself a F/O in every sense. Trying to go back to the feeling I had when that was my role and I did my best for my Captain.
Yes, most of the times I would use a different approach on many issues during the flying day but that goes with the Captain personality.
Concentrating on being a good F/O makes it an interesting day anyway.
Also if small details only, I always discover something that, on my next flight, will help to make my F/O feel more confident and at ease.
If in the right seat, as difficult as it may appear, I try to make myself a F/O in every sense. Trying to go back to the feeling I had when that was my role and I did my best for my Captain.
Yes, most of the times I would use a different approach on many issues during the flying day but that goes with the Captain personality.
Concentrating on being a good F/O makes it an interesting day anyway.
Also if small details only, I always discover something that, on my next flight, will help to make my F/O feel more confident and at ease.
I fly LHS for a major charter airline. I have spent most of the winter flying with other Captains because:
a. We do not have enough F/O's per se
b. We have allowed some F/O's to fly with other operators to save costs over the winter
c. Some F/O's have taken part-paid additional leave - again a cost saving measure.
It is not a major problem in itself - our SOP's work well and I fly from a small friendly base. However, there are inevitably problems with regard to cabin crew and handling agents who don't quite know who's in charge. More importantly however, mistakes are made due to endlessly swapping seats - invariably only minor things but the day will come.............
For reference the CAA have decided that a single engine circuit, single engine go-round and single engined landing in the sim every six months will prove our expertise in the rhs with the recent addition of a LVP approach.
a. We do not have enough F/O's per se
b. We have allowed some F/O's to fly with other operators to save costs over the winter
c. Some F/O's have taken part-paid additional leave - again a cost saving measure.
It is not a major problem in itself - our SOP's work well and I fly from a small friendly base. However, there are inevitably problems with regard to cabin crew and handling agents who don't quite know who's in charge. More importantly however, mistakes are made due to endlessly swapping seats - invariably only minor things but the day will come.............
For reference the CAA have decided that a single engine circuit, single engine go-round and single engined landing in the sim every six months will prove our expertise in the rhs with the recent addition of a LVP approach.